vichamzah

Looking at the timetable of flights, I presume MTA is an early bird in terms of its delivery? When will the A330s replace the ancient 330s significantly? Will they also possibly be utilised on "trans south China sea" domestic routes (KUL-BKI, KUL-KCH,etc.)?

Hold on. You're comparison doesn't make sense in the first place. The A330s form the backbone of MHs regional,which in actual sense of the term, means 5-7 hour flights. The 744s and 772s which form the main core of MHs intercontinental routes, with some spillovers into the shorter routes served by the 330s. These 744s and 772s are presumaby due to be replaced by the A380 and some other mystery aircraft that MH has yet to announce. Therefore, it's like saying the B737-800s seats were also interim until MH introduced the A330s, when they serve different purposes. Yes, SQ tends to be pretty quick with cabin refreshes, so is EK, so is CX and company. Again, the A330s and 772s will only be in service for the next 5-6 years, or even shorter (3-4 years). The current seats on these aircraft will probably not find its way onto the 787s for the reasons stated above. However, the new products launched on the permanent aircraft will be in service for quie some time, unlike the A330s and 772s product which again will not see a full round of service. Yes, SQ can refresh its cabin every 8-10 years, but so what. It's older seats will still remain in service and the airline can use these aircraft until the cows come home. Thus, the permanent mainline fleet compared to the interim aircraft, will see a much longer time frame in the fleet. Don't forget, SQ will replace aircraft that are ageing. However, they won't keep leased aircraft until they age and then replace them. It's like renting a car. Look at MHs leased 738s. They'll soon be with another operator. Right now as we speak, MHs ancient 330 biz class seats are still in service until they all get retired. Same for SQ and all airlines who see their mainline fleet undergo a full service cycle. SQs old B772 biz class saw service for slightly more than a decade, which for SQs definition is a full service cycle, versus its A330s and currently refurbished 772s who'll see service for maybe 6-7 years at most. Interim just means that they will not see this full service cycle. Yes - people moan about the cabin, but for me, there are other things that need improving that are far more important. Things that really do decide whether I fly with MH or not. Quality of regional C class seats is way down my list. Well, that's your choice. Though I believe it should be a wholisitic experience. ANYONE KNOWS WHAT THE A380 WILL LOOK LIKE????

Well, I think SQ 7772s are currently being refurbished because they are again interim aircraft, just like the A330, though not that interim, who will see service for the next 5 to 6 years, if not more, before the 787s and A350S role in. In some sense, the 772s are interim aircraft before the newer ones come in. Yes, I am trying to say that these seats are interim. Partly because they are probably not going to find their way onto the newer and permanent 787s and 350s in time to come. Why, because by then, enough time would've passed and knowing SQ it always wants its top notch, most updated seat, given it's a new aircraft. And I think most carriers, tend to refresh their seats after 10 years. What is more important to me are the other stuff like better connection times, better frequencies, member of an alliance... etc. (Quote from Azman) I totally agree with you. But doesn't MH in some sense also not do so well in this department compared to its competitors? To Jadivindra: Yes, its aesthestics, but then why is MH a five star carrier? Also, all carriers must provide a minimum level of maintenance. Clearly, MH surpasses that. I'm not saying that MH has terrible maintenance like a blacklisted EU airline. But for some reasosn, MH seems to be plagued with delays and broken aircraft, in comparison to its five star carriers. And, I believe this has also been pointed by many others who frequently fly MAS and the rest.

