Juergen Witte

With a PPL "made in Malaysia" you may only fly aircraft with 9M-... registration ! (anywhere in the world) But i think the malaysian PPL will be honoured in the U.K. (like in many other ICAO member countries ... ) - under the condition that you pass some theory/practical tests as well as a check flight which will allow you to get a british license afterwards. So, you can somehow "circumvent" the (financially) exhausting education in the U.K. but your malaysian license will still be limited to 9M registered aircraft !!! I suggest you contact the CAA and ask what exactly you will have to do to "transfer" your malaysian PPL into a U.K. one (probably a license according to JAA regulations) rgrds, Jurgen

I know for a while now that Pacific Pearl Airways had planned charter flights Davao, Philippines (DVO) - Bandar Seri Begawan (BWN) due to commence in april. Until now i haven´t heard anything whether these flights have started or not ... Is there anyone out there who knows more about that ??? (probably Sabah/Sarawak locals?)

If Berjaya maintains their actual ticket price level and tries to compete with Firefly i don´t see them around for long ...

Just stumbled over the first photo of Berjaya Air´s new ATR 72-500. Just see: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Berjaya-Air...next_id=1499766 So, Berjaya´s Dash-7 era is going to end soon ... The first one (still wearing factory registration F-WWEC) will become 9M-TAG

Maybe they were granted a straight-in right away from transition altitude because no other traffic was around ... ??? Transition altitude for TBS is FL90 (9000 feet). When the aircraft reaches transition altitude it may be well to far away to be recognized by TBS tower. Next to this radar aid may be limited due to surrounding mountains or even non existent ... If a cockpit crew confirms "runway in sight" the tower crew (at TBS) may not know if the cockpit crew has the right runway in mind due to the proximity of both airports ... !!!

That is exactly what i was thinking ... Next to this the taxiway arrangement at the military airport is totally different and can easily be recognized as a military one !!! ( as can be seen on the above photo ). Also the approach chart for TBS clearly highlights not to mistake the military airport instead of TBS ! At least one of the cockpit crew has not done his job to the regulations by familiarizing with the approach and reading the approach card properly. Otherwise he should have been alerted by the - clearly visible - remark on the approach map !!!

I´d rather like to see MH fixing their "Enrich problems" ... And it makes me wonder if Y+ passengers will only get Y class miles ... (which i would expect ...)

I still don´t get why they even touched down at the airbase ... When looking out of the window they must recognize there´s no terminal, etc. I simply can´t believe that a Star Annoyance member airline would let a flight go to a destination like Tbilisi without ensuring at least one cockpit crew member is familiar with that airport. So, there´s no escape from that "incident" as they must have recognized being wrong !!! P.S.: TK has a relatively high proportion of ex military pilots. So, maybe the crew still had the "military airfields software" in they minds ... ?????

Peter Michel is a German. He´s a retired engineer ... PM lives not far from Frankfurt (In Bischofsheim near Mainz - some 30 km from FRA just below approach path to FRA ... ) and he has already built a lot of airliner RC models !

Viva Macau is to adjust their LCC model to that of the leading LCC´s (remark: AAX that is ... ) Viva Macau Airlines Introduces Checked Baggage Fees for Economy Class (Macau, March 26, 2009) Viva Macau Airlines, Macau’s award-winning international low-fares airline, today announced the introduction of checked baggage fees for Economy Class passengers. Effective 1st April, a service fee will apply to each Economy Class passenger who carries checked baggage for all flights except charter flights to Tokyo. For flights within 5 hours (i.e. Jakarta and Ho Chi Minh City), MOP70 (USD8) per passenger will be charged for any checked baggage up to 15 kilograms; for flights more than 5 hours (i.e. Sydney), MOP110 (AUD20 or USD12) per passenger will be charged. “To ensure the lowest airfares, our policy is our passengers only pay for what they require. The new checked baggage fees will only apply for passengers who require this service,” Viva Macau Airlines CEO Con Korfiatis said. In addition, checked baggage allowance for Economy Class will also be adjusted from 20 kilograms to 15 kilograms, effective 1st April. For passengers who made bookings before 1st April, checked baggage allowance remains unchanged and no checked baggage fee will apply.

