flee

When I was there last month, weather was awful. Maybe its still not good - I see the CNN shots of Victoria Harbour every day and they almost always show haze or bad weather! This was one I shot airside - not good!

Minister OTK is still stalling on the issue: Source: http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=495976

Hong Kong authorities release preliminary report on Cathay incident By Ghim-Lay Yeo The Cathay Pacific Airways Airbus A330-300 involved in a high-speed landing at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) on 13 April had issued a Mayday signal while preparing for landing. The aircraft's centralised monitoring system had reported problems with the A330's twin Rolls-Royce Trent 700 engines at least five times throughout the flight, says a preliminary report issued today by Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department. Despite this, authorities say there was no engine or fuel system-related problem reported in the maintenance log of the aircraft, registration B-HLL, before it left Surabaya for Hong Kong at 01:24 GMT in an uneventful departure. While the aircraft was climbing, the flight crew noticed minor engine pressure ratio fluctuations on engine no. 2. The other engine also had similar fluctuations "but within a narrower range", says the report. At 01:58 GMT, the aircraft's monitoring system displayed the message "Engine 2 Central System Fault". "As parameters on both engines were normal except the slight fluctuation of the engine pressure ratio indications, both the flight crew and the maintenance control [of Cathay's engineering department] were satisfied that it was safe for the flight to continue," says the report. A similar message concerning engine no. 2 appeared on the monitoring system again at 03:16 GMT. At 05:19 GMT, the system displayed "Engine 1 Central System Fault" and "Engine 2 Stall" within "a short period of time", says the report. The aircraft then sent an urgency signal to Hong Kong Air Traffic Control, advising that engine no. 2 was at idle thrust. The aircraft requested for priority landing, which was allowed. While the aircraft was 45 nautical miles from HKIA and was about to level off at 8,000ft above mean sea level, the monitoring system displayed "Engine 1 Stall" at 05:30 GMT. A Mayday signal was declared at 05:32 GMT. "During the final approach with both thrust levers at the idle position, No 1 engine was stuck at about 74% N1, and decreased to about 70% N1 during touchdown, and No. 2 engine was stuck at about 17% N1 throughout the approach and landing," says the report. The aircraft landed at 05:43 GMT at a ground speed of 230kt with a landing weight of 173,600kg, with the pilot applying maximum manual braking before the aircraft came to a complete stop on the runway. While landing, the lower cowling of engine no. 1 contacted the runway surface briefly, resulting in the automatic deployment of spoilers. Only engine no. 1's thrust reverser deployed. Five main tyres of the aircraft were deflated, and there was fire and smoke on the main wheels, says the report. The pilot then ordered an emergency evacuation of the 309 passengers and 13 crew members. During the evacuation, 57 passengers were injured. One of the 57 suffered serious injuries, adds the report. An investigation team comprising officials from Hong Kong, France, UK, Indonesia and the USA is looking into the incident, with assistance from Airbus, Rolls-Royce and Cathay experts. "The engines, their control systems and the fuel system are under detailed examinations to determine the possible causes of the abnormal engine behaviour," says the report, adding that engine fuel components and samples have been sent to the UK and USA for analysis. Investigations are expected to take more than a year to complete, says the report. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/05/06/341636/hong-kong-authorities-release-preliminary-report-on-cathay.html

It's time to draw the line By Presenna Nambiar Malaysia Airlines (MAS)(3786) and AirAsia are at it again. And this time, everything points to a bare-knuckled fight. One is struggling to survive in an environment that is making the high-cost legacy carrier model all but obsolete, the other is trying to grow as much as and as fast as it can. In the latest dispute, MAS is adamant that AirAsia should not be allowed to fly the Kuala Lumpur-Sydney route. But AirAsia is insistent that it should. This is not the first time MAS and AirAsia are eye-balling one another and one may ask why. An aviation policy that is so "fluid" that air traffic rights are given (or not given) based on how hard you lobby for it, who the minister of the day is, or by the need to protect national interests. Given the situation, MAS and AirAsia will continue to lobby, at government level and in the media, until and unless the government, specifically the Transport Ministry, comes up with a definitive aviation policy framework, which clearly states the direction of the local aviation industry. Closed doors meetings between the government and both airlines, and unwritten rules, are no longer going to cut it. The irony of it all is that if there's one thing both airlines agree on, it's that there is a need to have a policy framework for the aviation industry, a sort of do's and dont's. AirAsia chief Datuk Seri Tony Fernandes, for example, said he has always been in favour of an independent regulator for the aviation industry. He went as far as to say that he dreams of a regulator like Bank Negara Malaysia's Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz, whom he says allows for both foreign and local competition in the industry. MAS managing director Datuk Tengku Azmil Zahruddin has also called for a long-term, comprehensive and impartial policy that will ensure that the country and rakyat takes precedence. Sure, one might argue that MAS and AirAsia's ideas of an impartial regulator may be different, but the onus lies on the government to decide what is best not only for the nation, but also the industry and consumers. Ahead of a world with open skies, Malaysia needs to make a stand on how open it wants to be. All said and done, a framework is a promise by the government to stick to a plan, one that is not susceptible to lobbying. Source: http://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BTIMES/articles/paf/Article

