N Azman

if you had bothered to read my post completely, you would see my clarification in the example down there. the part about sacrificing some services (and some passengers) for good RPK. hey, it worked so far, the numbers dont lie bro. unless you really believe snackboxes would bring the passenger count of mas down close to ZERO. in which case i have no arguments to counter that already! wow people really do believe snackboxes can bring down the 'P' amount significantly. remove the 'P'? u mean bringing it down to zero passenger count? because of snackboxes? you can't be serious man. youre taking extremes to combat a perfectly logical argument. im lovin this argument now. but that just doesnt make sense. P count is important, but definitely not driven by snackboxes.

1) creating firefly as a community prop-only lowcost competitor to airasia 2) Fleet renewal of new generation 737s with better fuel consumption 3) selling expensive unnecessary assets such as the MH building in KL 4) continuing BTP 1 with BTP 2, whose success will ensure MH could have a large enough cash mountain to survive any future world/local economic crises (any more war in the mideast, oil peak scenario, govt change in malaysia (uh-oh...)) 5) ATR 72 with even lower fuel consumption to ensure cost structure of firefly is kept low, as the industry approaches overcapacity 6) NOT cancelling the A380 orders despite heavy pressure from the unions for him to do so, hence ensuring MH stays with the competitor next door in terms of equipment availability. Look, im not a pro-MH guy or pro-IJ guy or anything. But those sure sounds like long term solutions from my seat right here.....

With all due respect to the above posters, i think all the posts above are a biiiiittttt inaccurate. passengers are not king. RPKs are king. Passengers are secondary to a good RPK. RPK is revenue-passenger-kilometer which in otherwords, how much money you make, per passenger, per kilometer flown. So in other words, its not just about carrying the most passengers and pleasing the most, its about maximising your revenue with each passenger, even if you have to sacrifice a few. Striking a balance to maximise revenue is a definite trade off exercise where there is no best of both worlds. it is apparent that IJ cut MH's costs in its inflight menu, but RPKs has been sky rocketing since he took over. Ill say it again. RPKs have been increasing tremendously since he took over - which equates to higher revenue, and profit. Which makes for a good CEO. "you can fly 100 pax on a bad RPK, and still not make as much money as the next carrier carrying 80 passengers with a good RPK..." (minus 20 pax who are disgruntled with snackboxes) And the last post regarding 'Major Contributor' being the passengers. Yes, thats true. But do you really think your view of snackboxes being a decisive factor of people choosing their airlines is mutually shared by the majority of the fliers in the region? I can assure you. Not that many people gives a sh*t.

Prashant, I agree with you. IJ has done a great job from the business point of view. Somebody in MH could have done a research that results in: 30% of MH flyers are unhappy with snackboxes. Please bring back my hot meal. 30% don't give a hoot. Either I'm asleep anyway or I'm half dazed due to the pressurization and of the opinion that all airline food sucks and are too little. 20% dislikes the snackboxes, but ultimately doesnt give a hoot either. Airline choices are based on price or safety record or equipment or scheduling convenience. Not what food they serve on board. 20% don't give a hoot also. I'm flying business/first class baby which gives you a whopping 70% that doesnt give a hoot. So, from the business point of view, there goes the hot meals. in with the snackboxes.

i just spent the last hour arguing about the outlook of VLJs in the region. whats malaysianwing's take on this?

ambitious? not if carriers from russia and countries from the old soviet block snap up 750 out of that 800.

I wonder how this large order of narrow bodies plays into MH's plans. Many people know that the domestic and regional SEA traffic is heading for overcapacity, with airasia and lion air boasting massive order backlogs. No way MH can match their cost structure, and now they putting close to 50 narrow bodies to fight for the same routes? I wouldve expected them to make a smaller order, and re-align themselves to be a more international oriented airline, rather than fight a losing battle in the domestic and regional. not to mention already having their own child, firefly, flying domestic with ATRs.... any thoughts on this?

Well, why would firefly want to damage MH's coffers even more by offering SZB-SIN flights? As if the current threat from AK/Tiger isnt bad enough.....

Is Johor the only state government/monarchy that owns a bizjet?

