Craig

If you are looking at solely KUL-LHR nonstop market, then yes. But I believe both BA and MH targets a lot of traffic outside those market as well. MH is still light years ahead of BA in terms of passenger comfort so I don't believe they should benchmark against BA. The A350s aren't going to be used solely for LHR either.

You mean charging all passengers with the exception of OWE and F for seat assignments, cramming 8-across J in a 777 without direct aisle access, and for passengers connecting to other regional flights - cramming the maximum allowable seats in MH 737 (BA is going to have 180-seater 320 just like AK), buy-on-board on all regional flights including water, introducing HBO fares, not interlining bags even though you are flying the same airline, handing out Kit Kat bars after a 6-7 hour flight instead of a light meal? I sure hope not! MH is light years ahead of BA right now. Let's not start the race to the bottom with BA.

Wishful thinking - is MH planning to move to T1 by any chance? That's where most OW operators are and would definitely make connections easier.

What if a non-LCC wants to operate from there or AK's childish publicity stunt that they wanted move their entire operations to "KLIA1"? Keep it simple. Terminal 1 and 2 (A and B etc.). It's the same airport. If the nomenclature of airport terminals ain't broke, don't fix it. Now you have people asking about KLIA1, KLIA2, main terminal, satellite terminal, LCCT etc. It can be very confusing to a first time user. Terminal 1 with the main concourse and satellite concourse, and terminal 2. Simple and easy.

I am pretty sure the press release said otherwise. AFAIK, China rarely grants one year visa now. It's 6 months multiple entries. A few years ago they are quite easy on giving 2 years multiple entries. But having that said, a 2-week visa waiver would work for *most* Malaysian tourists to China. 1-week would even work for me. Highly likely that these flights are incentivized by the Chinese government. Just like how they provide incentives to BA and AY to fly into secondary Chinese cities. Once these incentives go away, so does the route (BA's LHR-CTU is a great example).

Interesting. Some routes are just oddball (PEN-SZX comes to mind). And MH hasn't even loaded KUL-HAK into their GDS yet and they are starting this route next month! Prime PEK slots are difficult to procure. And airlines usually have more capacity into PVG than to PEK. You want MH to send its 333 on PEN-SZX? On a point to point service (and SZX is not even served from KUL)? MH uses a 738 for KUL-TPE/CAN which probably has way more traffic than PEN-SZX. And the reason for BKI-TSN is probably because it's within the 738 range. Chinese, Indian, Nepali, Bangladeshi, and Burmese nationals living in their country of citizenship (plus a few more for Indians and Chinese e.g. living in Hong Kong or Australia is fine) are eligible to apply for the e-visa. I don't know how it works but I guess it's similar to India's e-visa for foreign tourists. The Malaysian e-visa is valid for 3 months for a max stay of 30 days. Now if only China grants visa waiver to Malaysians like they do to Singaporeans (14-days visa free) or at the very least 72 hours TWOV (currently at 24 but it must be to and from the same port). OT: Can the government negotiate for visa free access to Morocco and Ethiopia for Malaysians as well

CX will be adding another weekly HKG-KUL flight between 08DEC and 23FEB (making a total of 5 flights a day on Thursdays). Flight schedule is as below: CX727 HKG1055 - 1450KUL 4 EQV CX728 KUL1605 - 2005HKG 4 EQV Most flights are 2-cabin 773 with a couple of 33E/33P/343. Seems like CX is sending its 77G/77H to KUL at least once a day for W16/17. One last hurrah before being KA-ized.

