Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal

Craig

Platinum Member
  • Content Count

    1,156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Craig


  1. Another good example is the current civil unrest/protest in Bangladesh. There are passengers who can't travel to the airport due to road closures or protests and could even be dangerous for people to be out on the streets (especially for MH197/AK78/OD161 that departs around 0200). Instead MH asked passengers to arrive 4 hours prior to departure.


  2. 4 hours ago, flee said:

    Consumer protection laws are strongest in the EU. In Asia, consumer protection is virtually non-existent - businesses can do more or less what they want and consumer rights is not high on their agenda.

    Adverse weather or anything that's beyond the airline's control is not covered under EU261. They know that a lot of passengers will miss their flights due to delays or cancelations so they rather let passengers change themselves so it wouldn't create a mess at the airport. It actually helps the airline too and get the more urgent pax out of the way and let those passengers who have more time to voluntarily change their flight to a day/time that's less congested, thereby freeing up seats available. And in some cases, it is impossible for travelers to get to the airport, e.g. an annual event in Kelantan in December or so or the great Sri Muda flood of December 2022. The last thing people want to worry about when their house is flooded if they need to call the airline and reschedule their flights.


  3. I wish most Asian carriers would adopt the likes of American/European carriers and issue a travel waiver whenever there's a major issue e.g. severe weather or IT outage like this. E.g. if you are traveling 19/7, you can opt for one free change in the same cabin, origin/destination within a time period (usually 2-7 days) with change fee and fare difference waived. But then again, if they can't manage their own booking via the website, it might be difficult this time. 


  4. 5 hours ago, Izanee said:

    Well to be fair, many pax on the Turkish airlines flight IST-KUL and KUL-IST were connecting on MH and OD service to and fro Australia/NZ

    Yes. EY, QR, TK, WY sends quite a fair bit of their passengers on MH (and on some routes, OD as well) for beyond KUL connections. That's why all of them can do at least 2x daily to KUL and there is more capacity to KUL than say SIN for those airlines. 


  5. 2 hours ago, Riza said:

    And usually flight to North Asia that is always affected. 

    Not really lol. Try looking at DEL, BOM, MEL, AKL, PER on-time performance. They don't even fly the same schedule anymore. Some days they just cancel and renumber a flight and some days they re-schedule a flight to make it looks like it's not delayed. e.g. MH129 to MEL on 15/7 was rescheduled to 1215 instead of the usual departure of 0920 and it's reflected in the GDS (so they don't get hit with a delay) but yet it was delayed to a 1302 departure. Flight was operated by 9M-MTW and it turned around from MH 157 (from JED) that arrived at 1137 (STA was 1115). MH129 a week ago (7/7) left KUL at 1630 and arrived MEL at 0142+1. 


  6. 11 minutes ago, Riza said:

    Lately i saw some flights to both KIX & ICN departing KUL at around 0600 to 0730 though not daily. Dont know if these are scheduled but since the flight number doesnt start with 7 then surely its not an extra flight. 

    They don't "delay" a flight anymore. It appears that they are canceling the original flight (e.g. MH 52/66) and replace them with a new flight number (MH 54/64). It's quite messy now. They need to get their house in order or at least lease planes for their Haj operations. 332 showing up in places they shouldn't be, e.g. SYD, MEL, KIX, ADL etc.


  7. 19 hours ago, jani said:

    The road infra is of course one major issue, but why wasn't the LRT alignment designed to include Subang Airport? Heck even both lines of the MRT are not too far away.

    Kota Damansara station (Kajang line) is about 2km from SZB as the crow flies. Problem is that 2km is almost all forest and would prefer to leave it untouched. The spur line can't be done to either the upcoming Shah Alam line or the existing Kelana/Kajang line without significant inconvenience (i.e. closing part of the line). Although might be good for the future (either Kelana or Kajang line get s a spur to SZB) and they can do higher frequencies around the city center (similar to current Ampang/Sri Petaling line with the split at Chan Sow Lin whereby Chan Sow Lin to Sentul receives higher frequency compared to the rest of the line. I have also never understood why MRTCorp never run higher train frequencies in the city center during off-peak, e.g. between Phileo Damansara / BU and Batu 11.

