AirAsia X to set up virtual hub in Middle East

[Naim 6]

Historically, Indian routes is high yield.

 

 

My flights with AKX A330 to Chengdu last week were virtually full both ways. Packed with tour groups of very noisy Chengdu ppl.

[flee 5]

My flights with AKX A330 to Chengdu last week were virtually full both ways. Packed with tour groups of very noisy Chengdu ppl.

However, the Tianjin service was suspended. So it does not mean instant success all the time - so it is essential that sufficient market research is conducted before introducing a route. Otherwise, people will say that they are "unreliable". That is not a good reputation to carry!

 

looks more like a cover up . Wud think more of low demand as the main reason.

 

Not surprised! Basic maths , 5 flights with say 300 - 400 seater aircraft for a population base of AUH ( say just over 1 million ) with 2 markets of rich locals and workers ( remember large of them from the Sub Indian Continent) ...... would obviously translate ...almost no market perhaps?

I think the truth is somewhere in between - it is true that the economics will be difficult for D7 if it carries only 270+ pax per flight. That is why the seating capacity has been increased to around 300 after the seats are changed.

 

AUH will probably do OK if the flight carries on to a second destination in Europe, e.g. Paris, Amsterdam or Frankfurt.

[Izhar Z 1]

AirAsia X will get back to Abu Dhabi when the new seats have been fitted into its aircraft, according to a source.

 

This shouldnt be right, should it? I thought they say when they get a more economical aircraft? And I think they stressed that too in their responses to the comments on their FB page.

[Tim Lee 6]

I think it is more a case of waiting for more incentives from Abu Dhabi and nothing about aircraft and seats. The money from Abu Dhabi will be used to offset the cost of operations and route development/promotional cost.

[Isaac 0]

Slightly off topic, but which is worst: 777 with 3-4-3 seating or A330 with 3-3-3?

 

Been on Emirates 3-4-3 and it was horrible.

Obviously 3-3-3 on 330 is a lot worse. The EY seats in 3-4-3 arrangement on 777 are only 0.2" narrower than a typical EY seat on 747. One won't really feel the difference except for the noticeably narrower aisle. I've been on EK 772 too and thought it was all right.

[Aiman 0]

From my thought,

 

They will continue that route but the aircraft type will be changed to A333 they using now..

plus they will also change seat configuration to more wider,less seat and focusing on premium section.

because from what I see is more passengers intend for comfortable rather than reaching point A-B, I'm talking bout long haul flight.

What point if the seat config is bout 300 and during off peak season only 150 passenger travel that flight, so bonus to them(passenger) when door close they get extra free seating with just paying their single seat.Plus need to feed 4 engines (a340) its a really disaster to the company economy.

(Don't compare it to national airline..definitely they wont be a problem if they(national airline) send to throw stone destination with a346)

 

And talking bout economical long haul aircraft, Airbus 330 is the best..its have it all(aircraft dynamic,fuel consumption=2 engines,seating and already certified for ETOPS flight).

[Walter Sim 1]

AirAsia's Facebook page looks like a complaint center now.. Other than Abu Dhabi, seems like Palembang and Haikou, Manado is facing the axe.

 

AirAsia Hi Mariam, Both KL-Palembang and KL-Abu Dahbi are suspended until further notice. We will re-study the viability of the routes. All affected guests can be refunded. Apologies for all the inconvenience caused.

 

AirAsia We would like to reassure you that this year we are dedicated to cutting off our routes we do not have faith in the long term and this is definitely the year for India

 

AirAsia Hi there James. The route to Haikou has been canceled and we are working a resolution for our guests. The call center will contact each and every affected guest

Edited February 3, 2010 by Walter Sim

[Sri Ramani K. 0]

HAK and MDC were low yield routes. both started off with one daily, then to 4 weekly, the former being cut to 3 weekly and i think it's best that the route is dropped if they're not serious about operating it.

[Cheng Kit 0]

That means MAS should take over this route.

[flee 5]

The suspension of AUH so soon after its introduction has caused a lot of bad feeling amongst those who have booked on those flights. If D7 wants to regain some goodwill, it will have to offer some compensation - perhaps free flights when AUH services resume to those who have booked on the cancelled flights.

[Azri M. 0]

AK/D7 Flight suspension! What happen? Is this the consequences of mounting India flights???

http://www.airasia.com/site/my/en/page.jsp?reference=flightsuspension

 

Route Date effective

Kuala Lumpur – Abu Dhabi – Kuala Lumpur 21 Feb 2010

Kuala Lumpur – Manado – Kuala Lumpur 25 Feb 2010

Kuala Lumpur – Haikou – Kuala Lumpur 10 Mar 2010

Kuala Lumpur – Palembang – Kuala Lumpur 21 Feb 2010

Miri – Singapore – Miri 1 Mar 2010

Tawau – Singapore – Tawau 2 Mar 2010

 

 

Kuala Lumpur – Guilin – Kuala Lumpur

25 Mar 2010

Reduced frequency from 7x weekly to 4x weekly

[H C Chai 4]

AK/D7 Flight suspension! What happen? Is this the consequences of mounting India flights???

http://www.airasia.c...lightsuspension

 

Route Date effective

Kuala Lumpur – Abu Dhabi – Kuala Lumpur 21 Feb 2010

Kuala Lumpur – Manado – Kuala Lumpur 25 Feb 2010

Kuala Lumpur – Haikou – Kuala Lumpur 10 Mar 2010

Kuala Lumpur – Palembang – Kuala Lumpur 21 Feb 2010

Miri – Singapore – Miri 1 Mar 2010

Tawau – Singapore – Tawau 2 Mar 2010

 

 

Kuala Lumpur – Guilin – Kuala Lumpur

25 Mar 2010

Reduced frequency from 7x weekly to 4x weekly

 

What a shame, some of these routes don't even last for a year. I feel sorry for the people who are affected by the flight suspension, imagine having to go through the hassle of changing travel plans, rebook flights etc. I also see that D7/AK are not offering the option of transfering affected passengers to another airlines operating the same route. Oh well, they are LCC's after all.

