Y. J. Foo

You might want to upload the image to an image hosting site. Flickr and Photobucket are some of the examples.

IMO introducing B737-900ERs to complement existing B738s might be better from fleet commonality viewpoint. BTW FZ is Boeing customer code for Babcock & Brown. Seems that FY doesn't have a specific Boeing customer code at this moment.

I'm fairly certain CX sends some of their aircraft to XMN for heavy MX. The facility is owned by HK-basec HAECO but still technically done in CN... Off-topic BTW... With the sanctions being proposed to be relaxed they may finally get to replace the increasingly old airframes.

Airbus has filed a patent for a configuration that stacks passengers in the manner that, "In modern means of transport, in particular in aircraft, it is very important from an economic point of view to make optimum use of the available space in a passenger cabin." USPOT site to the patent:http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20150274298&IDKey=0410F6F462F7&HomeUrl=http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-adv.html%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PG01%2526S1=20150274298%2526OS=20150274298%2526RS=20150274298 http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/5/9457857/what-is-with-this-hellish-airplane-seat-arrangement-from-airbus

Nah it's SQ's new A330LNO (low nose option) On serious note, anyone knows which frame involved in this?

This from FY's FB and Twitter: https://www.facebook.com/Firefly?fref=ts Wow I hope it won't be this bad when I fly with them next month...

Good thing the fire was under control before fuel tanks were breached, else it could have been much worse.

Probably those less observant do not mind serving it. Back to the topic, it would be interesting to see how the airline would play this one out. Stick with their gun, and they might get decried for trampling on freedom to practice one's own belief; back off their stand, and they will more than likely get lashed out by certain quarters as "un-American".

Was the survey conducted by the same bunch of people way back when they concluded that, allegedly, 94% of pax surveyed preferred snack boxes stuffed with cold, inconsistently-made sandwiches on sectors like KUL-BKK, while their rivals operating the same route offered (and still do) actual hot meal? /s To quote former CO CEO Gordon Bethune, who did a great job reviving the ailing airline: You can make a pizza so cheap, nobody will eat it. IMO Muller will need to provide a service that can compete with the like of SQ, TG, GA, VN et al if they want to turn newco around and stay relevant; mere cost-cutting measures by taking away amenities that used to be there like this that affect service levels will only serve to sway savvy travellers away, and in turn affect long-term viability of the newco, especially if they still cannot compete price-wise with rivals that promise better services. Admittedly it is a tall order to sway the public perception around after all these negative presses, but if he can shed off all the bloated legacy contracts and optimise the costs and expenditures, it should be easier to achieve both cost-savings and better-than-existing services.

More information from other Chinese dailies on the proposed project (http://www.nanyang.com/node/716402?tid=517 and http://mykampung.sinchew.com.my/node/374809): - Existing airport currently handles 80 flights daily (actually closer to 100+ takeoff & landing daily, and not including general aviation I presume, still not sure how that translates to "busiest airport after KLIA") - To be accessible via Lebuhraya Rakyat and supposedly a mere 29km from KB (even if I were to use KB mall as the starting point it would still be closer to 40km - I guess by "KB" they mean Tunjong, the new township that also happens to be the future administrative centre?) -No words on what would happen to KBR if this plan goes through

According to this news article from China Press (http://www.chinapress.com.my/node/644306): -Kelantan Exco Anwar Tan revealed that existing KBR will not be expanded "due to saturated development". -A new 5000 acre site at Labok, near Machang, approx 55km from KBR is proposed to central gov't for development of a new international airport. -Proposal not yet accepted by central gov't. I was under the impression that KBR was upgraded a few years back to include a new taxiway, and the terminal is planned to be expanded?

Wonder if NH plans to put in 3x5x3 configuration on main deck? It would be fun...

Apparently the "MH" code was meant to stay before this leak... this is intriguing. Perhaps the new IATA code is to better suit the new branding? But that would contradict the statement that "It will not have M and H in it" for RH and RM. Since the rumour does not mention where "R" would be, I'd say "ER" and "SR" might be some possibilities, however sinister that sounds...

I thought at one point TF wanted to build AK's own airport at Labu? If he gets p!55ed off enough he might start considering that opinion more seriously this time...

Seat manufacturer Zodiac has filed a patent for its latest idea - turning the middle seat 180 degree to face backwards and have the seats arranged hexagonally “to increase cabin density while also creating seat units that increase the space available at the shoulder and arm area.” http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hey-look-nightmarish-idea-plane-seating-ever/ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/07/09/421558674/the-plane-seating-arrangement-thats-being-called-a-nightmare I'll be damned if this ever gets FAA/EASA certification...

Well it is a tongue-in-cheek proposal, so... But either proposals may become reality earlier than LHR third runway the way it seems so that's that!

This reminds me of the purported Manhattan Airport Foundation's plan to raze Central Park to build an airport there... http://manhattanairport.org/

Wet lease perhaps? After all the aircraft still carries 9M registration.

Apparently it is not new - seems that they tend to suspend hot beverage services due to "bad weather", even though the weather could not have been any better. Hope whatever CM does to turn MH around, he won't make onboard F&B BoB a la EI!

I thought 2 of the 380s are to be leased by Transaero? That means after this there will only be 4 of those around - for now. IIRC 3 frames are needed to sustain the remaining A380 route to LHR, so it might be a bit too tight to even do another one daily flight to AUS.

The Labours supported and was close to proceed with the third runway construction before the 2010 election. It apparently was also one of the reason Gordon Brown lost the election; the coalition government of Tories and Lib Dem took over and cancelled LHR expansion plans. And David Cameron apparently is not changing his mind anytime soon, but nonetheless the realities have crept in and he may have to back down on that: Cameron’s ‘no ifs, no buts’ Heathrow runway stance dealt big blow http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f4f915fa-1fff-11e5-aa5a-398b2169cf79.html#axzz3eho6w2x4

In other words, the Commission has stated the obvious, which British aviation industry has been saying this past decade. Perhaps they should just throw in a fourth runway as well. Unfortunately it seems pretty apparent also that the Tories and those brain dead NIMBYs will block this proposal, notwithstanding the fact LHR is increasingly losing out to continental European competitors due to operational constraints.

Soon-to-be-fired CA Personnel: Do I have to pay for the bags I am packing my personal effects?

Much to the disappointment by Samsonite, American Tourister etc it seems

11. Some brain-dead attention wh0re blaming MH's female uniform as "too revealing" as the reason of the incident... To all those sensationalist mass medias MH really can't do things right, at least they err on the safe side on this. Did the media react in similar scale the last time BA's 744 flew across the pond with only 3 engines operational?