flee

I think this is a sad development - looks like they are trying to intimidate you. I think that as long as you let them know that you know that you are just photographing beautiful planes and show them your pictures you should be OK. You should not be confrontational. It looks like Friday is a better day to go to OH and it is best to avoid it on weekends. Maybe spotters should not go alone - the ones who have radio receivers should be off site and they can relay info to the spotter via SMS or phone call... Yes, since this kind of experience can be expected on a Saturday, it will make it hard for MW's 6th anniversary celebrations to be held in KUL.

Third A400M takes to the air By Craig Hoyle Airbus Military has enjoyed two notable firsts in its A400M programme, with the debut flight of development aircraft MSN003 having been achieved while its first two aircraft were also airborne. Flown from the company's San Pablo final assembly site near Seville, Spain, MSN003 took off at 13:57 local time with a crew of five, including experimental test pilots Tony Flynn and Francois Barre. "The addition of MSN3 to the fleet is great news, and will let us push ahead even more rapidly with the flying programme," says Airbus head of flight operations Fernando Alonso. As of 9 July, the A400M test fleet had logged 100 test flights and a combined 400 flight hours, the EADS company says. This represents continued steady progress since last month's Berlin air show, where MSN001 made its show debut after around 250h had been amassed by the fleet. Airbus Military will have five test aircraft available by mid-2011, with these required to fly a combined total of 3,700h during development testing of the A400M. The transport is expected to enter service around late 2012, following a delivery delay of around three years. Carrying a medium instrumentation load, MSN003 will be dedicated to tasks including proving the A400M's autopilot and navigation systems. The aircraft will be assigned to test duties conducted from Airbus's Toulouse site in France. MSN001 will arrive in the UK on 16 July ahead of its weekend participation in the Royal International Air Tattoo at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire. The aircraft will then take part in the daily flying display at the Farnborough air show from 19-22 July. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/09/344266/picture-third-a400m-takes-to-the-air.html

Ex-Hong Kong Airlines B738 is now with MH registered as 9M-MLE.

I think that they may be upgrading to a more versatile version. It is no secret that there is a demand from AirAsia Group pax for multiple destination bookings, e.g. OOL-KUL-BKK-HKG-KUL-OOL. With the booking engine updated, they may also accommodate AirAsia X's requirement for one-stop long haul flights, e.g. KUL-MEL-CHC

Iran Air's EU ban centres on MRO and airworthiness By David Kaminski-Morrow Serious flaws in Iran Air's fleet maintenance and airworthiness programmes led to the decision to ban most of the flag-carrier's aircraft from European Union operations. Iran's Civil Aviation Organisation has demonstrated "several weaknesses" in its oversight of Iran Air, including a lack of detailed review of maintenance programmes and minimum equipment lists. These failings have led to "failure to detect errors" made by the airline, states the European Commission in an assessment detailing its rationale for blacklisting the carrier. Iran Air is suffering "significant deficiencies" in the management of airworthiness and maintenance, it says. "In particular basic errors had been made in the maintenance programmes leading to significant omissions from the programmes for safety-related equipment on the Airbus A320 fleet and the Boeing 747-200 freighter," it adds. Ramp check results from Iran Air's A320s are "noticeably worse" than those for other aircraft in the airline's fleet. Assessment of the airline's operations has shown that the A320 fleet maintenance system "failed to ensure that deferred items had been rectified in the specified timescales". No flight-data monitoring has been carried out on the A320 fleet while the rate of data-gathering on other aircraft has been "very low", the Commission adds: "Moreoverthe company is failing to address the basics in terms of the continued airworthiness of its aircraft." Iran Air's A320s, along with its Boeing 747s and 727s, have been included in the most recent revision of the European Union blacklist. The Commission acknowledges that, during an assessment visit in May-June, the Civil Aviation Organisation was able to demonstrate an oversight system which "complies with the intent" of ICAO regulations, and that the CAO had a "strong commitment" to adopting modern safety management techniques. It adds that the CAO has corrected previously-identified weaknesses in audit follow-up procedures, through a system which enables urgent safety issues to be addressed quickly, and says the CAO has shown an "open, co-operative and constructive approach" to addressing shortfalls. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/07/344160/iran-airs-eu-ban-centres-on-mro-and-airworthiness.html