By Muin Abdul Majid DUBAI, May 6 (Bernama) -- Emirates Airline is supportive of a request for an increase in flights to Kuala Lumpur during Ramadan as Malaysia eyes more Arab visitors during the Muslim fasting month, Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen said. She said the possibility of Emirates using the Airbus A380 superjumbo for the flights was mentioned in her talks with Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed Al-Maktoum, chairman and chief executive of Emirates Airline and Group here, Wednesday. "I requested Emirates to add flights to Malaysia during Ramadan...and he was very supportive," she told the Malaysian media after the meeting which took place at the ongoing Arabian Travel Market (ATM) 2010 here. Dr Ng is leading the Malaysian delegation at the Middle East's premiere travel fair which ends tomorrow. Emirates currently operates 21 weekly non-stop flights between its home base of Dubai and Kuala Lumpur, the Malaysian capital. The minister said the unique atmosphere of Ramadan in Malaysia should be enjoyed by outsiders. "In Malaysia, the length of your fasting time is quite constant. The whole religious aspects are well-catered for in Malaysia. "You can have your breakfast and sahur (early morning meal) at the hotels which offer buffet spreads, and perform tarawih prayers at the mosque," she said. Dr Ng said an interesting aspect of Ramadan in Malaysia was that non-Muslims would also wait for the azan (call to prayer) before eating with their Muslim friends at the breaking fast ritual. The minister said Tourism Malaysia would engage hospitality industry players in planning for the Ramadan tourism push. Dr Ng also said Sheikh Ahmed made an observation that many Middle Easterners were going to countries like Thailand for medical tourism despite Malaysia having facilities for this purpose. "I will go back and convey the message to the Malaysia Healthcare Travel Council," she said. On its part, she said, Tourism Malaysia would always extend any assistance needed in promoting medical tourism in Malaysia. Source: http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=496024

I think D7 CEO, Azran, answered your question in his statement above!

More here too: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/business/article/airasiax-rejects-mas-arguments-over-rights-to-sydney/

SQ's fleet management has long been the envy of many in the industry. However, even the best planning in the world can be frustrated by delivery delays of new generation aircraft. That is why we see some unusually "old" B777 and B747 aircraft in the SQ fleet.

Yes, they do indeed - and this extended delay in granting the rights for D7 to ply the KUL-SYD route is one of them! D7 was also "persuaded" to send their first leased A343(9M-XAB) to SZB for its livery to be painted when they originally intended to send it to SIN because it was cheaper to do it there. So D7 had to do "national service" sending their plane to a competitor for painting and paying more for the privilege. Fortunately for D7 the second A343 (Raiders livery) was done in SIN.

It is good that we are able to debate constructively and look at the pros and cons objectively. I am not anti-MH either - I am more pro Malaysia, want our airlines to do well and not only compete with each other but also with the best in the world. To do that, we need markets to be open and free so that anyone and everyone can have a go at any route they like to fly. The govt. should be a facilitator, not a manipulator. D7 is a new airline and currently its current priority is to build a network of core routes - a bit like having anchor tenants in a shopping malls. Once this is done, they can think of less profitable (but nevertheless makes business sense) routes. How can you invest if you do not have base level income and profits? Banks would not be so stupid to lend you money if you are not fundamentally profitable. MH has over 40 years of route investment behind them (if we ignore the pre-1972 days of MSA and its predecessors) - so they have already built up their core routes. In Singapore, a much smaller country, they have 4 scheduled airlines that can be considered to be Singaporean. Yet their govt does not protect one airline from the other from competition. All of them also have to compete on the open market with other airlines serving SIN. This is what Malaysia should do too. The govt. should not restrict any airline from flying any route. If Firely or MASWings want to fly to wherever AK or MH flies and sees a business sense to do it, they should be able to do so. Blocking them would be a foolish thing to do... MH is better organised today, RAS and govt. subsidised services are operated by a subsidiary (MASWings) so that their accounting is more transparent. RAS services have also improved a lot because of that. If there was no competition, do you think you would be enjoying better services at cheaper fares from MH. So let Malaysian skies be open - so that people like you and me have a greater choice of airlines and fares to suit our individual needs.