Well, I did say second LCCT, meaning I don't wish AK to exit KUL either. For the sake of KUL, and also for the sake of transitting pax to international flights. Therefore, the selection of flights in and out of SZB LCCT will be critical, to make sure KUL stays afloat. For instance, some low yield destinations can be shifted to SZB, in order to boost its load factors, since people generally hate to travel 1 hr to KUL, for a KUL-JHB stint whereby you can drive 3 hours straight to JHB. But do NOT move KUL-KCH to SZB....things like that.... am i making sense here? Oh yeah. of course the tax-payers pay for it but the taxpayers are also presented the option to travel cheaper to more destinations with the opening of an LCCT in subang... We pay taxes anyway with or without any airports involved. But the taxi/ERL ride to/fro KUL , thats daylight robbery!

Maybe the said person could BUILD another LCCT at subang. We all know SZB as an airport fits the LCC model better than KUL. Nearer to town, less air traffic - lower turnaround time - etc etc the whole shebang. The firm orders are for 50 A320s right? and right now theyre at around half of it....and the LCCT at KUL is starting to crowd up.....not to mention the future pax from tiger airways.... I fancy a 2nd LCCT at SZB.

TGG airport has been overdue for upgrades anyway. The old terminal is in a sad state AFAIK, and my last visit there was 3 years ago! Eitherway, a major aviation hub at TGG is not gonna happen, not in the near future anyway. With tourists to Perhentian/redang islands flying into KBR, and tourists to cherating flying to Kuantan, or driving, Kuala Terengganu itself does not produce enough traffic to justify a big airport.

Isn't he talking about Electronic Flight Bag? That thing has been around for ages isn't it? Even on boeings...

Yeah, I noticed the current discovery harmony module payload is in the pictures. I was referring to that specific picture with the SpaceHab lab module in it. Maybe that picture alone came from pre-columbia?

Which launch is this pic from Azuddin? I thought SpaceHab was destroyed in Columbia?

EK also fly SIN-KUL as I recall....on a 777 no less.

I remember a long time ago, you can buy 'standby' tickets like that for ANY destination (cheap cheap). And you have to be there to see if there's any vacancies or no shows.....and you only know 10 minutes before takeoff if you get it. Wonder if we can still purchase such tickets now....

Oh wow. This is a flaming hot controversial topic. Religion should be up to the individual. Everyone's got their own intepretations so lets leave it at that. For example, my arab seatmate and his wife (who's wearing the burqa-ninja type head covering) on DXB-SIN sometime ago proceeded to chug a can of heineken each, after a fairly lengthful read of EK's interactive Al-Quran channel. Maybe he's conservative. Maybe he's not even muslim. But the point is, who am I to say. And to make this post ON topic, that was in a 777-300! awesome ride!

Thanks Azuddin. These pictures rock.

Great thread this one. Azuddin, if you have SRB manufacture, assembly, and recovery pics also please share

This is nicely written. I'll lookout for this article in NST If its not published, simplify some of the points and resend. I know they're quite a stickler for page space up there at jalan riong.

Youre right about KLIA losing out bit. But I don't think crowding SZB is going to be an issue, not for the next 10 years at least. SZB operated those days with 3 terminals to accomodate International/cargo/domestic. If AK is allowed to start flights there to/from SELECTED destinations only, I think they can even use the existing T3 to accomodate that. No new buildings needed. Sure, traffic will flare up a bit but it is a small price to pay, and the gahmen even have the option of expanding the second road entry into SZB, coming from damansara perdana through kampung melayu.

I remember the ground breaking of MIAC 2 odd years ago, but i don't seem to recall any plans for LCC placement at SZB. MIAC looks to be out the window anyway, judging from current state of structures at SZB. MRO center? LCC center? Aerospace research center? All of the above? Wish the gahmen would just follow through with at least one of those. Lots of graduates in need of jobs out there...

This is exactly why frat-boy pranks should not be attempted after passing the age of 40.

Naah. If based solely on this criteria, he would no doubt be a native of Subang Anyone got interior shots of any Prime Minister birds? (no pun intended)