 

Any insiders know which route will be axed next? KCH - SIN? I was thinking about flying them on SIN-KCH in Apr, but I am not too sure now.

Edited February 9, 2010 by H C Chai

[Kenneth Chong WT 0]

What a shame, some of these routes don't even last for a year. I feel sorry for the people who are affected by the flight suspension, imagine having to go through the hassle of changing travel plans, rebook flights etc. I also see that D7/AK are not offering the option of transfering affected passengers to another airlines operating the same route. Oh well, they are LCC's after all.

 

Any insiders know which route will be axed next? KCH - SIN? I was thinking about flying them on SIN-KCH in Apr, but I am not too sure now.

 

Jetstar Asia axed SIN-KCH...so go figure....QZ and 3K in the span of a few months...way to go KCH!!!

[Tim Lee 6]

I still remember a cry calling MH management a bunch of morons for not mounting more SIN-KCH vv, not so long ago.

[Waiping 12]

Yup, we were all constantly reminded that it is the profit margin that business should be looking at above everything else. I sincerely hope those who had said so didn't regret what they have said previously.

[Isaac 0]

Jetstar Asia axed SIN-KCH...so go figure....QZ and 3K in the span of a few months...way to go KCH!!!

What ? Are they still serving BKI then ?

[Tamizi Hj Tamby 1]

Wah,why so many flights got axed by AK?

 

Hmm,i wonder how's the pax load for MYY-SIN-MYY route.STB is not gonna like it.

[Waiping 12]

What ? Are they still serving BKI then ?

 

Yup, but no more Tiger here.

[Walter Sim 1]

Azran said on FB

 

Much more to AUH than fuel. Even then, this efficiency is only on fuel 'volume'. Pricing is different - would you believe it, that the cost of fuel supply and handling at AUH is more than triple in KL despite it being so close to fuel source! That's monopoly practice for you!

[Aiman 0]

Azran said on FB

Much more to AUH than fuel. Even then, this efficiency is only on fuel 'volume'. Pricing is different - would you believe it, that the cost of fuel supply and handling at AUH is more than triple in KL despite it being so close to fuel source! That's monopoly practice for you!

 

That because D7 using 340 to AUH,you have to feed 4 engines plus parked at Terminal one of cause used much cost instead park at Terminal 2 (don't use Passenger Load Bridge then transfer paxs with bus to main terminal for customs and don't use luxury departure hall,just direct the passengers to the bus wait until if full and transport them to aircraft).

 

If passengers make fuss of it..its their fault because in first place why bought the ticket,its a Low Cost airline. If want all the luxury then they are plenty other airlines. But some pax don't care bout all this luxury,they just want to rest(sleep) and reach their destination..that's it.

 

Its quite funny that passengers compare national airline with Low cost airline facilities and service.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Aiman

[flee 5]

Yes, some of the expectations of the pax can be considered weird, like wanting blood out of stone!

 

I think D7 learnt their lesson - so the new seat reconfiguration on their aircraft now exclude PTVs on seat backs. They mentioned that the uptake is only 30%, so why put them on 100% of the seats. Easier to just carry the portable units as they cost less both in terms of RM and weight.

[EddieDaniel 0]

Put it this way...They do not want to spend money to develop new routes but taking advantage of routes that MAS has developed and spent million of Ringgit. Is that fair?

Edited February 11, 2010 by EddieDaniel

[flee 5]

Its about as fair as using taxpayers' money to bail out MAS when it runs into trouble!

 

Put it this way...They do not want to spend money to develop new routes ...

If you are talking just about D7, I am not sure if what you say is 100% correct. For example, MH does not fly to Coolangatta, Tianjin, Hangzhou, Stanstead, etc. Those routes were pioneered by D7.

[Mushrif A 3]

That because D7 using 340 to AUH,you have to feed 4 engines plus parked at Terminal one of cause used much cost instead park at Terminal 2 (don't use Passenger Load Bridge then transfer paxs with bus to main terminal for customs and don't use luxury departure hall,just direct the passengers to the bus wait until if full and transport them to aircraft).

 

 

As far as I know and have seen, D7 uses stairs and buses at remote bay at AUH - not the airbridges.

[EddieDaniel 0]

Its about as fair as using taxpayers' money to bail out MAS when it runs into trouble!

 

 

If you are talking just about D7, I am not sure if what you say is 100% correct. For example, MH does not fly to Coolangatta, Tianjin, Hangzhou, Stanstead, etc. Those routes were pioneered by D7.

 

 

People go to Stansted because of London and not Stansted....Tianjin because of Beijing...These routes are developed by MAS not D7....