Are they really? Economics is what is driving AirAsia - they want lower costs for everything. If they used the MTB, it would cost more in airport charges. The LCCT has paid for itself over and over again already as passenger traffic is so much higher. Do you think the govt. and MAHB will authorise the construction of the permanent LCCT (PLCCT) if the current LCCT isn't making money for MAHB? I am not sure if taxpayer's money is used for PLCCT construction. However, we do know that MH was bailed out with taxpayers' funds when TR turned MH upside down. That was why MH had to sell its building. All its aircraft were then sold to another govt. body, Penerbangan Malaysia so that the govt. has an excuse to bail them out.

I think AirAsia is prepared to build its own airport @Labu but the govt. also blocked that idea. The govt. has forced AirAsia to continue using KLIA/LCCT. Does it matter if KLIA or LCCT is the hub? They both belong to MAHB. If you look at the Malaysian banking industry, it is a shining example (in Malaysia) of competition improving the industry as a whole. Bank Negara removed protection and opened up the market. As such, we now have so many different banks offering good service and we are leaders in Islamic banking. MH has also improved itself as a result of competition from AK/D7. That is why we say that competition is good because it challenges businesses to do better. If MH is unable to compete in the business, then they might as well shut down. Taxpayers should not have to bail them out.

It could be that most of MH's KUL-SYD pax are transit pax on the kangaroo route - so if D7 is allowed on the same route, it would also lose out on the KUL-LHR route. MH is just lazy, rather than work to improve its own product and be competitive, it is trying to take the easy way out since it is a GLC. This is too much hard work! It is easier to ask the govt. to block D7!

Yes, they are leaving the fleet as more A333s arrive to join the SQ fleet. Some of their 9V-SQ* series are 1997 vintage (13 years).

Why not? Its just a matter of $$$ and whether the new owners have enough of that!

They probably needed to close it so that the airport vehicles can inspect the whole runway to assess the damage.

KUALA LUMPUR: The Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport in Subang was closed for more than one hour today after lightning struck the runway during a thunderstorm. Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd senior general manager (operations) Datuk Azmi Murad said lightning struck the runway at 4.40pm, creating two potholes about 2 feet wide. "We carried out emergency patchwork and were able to open up the runway by 6pm," he said. Three flights waiting to land were redirected, one from Terengganu, one from Penang, and the third from Kota Baharu. Operations at the airport returned to normal at 6pm. Source: http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/articles/20100504201329/Article/index_html

Singapore Airlines (SIA) has finalised a deal with Russian carrier Transaero for the sale of four Boeing 777-200ERs and other carriers such as Royal Brunei Airlines and Portugal's EuroAtlantic Airways are also speaking to SIA about acquiring 777s. "We have now finalised an agreement with Transaero covering the sale of four 777-200s, manufacturing serial numbers 28998, 28999, 28514 and 28523," says a SIA spokesman. Flightglobal's ACAS database says these are all -200ERs and three were built in 1998 while 28523 was built in 1999. These aircraft are all in a two-class configuration, the spokesman adds. Transaero announced late last month it would be getting 14 ex-SIA 777s but the SIA spokesman says "at that point [last month] it was a letter-of-intent" only whereas now the deal has been finalised. SIA's spokesman declines to comment on whether Royal Brunei and EuroAtlantic Airways will be getting ex-SIA 777s as well. But a Royal Brunei spokeswoman says the carrier does plan to add 777s in June and is working to finalise a deal in the coming days. "It is no secret that the party we are speaking to is SIA," says the spokeswoman. Royal Brunei's CEO, Robert Yang, is SIA's former VP for eastern USA and South America. Royal Brunei's online booking engine shows that it plans to replace its Boeing 767s on the Bandar Seri Begawan-London Heathrow route starting 24 June but the service will continue to have a stop-over in Dubai. Its non-stop Bandar Seri Begawan-Brisbane service will switch from 767s to 777s effective 25 June, it says. National carrier Biman Bangladesh Airlines, meanwhile, has added an ex-SIA 777-200ER and this aircraft is leased from Portugal's EuroAtlantic Airways. "We have one [ex-SIA 777-200ER] in the fleet with another 777-200ER in the process," says the spokesman, adding that the second aircraft will also be an ex-SIA aircraft on lease from EuroAtlantic. He says the carrier is also talking to EuroAtlantic about adding a third and fourth 777-200ER. Source: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/05/04/341472/sias-move-to-phase-out-777-200ers-gathers-pace.html