By Kerry Reals European safety authorities have expanded the operating restrictions imposed on Iran Air to include a ban on allowing the carrier's Airbus A320s, Boeing 727s and 747s to operate within the European Union. In a revision of its airline 'blacklist' published in March, the European Commission placed restrictions on Iran Air after ramp checks uncovered evidence of "insufficient oversight". However, at the time it said the airline could continue to operate 18 Airbus A300/310s, nine Boeing 747s, six Airbus A320s and a single Boeing 737 into Europe. But in a further revision released today, the Commission says that - following a recent visit to Iran - its air safety committee "unanimously supported the expansion of the operating restrictions" to exclude Iran Air's fleet of A320s, 727s and 747s. The Commission adds that it will "continue to closely monitor the performance of the airline through the results of ramp checks of its aircraft which can operate in the EU". Surinam's regional carrier Blue Wing has been put back on the blacklist, following an Antonov An-28 accident in May. Blue Wing had been on the original list of banned carriers but had its ban lifted in November 2007. The latest ban is in response to "a series of accidents suffered by this airline and serious deficiencies revealed during ramp inspections of its aircraft", says the Commission. Two Indonesian carriers, Metro Batavia and Indonesia Air Asia, have been removed from the latest blacklist. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/06/344095/latest-eu-blacklist-bans-iran-air-a320s-and-747s.html

It is interesting to note that the original airframes allocated to MH are "not built". MSN 018 (test reggo F-WWSO) MSN 024 (test reggo F-WWSU) MSN 032 By deduction, had these been built, MH would have received them. I wonder why the MH (and FedEx F version) airframes are the only ones listed as "not built" amongst the early allocated airliner airframes. Source: http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/Airbus/A380/index.php

Info from MAHB website. Re KCH: Re BKI:

I think that legacy carriers do not reward those who book well in advance. LCC's can only claim significant advantage if you book more than 6 months ahead and during their promotions and sales. So how do LCCs make their money? Firstly airlines like D7 have more seats on their planes. Like legacy carriers, they are also carrying cargo. They also price their tickets according to the competitive situation on each particular route. The important thing for them is to sell as many seats as possible. Once they get the seats sold, their next thing is ancillary income. Selling premiums, in flight entertainment, meals, checked in luggage, insurance, bus transfer tickets, etc. Even their inflight magazine is some sort of income generator for them. As to whether this long haul low cost model is sustainable, only time will tell. Some think that if there is another fuel hike, it would kill long haul LCCs. Somehow, I don't think so. Fuel hikes affect all airlines. The fact that LCCs pack more seats will mean that their costs per seat mile will still remain lower than that of legacy carriers. If fuel prices go up but the world economy is stil OK, I suspect that leisure travel might not collapse. I think that for long haul LCCs to survive, it is vital that they remain a viable option for travellers. Flight cancellations and delays are more important than comfort for these types of pax. So it is important that LCCs try to maintain their schedules as top priority. D7's connectivity with AK, FD and QZ is also important. These sister airlines feed pax to D7 and vice versa. I suspect that is why D7 was able to make a profit (its first) in 2009 despite the recession.

We can have more than one event to celebrate the anniversary - we can have a dinner and invite one or two MW members to share some of the pix in a slide show presentation etc. We can also run other activities in Malaysia. Its just that for spotting, locations outside Malaysia may be more fruitful. MAHB is expanding its activities overseas (e.g. MAHB has a hand in the new terminal of New Delhi airport) - so why shouldn't Malaysian Wings do the same?

Very nice pix! Are there any seats for couriers or accompanying officials? I note that when FedEx delivered the pandas to China, they had some seats for those accompanying the VIP cargo.