It will be a "hard nut" to crack obtaining the neccessary traffic rights ! If that fails i´d suspect they still look into further european destinations. I had the impression they were focused on Europe at the moment but probably the drive behind starting flights to the U.S. is to gain a wider recognition of the Air Asia brand in shorter time ... We´ll see ... @Seth K I agree the routing KUL-STN-NYC would be the most plausible But - where will AAX get their needed additional a/c from ??? (A340-300´s are not really many on the 2nd hand market ... )

Well, despite the fact that flying in Indonesia is not the "safest" way of travel in general ... I find it a bit unfair to blame indonesian aviation again in a generalization ! Nobody knows exactly what happened but immediately blames the whole country ... It might be one of the "inevitable incidents" that can happen to every airline on this planet !!! Although it has been an "older" type of aircraft (B 737-200) that does not automaticly imply poor maintenance, etc. It should be known that not all indonesian airlines have poor maintenance ... I wish (i know it´s just a wish) that media would report depending on solid information rather than making an immediate gun shoot at everything that has been put into a certain - negative - category previously ... !!! (unfortunately media acts like this all over the world)

Hmmm, i don´t think we will see another european route this year ... And ... Italy ??? I know it´s on D7´s agenda but surely not on top of the list ! I´d rather see D7 going to Cologne maybe next spring ( depending on whether they can aquire enough aircraft or not ! - remember firstly they will increase STN to a daily service which means they need 2 aircraft just for this route !!!)

Simply because the singaporean government - until now - wants all scheduled flights to go to Changi. It´s probably under consideration to permit regional prop flights going to Seletar. (note: there is no passenger terminal @ XSP that could handle much more than the actual Berjaya Air flights ! )

Maybe they forgot to include the appropiate prayer/religion for that particular danger ...

You´re correct regarding accessability ... (I´ve flown into XSP on Berjaya Air from Tioman ... ) But when passenger numbers rise significantly (and they certainly will with a SZB-XSP service) i suspect the bus schedule would be adjusted to demand. At the moment there´s no need for a more frequent bus since the usual people flying into/out of XSP use taxi or limousine as ground transport. (the bus is probably aimed to those working at the airport only) Regarding distance to the city: As always it depends where you want to go. I´m not sure that the SG government will block scheduled flights into XSP if these are clearly not for connecting traffic (e.g. that already applies for the Berjaya flights) Still, if they insist on FY flying into SIN, FY would certainly go to the Budget Terminal.

... and here´s the =@ Since there´s no singaporean airline with turboprop equipment they (the possible singaporean carrier for SIN/XSP - SZB service) might insist on operating jets to SZB ... So, there´s trouble ahead regarding permission for flights between SZB and SIN/XSP by a malaysian airline !!! I can hardly imagine any potential singaporean airline aquiring turboprops just to be able to serve the SZB-market ... Actally I´m trying to imagine how relaxed TF will lean back in his chair watching both sides (SG and MY goverments) fighting for a solution that saves both faces !!! ... and gives him the chance to get his jets into SZB without having to fight seriously for it We will see ... ! But i don´t see FY operating any jet out of SZB soon ! Btw.: In my opinion the AT7 would be perfect for the route - economy wise (considering the distance)

I was already wondering about that ! But Berjaya will replace all Dash-7 with new ATR 72-500. So, this will put them in the same situation as Firefly (aircraft performance wise) I suspect that due to the relatively short distance (SZB-TOD) the ATR´s will be way below MTOW and they may even restrict payload to make it doable (maybe restricted to max. 50 passengers ??? ) At Tioman the runway length is 992m . A comparable situation is at Caticlan (MPH) in the Philippines where the runway is even shorter (810m) ... Cebu Pacific operates their ATR 72-500 into MPH (albeit with payload restriction) So, i would expect a lesser payload restriction at TOD in particular as the distance flown requires even less fuel to be carried compared to MNL-MPH !

