Changi’s new Terminal 5 will stress-test Singapore’s land transport

The Straits Times, Changi’s new Terminal 5 will stress-test Singapore’s land transport

By Research Assistant Professor Samuel Chng, LKYCIC and Adjunct Associate Prof Lynette Cheah, ESD

By the time Changi’s Terminal 5 (T5) opens, Singapore will be planning for a world few cities have experienced: an airport capable of handling nearly 140 million passengers a year.

In 2025 alone, Changi Airport handled about 70 million passengers, an all-time high. T5 will raise annual passenger capacity by more than 55 per cent, from today’s 90 million to 140 million, making Singapore the world’s most intensively connected aviation hub (the busiest today is in Atlanta, at 108 million passengers a year, followed by Dubai at 92 million).

This is an impressive achievement. But it also raises a question that deserves more attention beyond the runway and terminal halls: Can Singapore’s transport system move this many more people smoothly from airport to city, and back, day after day?

This is not merely an operational detail. It is a stress test of the city’s wider mobility system, and of whether existing land transport modes alone can cope with the scale, surges and disruptions that Terminal 5 will bring.

Transit passengers still shape the city

A common refrain is that most of Changi’s passengers are in transit and therefore place limited demand on Singapore’s transport network. While broadly true, this view understates how airport growth translates into pressure on the city beyond the terminals.

Even transit-heavy hubs generate substantial landside demand. Airline staff, ground handlers, cleaners, security personnel, logistics workers and retail employees all move in and out of the airport daily. Flight disruptions caused by weather, technical issues or geopolitical shocks quickly convert transit passengers into hotel guests and late-night travellers. Peak arrivals also tend to be clustered in time, producing sudden surges in land transport demand at the airport. This phenomenon is common across major hub airports such as Heathrow, Incheon, Tokyo Haneda and Amsterdam Schiphol.

In systems terms, this means demand is not only large but also uneven. At the same time, travellers are often tired, stressed and unfamiliar with their surroundings. Airport demand is therefore peaky, time-sensitive and disruption-prone, precisely the sort of conditions that test whether a land transport system is resilient or merely sufficient on average.

Acting Minister for Transport Jeffrey Siow’s acknowledgement that T5 will significantly raise passenger volumes points to an important policy inflection point. Planning for T5 cannot stop at aviation capacity alone. Landside mobility must be treated as part of the same integrated system.

The MRT will do the heavy lifting, but not all of it

Singapore’s Mass Rapid Transit system will inevitably be the backbone of airport connectivity. In many aviation hubs, rail excels at moving large volumes of people efficiently, predictably and sustainably. For many travellers, especially those familiar with the city, the MRT will remain the default choice.

But rail’s limitations become more visible as passenger volumes rise.

Airport passengers often travel with luggage, children or elderly family members. Their tolerance for crowding, transfers and long walks is lower than that of daily commuters.

Peak arrival windows may coincide with morning and evening rush hours, intensifying pressure on lines that already serve residential centres, schools, central business districts and other employment centres. Rail systems are also less flexible during disruptions, when large numbers of passengers need alternatives quickly.

From a planning standpoint, rail handles volume well. From a user experience standpoint, it handles variability less well.

Taxis and ride-hail: flexible but labour- and space-bound

Taxis and ride-hailing services provide flexibility that rail cannot. They absorb late-night and early-morning arrivals, irregular demand and travellers willing to pay for convenience. They are especially important for families, business travellers and those heading to locations poorly served by rail.

Yet this flexibility depends heavily on driver supply. As passenger volumes grow, scaling a purely human-driven fleet becomes structurally harder. Competing citywide demand, fatigue and rising expectations for service quality all constrain elasticity, limiting the ability of ride-hailing and private taxi services to respond to surging demand. Long queues and waiting times for taxis and ride-hailing services are not just an inconvenience. They become reputational risks for a global hub.

Beyond labour, there is a fundamental space and congestion constraint. Taxis and ride-hailing services typically move one passenger group per vehicle, consuming valuable kerbside and road space at terminal forecourts. As passenger volumes rise, heavy reliance on these modes risks worsening traffic congestion within the airport precinct itself, affecting buses, service vehicles and emergency access. From a system design perspective, this is an inefficient way to move large numbers of people in a space-constrained environment.