Qantas Airways Ltd. and AirAsia Bhd. are challenging Singapore Airlines Ltd. and other full-service carriers with a low-fare, long-haul business model that has previously failed. Qantas’s Jetstar unit will add budget long-haul flights from Singapore later this year. The carrier cuts costs by renting movies to passengers and using lightweight equipment to pare fuel usage. AirAsia X, which flew more than 1 million passengers in 2009, squeezes 35 percent more seats onto its planes than full-service carriers to pare expenses. The two carriers also have support from existing airlines, with AirAsia X able to access flights to about 70 cities from its Kuala Lumpur hub through cooperation with AirAsia Bhd., Asia’s largest budget carrier. These ties may help the long-haul carriers avoid the fate of standalones Oasis Hong Kong Airlines Ltd. and London-based Zoom Airlines, which both folded in 2008. “Long haul, low cost is transforming the whole aviation landscape in Asia,” said K. Ajith, an analyst at UOB-Kay Hian Research in Singapore. “Budget carriers may be a force to reckon with in the future because if they have a strong network and are viable, they can potentially lure passengers from established carriers.” London, Australia Long-haul discount airlines differ from Southwest Airlines Co. and Ryanair Holdings Plc because they offer flights of more than five hours and have premium-class seats. AirAsia X, part- owned by AirAsia Bhd., flies twin-aisle Airbus SAS planes to London and Australia, and it’s planning services to Japan and South Korea. Jetstar intends to begin Singapore-Melbourne flights in December followed by services to Auckland in March. It’s also planning flights to European and Asian destinations. “There seems to be a market for long-haul discount travel if prices are low enough,” said Sean Fenton, who helps manage $740 million at Tribeca Investment Partners in Sydney. “It’s a threat to the incumbent carriers.” AirAsia X charges from about 1,286 ringgit ($400) for a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Stansted Airport, 40 miles outside of central London. An economy ticket on Malaysian Airline System Bhd., the nation’s largest carrier, to Heathrow Airport costs from about 2,104 ringgit. Singapore Airlines charges from about S$1,486 ($1,067) for a Singapore-Heathrow coach-class ticket. Singapore Airlines serves “different market segments with different service propositions,” Nicholas Ionides, a spokesman, said in an e-mail reply to Bloomberg questions. Malaysian Air doesn’t intend to compete directly with the lowest fares rivals are offering to safeguard margins, Chief Executive Officer Tengku Azmil Zahruddin said in an e-mail. The airline is targeting customers who don’t make decisions based on price alone, he said. ‘Real Killer’ AirAsia X, which last year had its first annual profit since starting flights in 2007, has gained from AirAsia Bhd.’s feeder traffic, said Chief Executive Officer Azran Osman Rani. Oasis Hong Kong, which flew to London and Vancouver, and transatlantic carrier Zoom, didn’t have similar partners. Relying on a point-to-point market “will be a real killer because there won’t be enough people flying every day,” Azran said. “That’s why the Oasis of the world really struggled.” Jetstar, which operates domestic flights within Australia and services to Japan, has code-shares with Qantas and a partnership with Air France-KLM Group, Europe’s largest carrier. Low-Cost Flying AirAsia X cuts costs by using fewer attendants per flight than full-service carriers because it only loads and serves hot meals that customers have ordered, Azran said. That saves the carrier as much as $100 per passenger, he said. Jetstar also formed a venture with AirAsia Bhd. in January aimed at lowering costs for spare parts and ground-handling services. AirAsia X’s costs were 2.8 cents per available seat kilometer last year, Azran said. Jetstar had costs of 6.8 Australian cents (5.7 cents) in the six months ended December, said Chief Executive Officer Bruce Buchanan. The carrier made twice as much profit as the Qantas mainline business in that period. Costs at Singapore Airlines, including premium and economy cabins, averaged 8.7 Singapore cents (6.2 cents) last year, according to Bloomberg calculations on figures from the carrier. Jetstar plans to boost its fleet to about 100 aircraft by 2015 from 65 as of June. AirAsia X aims to increase its twin- aisle fleet to 20 planes from eight over the same period, as it strives to more than triple sales. Market Share Including short-haul routes, budget carriers may account for 30 percent of Asia-Pacific capacity by 2015 from 20 percent now, said Derek Sadubin, chief operating officer at the Sydney- based Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation. Singapore Airlines may be shielded from budget competition by its reliance on premium passengers, who account for about 40 percent of revenue, said Ng Sem Guan, an analyst at OSK Research Sdn. in Kuala Lumpur. “There’s always demand for luxury things such as Mercedes Benz,” he said. Singapore Airlines is “a different animal” from low-cost carriers, he said. Travelers now flying economy-class with full-service airlines may also be reluctant to give up frills just for a cheaper ticket, said Rohan Suppiah, an analyst at Kim Eng Securities Pte in Singapore. “Do you really want to sit for hours in a budget configuration?” he said. “This model will probably only appeal to customers who are very price-sensitive.” Zoom stopped flying in August 2008 about a year after it began London-New York flights, crippled by competition and rising fuel costs. Oasis Hong Kong, which halted services after 17 months of flying, entered liquidation in June 2008 with about a HK$1 billion ($128 million) of debts. Stephen Miller, who was Oasis’s chief executive officer, said there is “great potential in Asia” for low-cost long-haul because of the high costs at full-service carriers. “But it’s a tough business until you get a name, a certain percentage of the market and a critical mass of aircraft,” he said. Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-04/qantas-airasia-may-make-budget-long-haul-a-force-on-asia-europe-routes.html