KUCHING, May 4 (Bernama) -- Melaka wants low-cost carrier AirAsia to introduce direct flights from the Melaka International Airport (MIA) to Kuching and Kota Kinabalu to boost joint capacity in the tourism sector. Melaka Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam said the proposal for the direct flights was made to AirAsia chief executive officer (CEO) Datuk Seri Tony Fernandes last year and the airline was now in the process of reviewing its domestic routes. "I hope there will be at least one direct flight each week to the two destinations. For example, the direct flight departs in the morning and returns in the afternoon or the next day," he told reporters after handing out an official invitation to attend the 13th Malaysia Games (Sukma) to be held in Melaka from June 10 to 19 to Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud at Wisma Bapa Malaysia, here Tuesday. Mohd Ali said AirAsia had the capability to provide the direct flights as the MIA now had the capacity to receive the Boeing 737 and Airbus 320 aircraft. He said Melaka was also keen to develop the education sector with Sarawak in view of the great potential which could be exploited jointly. Source: http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=495570

Dun play play, that P&S has RAW!

The A350 will have a new cockpit and it is more likely to be a development of the A380's.

From Business Times: War of words flares up over KL-Sydney route By Jeeva Arulampalam TWO Malaysian international carriers are once again preparing for a dogfight over profitable air routes. Over the weekend, Malaysia Airlines (MAS) (3786) openly questioned through the media AirAsia X's insistence on wanting the rights to fly the Kuala Lumpur-Sydney route when the latter could opt to ply other international routes it has already received approvals for. MAS managing director and chief executive officer Tengku Datuk Azmil Zahruddin has come out to say that AirAsia X was not keen to operate new destinations such as Manchester, Vienna and Moscow, as it realises it takes years of investment to make a route profitable. "It's not fair for another airline to want to ride on the investments made by us. Instead, they need to be able to develop their own routes," he told Business Times last week. For MAS, it may take up to five years before any new route is profitable as it must create awareness about that destination. The airline spends money on marketing and carries out familiarisation exercises by bringing travel agents from Malaysia to the new destinations, and vice versa. For instance, MAS invests some RM100 million annually in marketing costs alone in Australia, said Tengku Azmil. The debate over the KL-Sydney route began when AirAsia X, the long-haul affiliate of budget carrier AirAsia, claimed the government was protecting the national carrier's interest by not allowing it to ply that route. "One of the (unofficial) reasons cited was since MAS was forced to buy the A380 (superjumbo) jets by the government, they need the Sydney route to be protected," AirAsia X chief executive officer Azran Osman-Rani told Business Times in April. While MAS plans to use two out of its six A380s for the KL-Sydney route, aviation analysts have expressed concern that MAS will face yield pressure if it utilises the A380 for this route. MAS had expected to take delivery of its first A380 in August 2011, but announced last Friday that Airbus has requested that the delivery be postponed once again to the first half of 2012. AirAsia X's argument for wanting the KL-Sydney route against flying to other further destinations such as Vienna or Zurich was its lack of suitable aircraft and the lower number of tourists from the latter destinations. Azran has said that a daily AirAsia X flight to Sydney would bring in 110,000 passengers yearly. Instead, AirAsia could only do three flights a week to Vienna as it lacked the right aircraft, bringing in some 44,000 passengers yearly. "This also results in the poor use of aircraft capacity when you fly to a destination with limited tourist appeal," he said, adding that it takes roughly one to one-and-a-half years for AirAsia X to turn a route profitable. While both airlines publicly justify their arguments, air travel passengers/customers are essentially only interested in two key points. One is the passenger's ability to purchase the best priced airfare to a given destination, which typically only happens when there is competition among several players and not a blanket monopoly. And secondly, it is the sustainability of a route. A passenger wants to feel assured that the airline will still be flying to a given destination, having purchased the ticket six months prior to the departure date. Therefore, it is important for an airline, when fighting for the rights of a route, to know that it has the ability to sustain the route despite the route's initial lack of profitability due to intense competition or need for marketing investments.

Which company does not go into business for profit? Even GLCs like MH are chasing profits. The difference is that they can hide behind the government's skirt for protection. So they don't need to work so hard...