    Another alternative is to have a new but shorter line from Elmina, passing through SZB and then take over the undead PJD link alignment. Problem with that is government need to convince Tropicana residents it's a good idea to have a train tracks running pass their backyards and whoever the PJD link developer is drops their wishes for that highway.

    SZB was not part of the then government's plan to be a city airport. It was only in recent years they want to make it a city airport. There was excess capacity when KUL first opened and it was built to cater up to 100MM pax a year. Government at that time decided it's best to consolidate everything at KUL.

    8 hours ago, Robert said:

    A likely cheaper and simpler option is to convert the KTM link to LRT and build a link across to it from the existing LRT at Subang Jaya. A shuttle can then run on a regular basis plus for those that want to KTM there is an interchange at Subang Jaya. 

    Don't think that's possible. They use a different system and the KTM link merges back onto the KTM tracks instead of the LRT line. KL Sentral is still quite far away from Subang LRT station (easily 35-40 minutes) because it goes up north close to Ara Damansara, back south again to Kelana Jaya and before heading northeast towards KL Sentral.


  8. Is MH trying to get the biggest bang for the buck with their interns? They are canceling flights and renumbering them instead of delaying flights nowadays. Can’t imagine the cancelation rate for those affected flights. 
     

    e.g.  tonight’s MH160 (to DOH) was canceled only to be renumbered as MH284 that was scheduled to depart an hour later (but it ended up departing 30 minutes past MH284 departure time of 22:00). The return MH161 remained as it is. 
     

    MH 284 used the inbound MH165 for the turnaround. 


  9. 1 hour ago, Izanee said:

    are you serious or is this a joke? 
    interesting expansion if anything 

    Joke. They haven't even signed anything yet. It's hearsay for now with regards to the 321 XLR. But knowing MH, it wouldn't be inconceivable that they might use the 320 XLR for say secondary cities in South/East Asia (e.g. ATQ, AMD, FUK), Australia e.g. DRW/CNS, or second daily flight to KIX/ICN/PEK/PVG.

    5 minutes ago, JuliusWong said:

    CZ one step closer to oneworld alliance?

    I always thought CX was the one vetoing their application. CX wants CA. oneworld is still quite loose with QF not exactly friends with a few members, CX is pretty much doing their own thing. I'd prefer if they invite a central Europe or Latin America partner instead. These are 2 huge holes that needed to be filled. 


  10. 36 minutes ago, Robert said:

    I wouldn't be unhappy with the XLR :)

    New routes announced for Summer 2025: KUL-DXB-LGW/MAN, KUL-BNE-CHC/WLG, KUL-GUM-HNL-LAX/SFO 😬

    I hope if they do get the XLR/Neo, please configure it better than the Max.

    Will the 737Max fleet will be moved over to FY in the medium term or will MH operate both 320/737 should this materialize. 


  11. Is Firefly trying to be a full time charter? If they aren't getting new planes and they have pretty much maxed out their fleet, how do they fly to these far away destinations? I am curious if more routes are on the chopping block besides those in Borneo. 


  12. What's going on with MH's A333 fleet? It seems like the schedules are all messed up again. And now instead of delaying, they are canceling and assigning a new flight number for the replacement flight. e.g. MH54 to KIX is operating today and Friday morning (instead of Tuesday and Thursday night), so there'd be 2 KUL-KIX flights today and Friday. MH 64/86 is the new early morning flight to ICN (replacing MH66). MH7x (IIRC MH74) is one of the early morning daytime flights to NRT replacing MH88. 9M-MAC went tech at LHR a few days ago. I am curious how long management thinks this will hold with passengers. 


  13. On 7/5/2024 at 2:14 AM, Robert said:

    Not sure if you are on any of the popular MH FB groups but the plan to put the MAX on the route didn't go down well. There are many staff and some mgt on there who do read things so perhaps somebody was told to change it. 

    I doubt that'd be the case. If they listen to FB group, we would have better IFE, better seats/OTP, free alcohol on all flights, espresso based coffee rather than Old Town and Nescafe Gold Blend on say KUL-LHR in J. Maybe they'll switch the 7M8 to PKX instead (which is just about equidistance with KUL-ATQ). CA is using their 7M8 on their PEK-KUL (which surprisingly shows an upgrade to 333 for winter).