I can remember i heard/read somewhere "some time ago" that FY was considering to serve the "holiday islands". Is that true - and if so - what do you think is the impact on Berjaya Air ??? (considering they will switch to the ATR soon) In my opinion Berjaya would have to lower their fares significantly if FY enters their "home market". I know that J8´s ops are mainly to feed their resorts but is it a possibility they look for additional destinations ???

I heard that Spirit of Manila is expected to start "regular charter" flights between Davao, Philippines and Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei with their B 737-300 ... (probably from april 09 ??? ) Although not exactly related to malaysian aviation - is there anyone who has more details ??? Thanks, Jürgen

Another neccessary improvement would be sufficient access to public transport at XSP. At the moment there´s not even a local bus service within reasonable walking distance. Only taxis are availlable - and as i experienced by myself - demand easily surpasses supply ! So, better order one before arrival at XSP to avoid getting "stranded" for some time ...

Back to the "original" topic ... I´ve kept myself waiting some time before starting to comment/contribute my ideas ! Now, that they are going to find a solution without building a new ("shadow") airport next to KLIA i must say i could hardly believe that a separate airport right next to KLIA would ever be build. It would have been extremely rediculous - economy wise - and even considering AK´s growth in the past and that grow to be expected in the foreseeable future would not justify a separate airport. Actually it seems to me (from a foreign point of view) that MAHB management is simply not willing to do the neccessary steps to keep AK and possible other LCC´s happy. As far as i know the LCCT there´s still sufficient space to build a new terminal that will be sufficient for AK´s growth. It´s certainly not a good idea to mix premium and LCC passengers for MAHB - revenue wise - But it´s rediculous - no, stupid to block smoothe interchange of passengers from both markets. Which unfortunately is done intentionally in various ways. It´s o.k. to put LCC´s on the opposite side of the airport in a separate terminal from the legacies but not acceptable to run the LCCT like a separate airport! What KLIA needs are: 1) A significantly bigger LCC terminal with an option to extend it even further when need arises. 2) Regular reliable and properly signposted shuttle between KLIA and LCCT - preferably either a people mover or a train connection. Although this is not going to be a cheap solution (as it would require a tunnel between KLIA and LCCT) it would greatly improve the overall effectiveness of KLIA as a hub - actually KLIA is not even close to being a true hub because synergies are not used at all !!! 3) Much better access by public transport - it still goes beyond me why the KLIAexpress track was not extended to the LCCT especially as the typical LCC customer will not go to/from the airport by car ... If KLIAexpress is considered a premium product dedicated solely to KLIAs customers (as one can see when comparing the fares with the coach links to Sentral) why not run "local" trains to the LCCT ??? The mentioned excuses for not offering any rail access to LCCT are a joke ! Next to this i have yet to experience a KLIAexpress train being sufficiently occupied with passengers to make it profitable (or do i get it wrong and the low usage is more than compensated by the outragous fare that´s charged ??? ) More reasonable pricing with much higher load factor (fed by travellers from the LCCT) would be a better solution ! A further step would be offering an integrated public transport system in the greater KL area (having in mind what we are used to here in Germany) It seems that KLIA together with KL city still has a long way to go until a level similar to e.g. HKG or SIN is reached !!! This are just my 2 cents ... Jürgen

Which one is it ??? 9M-TAL ???

Sorry - should have checked "Observation Hill" first I just wonder how the loads are ...

Just found out that SEAIR should´ve already started a weekly flight Kota Kinabalu - Puerto Princesa (Palawan/Philippines) continuing to Caticlan (Boracay) ! So, Kota Kinabalu will see regular DO 328 service now ... (albeit once a week only - on fridays) This flight will connect three of the most important tourist destinations in the region. I wonder if enough Tourists will get to know about this service ... I know that a significant number of tourists would like to combine multiple destinations but were until now forced to limit themselves to one or two of them due to time (and money!) consuming restricted travel options so far ! Has anyone recognized these flights at BKI so far ???