Yes, a very good point indeed. I did wonder about holding it in SIN this year when voting for the 5th anniversary venue. However, the bulis activities at KUL ensured that the decision is made and it was a good choice because we had a fruitful spotting day at SIN. Spotting is like golf - people will go anywhere if the incentive is there (e.g. good traffic or a challenging course). However, getting into trouble with the law is not something most people want to do. So until the bulis in Malaysia realises that there is a hobby called plane spotting, MalaysianWings is probably going to mean that it is a group of people who are interested in Malaysian aviation. If we are to use cost as a criteria, then BKK is probably the more cost effective non-Malaysian spotting location. Hotels are more affordable and there is plentiful budget air travel possibilities from Malaysia too. Finally, the anniversary spotting session that may be a "highlight" event for spotters who normally spot at Malaysian airports - so it should be something special and something that we would not normally do for the rest of the year. It should be something we will remember as special.

EADS CEO slams Boeing "propaganda," and sees WTO appeal By Matthias Blamont and Lionel Laurent Sat Jul 3, 2010 8:17am EDT AIX-EN-PROVENCE, France (Reuters) - EADS (EAD.PA) Chief Executive Louis Gallois on Saturday slammed arch-rival Boeing's "propaganda campaign" over a World Trade Organization panel ruling and said it was a sign of fear ahead of a decision on a hotly contested U.S. aerial tanker contract. Gallois also said it was "likely" that the European Union would appeal against Wednesday's WTO panel ruling, which was critical of EU export subsidies to EADS-owned Airbus. "(Boeing's) propaganda campaign over the past three or four days shows they are scared that we will have a competitive offer for the tankers," Gallois told reporters on the sidelines of a conference in Aix-en-Provence. EADS and Boeing are locked in a fierce battle for a contract of 179 refueling planes to replace the aging U.S. fleet of Boeing-built KC-135 tankers, which are nearly 50 years old on average. U.S. lawmakers backing Boeing have called for the tanker competition to factor in the WTO ruling, which said EU export subsidies to Airbus had hurt Boeing and must be scrapped. But Gallois said that 70 percent of Boeing's complaints had been rejected by the WTO and that Boeing had not proved that export subsidies to Airbus had directly affected its competitiveness or employees. He also noted there was a second WTO panel ruling due on July 16 on a countersuit by the EU over U.S. support for Boeing. "It seems likely to me that (the EU) will appeal (the first ruling)," Gallois said. EADS will submit its tanker offer either on Thursday or Friday, in partnership with U.S. firms where sensitive defense equipment is concerned, he said. A350 FEARS Gallois also sought to scotch press speculation that the WTO panel ruling was pushing EADS to review EU launch aid for its Airbus unit's A350 airliner. "I do not expect changes to the conditions (of launch aid)," he said, reaffirming that government loans for the A350 XWB program were not contrary to WTO rules and that the financing of the A350 program was legal in the WTO's view. A Boeing lawyer has argued the WTO panel ruled government launch aid for Airbus airliners was illegal and that this applied to the forthcoming A350 -- a challenger to Boeing's 787 Dreamliner and 777 planes. EADS' view is that A350 launch aid is not in the remit of the WTO panel ruling and that it does not need to be changed. When asked whether EADS could take action against Boeing's statements on the WTO ruling, Gallois declined comment. (Reporting by Matthias Blamont and Lionel Laurent; Editing by Susan Fenton) Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6620L220100703?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+reuters/businessNews+(News+/+US+/+Business+News)