The human experience reinforces these limits. Long waits after long flights amplify frustration and shape visitors’ first impressions of the city. For drivers, rising demand translates into longer hours and greater pressure, and does not necessarily lead to proportionate gains even with surge pricing.

Taken together, these operational, spatial and behavioural constraints suggest that taxis and ride-hailing services are essential complements, but cannot be the primary solution for absorbing airport growth at scale.

The missing middle: dedicated airport bus systems

One option Singapore has historically underused is the dedicated airport bus or shuttle. Many global aviation hubs complement rail with high-frequency, limited-stop buses linking airports directly to city centres, hotel districts and regional hubs.

Singapore already has public bus services that run through the airport. However, these routes are designed primarily for local commuting rather than airport travel. For passengers with luggage, navigating steps, narrow aisles and crowded conditions on regular buses can be challenging, limiting their ability to absorb airport demand at scale.

Dedicated airport bus services perform a valuable load-balancing function, moving more passengers with fewer vehicles and less pressure on limited road space. They are quicker to deploy than new rail lines, can be rerouted during disruptions and provide a clear, legible option for travellers unfamiliar with the city.

Crucially, such services add redundancy, an often-overlooked dimension of transport capacity. But even here, Singapore faces a familiar constraint: manpower.

Where autonomous vehicles fit, and where they do not

This is where autonomous vehicles deserve to be discussed seriously, not as futuristic replacements for public transport but as supporting infrastructure.

Autonomous vehicles will not replace the MRT. Nor will they fully displace taxis in the near term. Their value lies elsewhere, in predictable service patterns and geofenced operating corridors, run as managed fleets.

Airports are uniquely suited to this model. They already feature controlled environments, dedicated road infrastructure and predictable origin-destination patterns. Autonomous shuttles can operate between terminals and nearby transport hubs, or along clearly defined corridors to hotel clusters or business districts, especially during off-peak hours when driver shortages are most acute.

Seen this way, autonomous vehicles are less about novelty and more about scalability. They reduce dependence on labour precisely where demand is hardest to meet, while allowing human-driven services to focus on trips that require flexibility and personalisation.

Globally, airports are quietly becoming testbeds for this approach, starting with staff transport, baggage and cargo handling and short shuttle routes before expanding to passenger services. For instance, autonomous buses were recently deployed at the Rotterdam The Hague airport for better airport connectivity. The lesson is consistent. Autonomous mobility adoption works best when it begins with simple, repetitive trips rather than complex city driving.

Managing transport demand is about confidence, not just capacity

Transport planning often focuses on numbers such as trains per hour, vehicles per day and passengers per minute. From a traveller’s perspective, however, confidence matters as much as capacity.

After a long flight, passengers want to know that leaving the airport will be straightforward. Clear options, predictable pricing and visible alternatives reduce stress and dwell time. When systems feel uncertain, even small delays are magnified psychologically.

A diversified mobility portfolio helps here. Rail provides certainty of travel time. Buses and shuttles offer directness. Taxis and ride-hailing services supply personal space. Autonomous shuttles can add frequency and reliability where human supply is thin.

The result is not just more capacity but a robust system offering many reliable choices.

Planning for growth without friction

Changi’s Terminal 5 is a once-in-a-generation project. It is also a rare opportunity to integrate aviation growth with broader transport and technology strategies from the outset.

The question Singapore faces is not whether MRT capacity will be expanded, or whether taxis will continue to serve the airport. These are givens. The deeper question is whether landside mobility will be designed as a layered system, where each mode plays to its strengths rather than competing for the same demand.

A credible strategy would treat rail as the high-capacity spine, human-driven taxis and ride-hail as flexible personalised services rather than volume movers, dedicated buses as load-balancers, and autonomous shuttles as scalable predictable connectors.

If Singapore gets this right, Terminal 5 could become more than an aviation milestone. It could demonstrate how a dense, high-performing city integrates emerging mobility technologies to strengthen public transport and orchestrate them where it matters – at what will soon be the world’s busiest airport.

• Samuel Chng is research assistant professor and heads the Urban Psychology Lab at the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design. Lynette Cheah is professor and chair of sustainable transport at the University of the Sunshine Coast in Queensland where she directs the Sustainable Mobility Research Laboratory.