There's been a lot of buzz over MH's new A330 product. Though the forum has fell silent, I’ve got stuff I’d really love to say. Whilst I do applaud their ambitions to become the no. 1 airline in Asia, at the rate their going, it's a trip down a never-ending road. Yes, MH's new business product, though up there, is a huge disappointment and their fleet renewal programme is by far slow and should've been done ages ago. However, it's not just it's ageing fleet and copy-cat cabin tactics that let it down. It's the way MH is run and packaged as an airline that keeps them at bay, up there but not the best. Firstly, SQ and CX definitely have a young and modern fleet. BUT, they have their fair share of ageing aircraft. Take SQ for example. It's 772s and 773s are by far a decade old or at least 8 years old. And it's not to say they're not used even though they're being phased out and replaced by the A333s. The thing is they're maintained superbly and more importantly, some are being refurbished, which in SQ terms means new biz class seats and upgraded IFE. But in MH terms it means slapping on new seat covers, as if that really makes a diff. Worst still, the new seat covers remind me of a packet of smarties mm...tasty. I know the 734s and 330s are junk and are unrefurbishable. But the reason they're that way is because of a lack of maintenance. The A330s were delivered in 95, not that far off from SQ 777s of 97 and beyond. Even MHs 777s, which I will submit to fact that they're slightly older, by far look much scruffier and suffer more faults and delays than SQ. As for the 734s, I've been on LEGACY CARRIERS with better DC-9s. I remember being in a "refurbished" one from SIN-KUL. It had a squeaking A/C, wires coming out from seats, broken reading lights. Here's the best part, MH seems to maintain its 734s like some third world airline, treating it like a bus. Its tray tables weren't uniform. Some seemed scavenged from some older aircraft. It's side paneling lights seemed to be a mumbo jumbo of diff kinds. They'd do well as a karanguni (rag and bone man). Stories aside, MH can replace all the aircraft it wants. But if it wants to stay on top, it has to ensure that it bucks up with maintenance and ensure its fleet is kept young. Frankly, its A330s should’ve been refurbished properly in 2005 and the 734s retired. It can have a young fleet in 2015, but will it still be young in 2025? Looking at the older generation MH fleet, it's not that badly off, apart from the 734s, but what catalyses the ageing process, is its woeful maintenance. Insyallah, I hope its next generation aircraft will not suffer the same fate and feel 5 years old after just 3. As for the new A330 product, I must say Y is pretty good looking. But its biz class is a huge disappointment. Firstly, MH has been touting that it’s gonna be on top. Looking at those seats, I’ve only got a few words to say. Cheap, tacky, copycat. Yes, it’s only a regional product. (I hope it doesn’t appear on the A380) But clearly, its competitors are ahead. Even SQ’s interim biz class looks more appealing. And I’d like to emphasize INTERIM. Knowing SQ they’re probably out to shock the industry, when they launched their ultra-wide long-haul biz, which was a hit. Definitely, it has more seat functions at hand and most of all, it’s small things that count, like providing more luscious materials, sturdier privacy barriers, even in Y, having my tray table down for a cup of juice is annoying when you can have a simple cup holder.MH for some reason, just doesn’t get it. It’s the first impressions that count. Even the Y-class product looks more tasteful and it’s previous long-haul J class seats look better. And again, this whole thing of service. Well, personally SQ and MH are comparable, and so is TG, so there’s nothing brilliant. There’s a limit to it, unless of course you want the stewardesses to spoon feed passengers which I don’t think will happen. If MH, really wanted to make it on top, the seats should’ve firstly been more innovative, like ANZs premium economy, perhaps, a lie-flat seat where its seamless for passengers to get out, sturdier privacy screens, more seat functions, and a more tasteful selection of materials. It seems that MH is always a latecomer and always seems to copy its competition instead of outwitting them. That’s what MH needs. And it’s excuse is always cost cutting. Air Asia is a worthy opponent, but MH needs to see around it, and secure new markets where it can compete. If not MH is always going to be the “cheaper version and second in line choice” airline behind SQ, CX, QR. It’s like, oh I can’t afford CX or the CX flight is full. Let’s take MH they’re not bad but I’d really like to fly the others. MH is not a diedie must fly airline like the other five star carriers. MH has no global presence unlike the rest. It's MOSAIC prog. is a joke. All it has allowed is for other airlines to gain an advantage on MH, especially in the ME market. For some strange reason, MH doesn't want to be part of an alliance, which quite frankly it should be if it wants to compete on par with SQ and TG if it really wants to be no.1. Even GA is joining Skyteam! Yes, the MH crisis of 05/06 was due to its oversized network. But its poor route planning that caused that. What MH needs to do is to be more ferocious in the ME market. I also don’t get a sense of it improving its India and China routes. MH should also work towards improving its Kangaroo route, by offering lower fares and an unparalleled experience, which means MH needs to get its creativity up. MH should leverage on cheaper operating costs out of KUL than SQ to provide lower costs and I’m glad it’s new fleet will also allow it do so. Again, proves my point of keeping a young and updated fleet. This coupled with MHs alliance network, would therefore catalyze it into the global stage and improve its customer loyalty, so that it truly becomes a diedie, I must fly airline and truly, Asia’s no.1 airline.