Airbus delivered 250 aircraft over the first half of 2010, while the recent landmark Emirates deal for A380s took its six-month gross order total to 131. Emirates' order for 32 A380s accounted for most of Airbus' new orders in June. Airbus also secured private custom for two A340-500s, while Turkish Airlines picked up a single A330-200. But the airframer also recorded six A330-300 cancellations, two attributed to Finnair which swapped them for five A321s, and four listed against unidentified customers. Ten A319s for an undisclosed recipient completed the order tally for June. The manufacturer accumulated gross orders for 131 aircraft by 30 June, while the cancellations for the six A330s and eight A320-family jets brought the net figure to 117. Airbus is slightly behind its 2009 delivery rate at the halfway point. The airframer delivered 254 aircraft in the first six months of last year. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/02/344009/airbus-logs-250-deliveries-over-first-half-of-2010.html

Who won at the WTO? By Murdo Morrison The World Trade Organisation's final report into state subsidies to Airbus raises two key questions: who won, and what effect will it have on the way the European airframer's multi-billion dollar programmes are funded? There is a third: will the ruling - published on 30 June - derail Airbus parent EADS's attempts to sell its A330 tanker to the US government, whose Office of the US Trade Representative initiated the WTO investigation in 2004, or compete in future Department of Defense contests. Surprisingly, given the emphatic way both sides claimed victory, or vindication, neither of the first two are clear. Although the USA has triumphed in at least some of the crucial legal arguments, what that means for the competitive landscape is uncertain. As far as the KC-X tanker contest is concerned, it is evident that Boeing's supporters in Congress, the unions and the media will step up their campaign - begun when the WTO's interim findings emerged last September - to stop the US military choosing a foreign supplier they claim has been able to challenge a domestic rival only as a result of unfair subsidies. Indirectly, that could be the biggest punch Boeing has landed on its opponent. Given the extent to which details of the report have already emerged in recent months, the report's content contained few surprises. Essentially, the WTO panel investigating the case has found that a series of loans to Airbus over the years, including reimbursable launch aid for the A380 and other infrastructure grants, did break international trade rules enshrined in the so-called Subsidies and Counterveiling Measures (SCM) agreement. However, crucially the WTO rules that A350 launch aid - agreed after the case began in 2004 - has not so far been illegal. The Geneva-based organisation - an umpire in trade disputes - also finds that the effect of the subsidies constituted "serious prejudice to the interests" of the USA in terms of it being able to sell its exports in Europe and other world markets. It recommends that all prohibited subsidies should be withdrawn within 90 days. However, importantly but rather confusingly, the WTO says the USA has failed to establish that the effect of the subsidies led to "significant price undercutting" or "significant price depression" by Airbus, and that the funding caused "injury" to the US aerospace industry. Not surprisingly, Airbus and Boeing put very different spins on the findings and what should happen now. Boeing chief executive Jim McNerney hailed the report as "a landmark decision and sweeping legal victory over the launch aid subsidies that fuelled the rise of Airbus and that continue to provide its products a major cost advantage", adding: "We now join the US government in urging full compliance with the ruling and a permanent restoration of fair competition within our industry." Airbus retorts that the WTO has rejected seven in 10 of the US claims and that the panel agreed that subsidies did not cause "material injury" to Boeing in terms of lost jobs or profits. What happens now is also uncertain. Boeing is unstinting. "Airbus must repay $4 billion in illegal launch aid it received for the A380 or restructure the A380's financing to proven commercial terms," it says, also warning that Airbus must not resort to illegal subsidies to finance the A350. Although it expects Europe to appeal against the ruling, it says that process should be concluded by the end of 2010. Airbus, however, expects the dispute to "continue for a few more years", partly because of Europe's corresponding case against alleged illegal subsidies to Boeing, which a separate WTO panel is expected to report on later this year, and has called again for both sides to negotiate a new agreement to replace the 1992 deal. "Only the availability of the report on the parallel case will bring the necessary balance to allow for a possible start of negotiations, without any preconditions," says the airframer, adding that "resolution will finally only be found in transatlantic or even multilateral negotiations". Those multilateral negotiations could be