And that includes BA/CX/TG/LH etc. flights to Malaysia/Indonesia/Middle East where you won't find pork on the menu (I don't know if it's halal, but definitely no pork and most probably no dressing/sauce that includes alcohol like balsamic vinegar or wine reduction etc.). However, if the carrier (e.g. TG/SQ/MH) has pre-order meals available, passengers have the option of choosing pork (not on MH for obvious reasons) on their flight to those countries (having the option to do so and actually ordering it on flights to those destinations are very different IMO). The same can be said for flights to India where beef is usually not on the menu and I find MH's lamb satay way better than the beef satay. Malaysians can visit Israel as a tourist (unofficially). You can always apply for an Israeli visa at their embassy and the visa is on a piece of paper (not stamped on your passport) and Israel doesn't usually stamp passports anymore (or at least you can can request not to stamp your passport - much like how HK entry/exit works now). And that is true - Malaysia doesn't have diplomatic relationship with Israel in name only. Trade still goes on.

TK did not sign a code-sharing agreement with OD. They signed an interline/SPA agreement - different from a code-share. e.g. - The following routing is permitted for a simple KUL-PEN: 1. IST-BJS/HKG/SHA-CA/CX/FM/KA/MU-PEN 2. IST-KUL/SIN-3K/OD-PEN That just means passengers have the option of flying from Istanbul to Penang via KUL (along with SIN/BJS/HKG/SHA) but KUL-PEN must be on OD instead of MH. And for PER: 1. IST-KUL/SIN-3K/OD-PER

Well good thing you are not running for the city planner position. I'd like to know your statistics on "a single point of failure...(that) will cripple air links". Does it happen so often that it's more cost efficient to build more runways at all other LON's airports (including LCY) before a third one at LHR. And not all passengers flying to/from LON ends/starts in London too

That and MH need the capacity. PB once mentioned that MH is under capacity to both DEL and HKG. KUL-HKG is a (OW) hub-to-hub regional flight. In most cases, these are usually high frequency/capacity flights. Product differentiation for a 4-hour flight is great. Product differentiation after a 12-16 hours TPAC or European flight is even better.

Agent would have no idea what you/your parents are talking about. They are responsible for your ticket until departure, not for lounge access etc. I think that's more of a misunderstanding of the rules. Quote from OW QR Lounge "Premium Lounge at London Heathrow is available for eligible customers travelling on Qatar Airways or any oneworld flights in First and Business cabin class only." OW Y pax are not allowed into the QR LHR Premium Lounge, but a OW premium pax is definitely eligible to enter the QR premium lounge (in this case the only other OW carrier at T4 is MH). It's actually not that high. SYD/MEL/HKG is much higher but yet QR allows their pax to use QF/CX lounge respectively.

MH assigns even for northbound and odd for southbound.

You can call the toll-free number from US at 1-800-552-9264. I believe this number actually routes back to the Malaysia call center (this is one area where MH is way better than most airlines, including SQ!). If it's the general reservation number in Malaysia, then you should be able to speak to the Enrich redemption desk. Also, it might help if you do some award availability research before calling and feed the agent the flights you want. The only one-stop service I can think of is KUL-LHR-IAH. Other than that, most flights require a transit at LAX/SFO/ORD/JFK/DFW. If the KUL-IAH distance is kicks you in the next award level, try flying into LAX/SFO/JFK and just buy a one-way domestic ticket, which sometimes costs as low as $50-60.

You are right that you are buying the same product and I have never said you are buying the same product. What I am saying is that MH and AK can't even compete on a level playing field with all else being equal. The government's job is not to subsidize passengers using T2 or tax more for passengers using T1. Trekking through a shopping mall is frivolous in this argument, along with toilet size etc. That's how MAHB designed and built it - blame it on them. This is like giving T2 pax a rebate because of their flaws in designing a user-friendly terminal in the first place. There are many airports that I can think that requires a long trek - one longer than the other terminals but that doesn't mean you get subsidized for your inconvenience.

You had me at toilet size. Think of it this way - AK, TR, 3K, MH, and OD all have a KUL-SIN sale - $0 fare with no admin fees etc. and you only pay taxes/PSC. OD and MH is already at a disadvantage right from the get-go because of the PSC. In fact, AK, TR, and 3K can even have a $10 base fare plus $20 credit card fees and be ahead of MH and OD! You see why TF is "championing" for lower PSC at T2?