  14. 9 hours ago, Izanee said:

    Air India to start daily DEL-KUL flights from 15th September using A320s… as we suspected!

    Good news with interesting schedule.

    Quote

     

    Flight AI384: Departs Delhi at 1300 Hrs, arrives in Kuala Lumpur at 2100 Hrs (Daily, effective 15 September 2024)

    Flight AI385: Departs Kuala Lumpur at 0830 Hrs, arrives in Delhi at 1125 Hrs (Daily, effective 16 September 2024)

     

    They are going to leave their aircraft RON at KUL (or I am curious if they are going to pair it with another Southern Indian city e.g. BLR/MAA). Not the biggest fan of India-MY redeye and this schedule sounds lovely.

    Malaysians are now eligible for 2 free (complimentary) e-visas to India until 30/6/2025, *not to be mistaken with visa-free/waiver*. Saves Malaysian pax $25USD per entry.


  15. The PEN-KUL-PEN is timed for the KUL-NKG turnaround.

    FY2954 PEN1600 - 1700KUL 738 246
    FY2955 KUL0700 - 0800PEN 738 357

    FY3842 KUL1740 – 2315NKG 738 246
    FY3843 NKG0015 – 0545KUL 738 357

    Good luck turning around FY2954 to FY 3842 in 40 minutes. I have a feeling FY 3842/3843 will be delayed quite often. I assume crew will operate FY2954-3842. Not sure if they'd deadhead back or stay in Nanjing for 2-3 nights.


  16. Seems like MH operated 2 additional NRT services this week timed for great onward connection to US/Canada. And rather odd they used a 2 digit number instead of MH 7xxx series. Flight operated 1JUN and will operate again 3JUN.

    MH48 KUL0600 - 1410NRT 333
    MH49 NRT1545 - 2150KUL 333

     


  17. More like a question than an answer. Indian carriers can't seem to make Malaysia work. Perhaps we will see Indigo expand more here given that they signed codeshare/partnership to be implemented sometime in the future for beyond connections. 6E has since moved to T1 at KUL for easier connections.

    Quote

    Indian carriers have tried connecting Kuala Lumpur to their network multiple times. Back in the mid 2000s, Air Indiaoperated to Kuala Lumpur twice a week with the A310. These were supplemented with flights from Chennai by Indian Airlines and Jet Airways. The connectivity at the start of 2000 comprised just 14 flights, nine by Malaysia Airlines and five by Air India & Indian Airlines combined. Jet Airways and Air Sahara joined in when they got approval to fly international in 2005. The competition from the Malaysian side became intense after the entry of AirAsia in 2009. Gradually airlines from India started pulling out, with Air India, Indian Airlines, Air Sahara, Jet Airways all vacating the route while the last one Air India Express vacating the market in 2016. IndiGo entered in 2019, but has kept a token presence with a single daily to Kuala Lumpur from Chennai, long moving out of Delhi and Bengaluru markets.

     


  18. 8 hours ago, Robert said:

    what caused it? Cant remember at all :(

    I don't think the actual reason was ever disclosed. It was just rumors here and there, but it was QF who sponsored MH into Oneworld (fact). And the rest are just hearsay. QF was planning to set up a more premium/full service carrier based in KUL called RedQ (IIRC) during MH-QF OW annoucement. There was some bad blood between MH and QF when MH was in the process of becoming a Oneworld member and it remained till today. There were some rumors that MH (or Malaysian government) wants QF to move their SIN hub to KUL (IIRC, including moving one of the LHR flights via KUL). QF obviously objected to that simply because the demand from SIN is much higher and garners higher yield than MY market. There were a lot more transfer opportunities from SIN (QF also transfer non-OW pax from AF, KL etc from SIN.).


  19. 7 hours ago, KK Lee said:

    Then why BA and QF exited KUL?

    QF left at the height of the AFC in the late 90s. Till this day, they have a lot of rights to Malaysia and beyond that aren't used. Doesn't mean Malaysia is not allowing competition. BA left and returned, left again and will return. There's some cooperation between BA and MH for beyond connections at both ends, so it makes sense for BA to return. BKK will be resumed from LGW, generally a much lower yielding airport. There's a tiff between QF and MH. IF they can get back in bed together we will see QF back at KUL. MY-AU is not a small market (excluding beyond connections). 

×
×
  • Create New...