key. The glacial pace of the deliberations so far have meant that the investigation has not kept up with the changing business landscape. Since the lawyers got to work in 2004, Airbus has launched the A350 and Bombardier the CSeries while the Chinese are developing the Comac C919. The Russians, Chinese and Japanese all have regional jet programmes. Ian Godden, chairman of UK trade body ADS, says it is "sad" that industries in the West are "distracting themselves with an internal dispute, while countries elsewhereare developing competitor aircraft", all with state support. "The trade dispute has the potential to tie up existing market leaders while such newcomers take market share," he adds. Ian Giles, an aviation lawyer at London-based law firm Norton Rose, who has been following the case, says the ruling represents a defeat for Airbus "but it is a long way from the end of the story". He adds: "Airbus has already said it does not believe the ruling impacts on funding plans for the A350 - Boeing clearly do not agree, and so another chapter in the dispute is likely to be played out before the WTO. As has been the case throughout this dispute, both sides are trying to portray the WTO ruling in their favour. "For Boeing, the WTO finding that the interest rates granted by the EU governments were so far below market rates as to be illegal is a positive, while for Airbus, the finding that these type of state-backed loans are not per se illegal will give them hope that they can restructure the funding with minimum disruption. Also several of the US claims as to specific measures being illegal were rejected." No one should expect a quick resolution to the dispute, he says. "The WTO ruling has to be seen as part of a wider political negotiation. The EU is not going to bow to this ruling without similar compromises from the USA, and the scope for countersuits before the WTO is far from exhausted. You get a sense of perspective on this dispute when you realise that there are still arguments before the WTO about the relevance of data from the 1960s. This still has a long way to run." Implications for KC-X and EADS's US defence prospects Boeing's political supporters in Congress - most of them from states in which the airframer or its suppliers have an industrial presence - seized on the initial findings as evidence for banning EADS (which originally partnered Northrop Grumman) from the KC-X competition, and stepped up their campaign following the report last week. Although the administration has always been careful to keep the arguments separate, pressure will mount on President Obama to opt for a solution that preserves the most American jobs at a time of high unemployment. EADS argues that the "only beneficiary of such a non-competitive action" would be Boeing. The losers, it claims, would include, the US military, the taxpayer and 48,000 Americans who would be employed building and supporting the A330-based tanker. Massive federal bail-outs and loan guarantees for US auto makers and other industries following the banking crisis - although admittedly not for aerospace - has also weakened the moral case against government subsidies. THE BACKGROUND TO THE DISPUTE Airbus and its European "home" nations - France, Germany, Spain and the UK - have always been open about the fact that the airframer's programmes have been supported by the taxpayer since the consortium began building aircraft in 1970. Created as an attempt to consolidate Europe's small national airliner manufacturing assets - most of them government-owned - into a rival for the USA's then big three, Airbus took many years to be taken seriously by Boeing. However, by the 1990s, with its A320 family selling strongly and the A330/A340 making inroads into the long-haul market, Airbus's market share was creeping up on Boeing - by that time the only other big aircraft manufacturer. A "gentleman's" agreement between Europe and the USA in 1992 - which set out ground rules for state funding of aircraft - was abandoned unilaterally by the USA in 2004 following Boeing pressure. This was just as Airbus was overtaking its rival for the first time and clocking up orders for the A380, a hugely ambitious, expensive and risky programme supported by reimbursable launch aid from European governments. After the USA pushed the WTO to investigate the subsidies, Europe in turn filed a counter case, claiming that US federal research and technology grants and funds from individual states represented illegal subsidies. The first panel hearing in the USA versus Europe case took place in March 2007, with the parallel European-initiated process kicking off that September. Airbus's case has always been that every piece of launch aid it has received has been borrowed on comparable terms to the market, and paid back to lenders with interest, arguing that investing in the company has been a lucrative investment for governments. The USA has argued that subsidies distort the market by allowing Airbus to fund riskier programmes with state guarantees against failure. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/01/343955/who-won-at-the-wto.html