Apples and oranges. Is the apartment and condo in the same location, electricity, water, security plus other essential items managed by the same company? LAX is one of the airports I frequent - should they install a toll booth on the walkway between T4 and Tom Bradley International Terminal (TBIT)? Or do I need to pay more taxes when AA swapped my T4 gate to a TBIT gate? TBIT is a gleaming new terminal with much better facilities - from retail to dining to passenger comfort but that didn't justify additional taxes. I could argue the same for CGK T3 vs. T1/2, BOM T2 vs. T1, CDG T2F vs T1, GRU T3 vs. T1/2 etc. One airport one PSC.

Or rather it's unprofessional to throw a hissy fit based on a rumor. People have mentioned this and I probably failed to see this when I used T2 a couple of times, but what facilities at T2 is lacking compared to T1? The PSC should be standardized - I don't pay less tax if I flew AK/3K/TR out of any other stations than I do with MH/SQ/TG.

Isn't C5 a remote gate or something?

Whilst I don't have an opinion on the PSC hike, I agree with the standardization of PSC across all terminals at the same airport. It's baffling to have different taxes at the same airport - both terminals require water, power (electricity), security/immigration staff, check-in counters, jet bridges etc. On a side note, is the rumored tiered PSC treated based on final destination or first international flight out - i.e. will KUL-HKG have the same taxes as KUL-SIN-HKG because the latter will mainly benefit other ASEAN carriers.

The KA-lonization of KUL is now reflected in the GDS. CX 724/725/729/720 will be KA-ed beginning March 2016 and the remainder beginning June. New flight numbers will be KA 722-729. Frequency remains 4 daily A333. On a side note, some CX 724/725 flights will be operated by CX 77G/H this November. IME, some crew treats this as F cabin (sold as J) - curtains are drawn with more attentive service and pax in this small cabin are allowed off the plane first before regular J. Also, bye bye BA/AA code on this route and for those who credit their mileage to AS.

Absolutely not. I flew MH 366 early August and there was alcohol in the menu.

Probably because fluency in Thai is a requirement for TG. And you are right for JL, just with one hand. There are only 5 male FA in JL - I had the pleasure of flying with one of them earlier this year.

My mistake. Glorified PEY then KA 65 (15:55 departure ex-HKG) and KA 61 (08:00 departure ex-HKG) on-time performance was 67% and 92% respectively for the last 2 months.

I don't contribute that much to CX's bottom line, but I do fly TPAC with CX about 8-10 times a year (20-30 times if I include my family) in premium cabin. My CX fare rule is quite flexible - I can't exceed MPM by a certain percentage but I can route any way I want on a OW carrier to/from HKG. I prefer not to fly PEY after a 16 hour flight from LAX, so come March 2017, CX 723/722 will not be part of my itinerary since CX 723/722 is mostly operated with 33K or 33E. I'd rather fly KUL-BKK-HKG-US since BKK/SIN/CGK sees 77H on a semi-regular basis (especially BKK). Ditto CX is still one of the preferred TPAC carriers ex-KUL. Japanese carriers have a maximum of 2 flights a day to US/Canada and it's all in the same departure bank. Between NH and JL, only NH is timed for TPAC flights. With CX, there are multiple departure banks from both ends. I could have chosen JL to LAX but I rarely do so due to inconvenient schedule. ANA's reinstated NRT-KUL flights were timed for TPAC flights from the get go. HND flights on the other hand is not timed for any TPAC flights. CX is not famous for its food, even in premium (F/J) cabins they are average at best. I fly them for their hard product. Because KA is 100% PEY seats whilst CX has 1-3 flights a day with flat beds to HKG. Also, since KA operates a lot of HKG-China routes, I won't be surprised if the on-time performance for its KUL flights, especially with the current CX 791/729 schedule, will suffer.