I think that the weather this year is freakish, suffering from the effects of El Nino. As everyone would know, spotting is very much weather dependant. So we just have to take our chances. After the foul weather on the Friday before our 5th anniversary session, who could have predicted the glorious afternoon of sunshine on Saturday? Other important considerations are the hostilities from the police that spotters are encountering in KUL and PEN. Next year, construction of the new LCCT in KUL will be in full swing and airport patrols may be stepped up further. It may not be possible to have a full day's spotting without being hassled by the authorities.

Boeing has always enjoyed subsidies in the form of highly priced military contracts - profits from military sales to the US and foreign governments help to fund their civil airliners (some of which also serve military purposes). Airbus does not have that kind of military business and is only starting out with its first programme, the A400M. In any case, I am sure the EU will try to drag this along until another WTO case involving Boeing is decided. In the end both companies might not get any benefit but we get more transparency instead.

If you are undecided, take a look at A.Net to check the traffic and the pix that are possible from these locations: KUL: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Kuala+Lumpur+-+Int.+(Sepang)+(KUL+/+WMKK)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= BKI: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Kota+Kinabalu+-+Int.+(BKI+/+WBKK)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= PEN: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Penang+-+Int.+(Bayan+Lepas)+(PEN+/+WMKP)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= KCH: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Kuching+-+Int.+(KCH+/+WBGG)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= BKK: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Bangkok+-+Suvarnabhumi+Int.+(BKK+/+VTBS)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= HKT: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Phuket+(HKT+/+VTSP)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= SGN: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Ho+Chi+Minh+City+(Saigon)+-+Tan+Son+Nhat+(SGN+/+VVTS)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails= HKG: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=-+Hong+Kong+-+Chek+Lap+Kok+Int.+(HKG+/+VHHH)&specialsearch=&daterange=&keywords=&range=&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page_limit=15&thumbnails=

Next year it will be the Paris Air Show: FROM MONDAY 20 JUNE TO SUNDAY 26 JUNE 2011 FROM 9:30 AM TO 6 PM AT PARIS LE BOURGET http://www.paris-air-show.com/en We might be able to get cheap AirAsia X tix as they are planning to launch Paris by Valentine's Day 2011 according to TF's unofficial "announcements".

I Googled and found this - Subang Flying Club: http://www.subanghighflyers.com/Our%20Fleet.htm

I have a feeling this facility may only be accorded to pax ono AirAsia flights. MAHB are saying that the LCCT will max out its capacity by the end of this year: With the permanent LCCT still at least 18 months away from completion, MAHB may be preparing to let AirAsia flights to spill over to the MTB as an interim measure as the outgoing LCCT will no longer be viable for further expansion.

Looks like we now have the Changiwood shot - thanks Kwek! Porting this over from the SIN spotting thread: The trip to SIN was definitely worth it and I thoroughly enjoyed myself. It is always good to put faces to names. Yes, we could start thinking about where the 6th anniversary can be held as KLIA might still be spotter hostile. Maybe we can try something like visit the RMAF open day (usually held in June on their anniversary) or go to somewhere that has fantastic traffic or spectacular scenery. Some food for thought...

The PEN spotting thread has been very quiet. Thanks for sharing Hon Kit - the Thai livery looks great even on a small old B734.

Despite mostly great light most of the afternoon, some arrived under cloud cover. A321's are not such a common sight in KUL. Here are a couple: The one that got away, a.k.a. Quek's revenge - this EY bird was sent to 20C, too far away for any meaningful shot: