Firefly may take MAS jets to expand

[Tafe 0]

Back to FY, i strongly agree if they move their operation to KLIA or LCCT...

Its time to liberalize our domestic market and give more options to consumers

IMHO FY is such a failure in bringing itself as 'community airline'...

When i heard community, i was thought they will serve small city like KUA-PEN, TGG-JHB, MKZ-LGK..

Yes, they did this during initial stage, but axe it even before the inaugural flights.

FY seems to enjoy doing lucrative routes, so give them B737 and start the war!!

 

FY have option to keep their ATR operation out of SZB by maintaining the current routes, to cater people who hate travel to KLIA..

But i doubt the needs of two airports serving KL which only have 7million people...

[Abdul Mutalib Saifuddin 0]

Mr Jadivindra if i may step in; the schedule from Boeing website here somehow tells me that the fleet's oldest aircraft is 18 years old. I think it is better for MAS to phase it out to the Desert (as you said). Aged fleets, to me, should not be in service after so long. Like SIA (to some extent Thai)--they have an impressive young fleet age. It would be shameful if Firefly goes from the youngest fleet it can offer to one of the oldest.

[Nik H. 3]

Back to FY, i strongly agree if they move their operation to KLIA or LCCT...

Its time to liberalize our domestic market and give more options to consumers

IMHO FY is such a failure in bringing itself as 'community airline'...

When i heard community, i was thought they will serve small city like KUA-PEN, TGG-JHB, MKZ-LGK..

Yes, they did this during initial stage, but axe it even before the inaugural flights.

FY seems to enjoy doing lucrative routes, so give them B737 and start the war!!

 

FY have option to keep their ATR operation out of SZB by maintaining the current routes, to cater people who hate travel to KLIA..

But i doubt the needs of two airports serving KL which only have 7million people...

 

FY needs to put its footprint at KLIA if not the LCCT ( Low Cost Carrier Terminal) will turn into LCTT ( Low Cost Tony Terminal ).

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

Mr Jadivindra if i may step in; the schedule from Boeing website here somehow tells me that the fleet's oldest aircraft is 18 years old. I think it is better for MAS to phase it out to the Desert (as you said). Aged fleets, to me, should not be in service after so long. Like SIA (to some extent Thai)--they have an impressive young fleet age. It would be shameful if Firefly goes from the youngest fleet it can offer to one of the oldest.

 

I don't think age is an issue. As long as it is well maintained, a plane could fly for many, many years. That's why you could still see 40 year old DC-9 plying the skies over the US, to name a few. The reason planes are parked in the desert are usually cost-related. If you could cost effectively maintain old planes, there's no reason you shouldn't continue to fly them.

[flee 5]

I don't think age is an issue. As long as it is well maintained, a plane could fly for many, many years. That's why you could still see 40 year old DC-9 plying the skies over the US, to name a few. The reason planes are parked in the desert are usually cost-related. If you could cost effectively maintain old planes, there's no reason you shouldn't continue to fly them.

Since the planes are old, FY might be getting dirt cheap lease rates for them, thus making them economical to run despite the high fuel consumption.

 

What is more important is not the age but the number of compression-decompression cycles the planes have undergone. We have also to take into account of the planes' operating environment in humid climate and near the seaside. This may weaken the planes stucture. Remember the B732 of Aloha Airways in Hawaii that broke up in mid air? That was caused by metal fatigue due to the high cycles that it has done.

 

FY should only choose the lower cycle B734s from the available planes so that it procures a reliable and safe aircraft.

[S M Tang 0]

Since the planes are old, FY might be getting dirt cheap lease rates for them, thus making them economical to run despite the high fuel consumption.

 

What is more important is not the age but the number of compression-decompression cycles the planes have undergone. We have also to take into account of the planes' operating environment in humid climate and near the seaside. This may weaken the planes stucture. Remember the B732 of Aloha Airways in Hawaii that broke up in mid air? That was caused by metal fatigue due to the high cycles that it has done.

 

FY should only choose the lower cycle B734s from the available planes so that it procures a reliable and safe aircraft.

 

I was just watching Air Crash Investigations and they were talking about it. I've seen that one a few times already but it never fails to scare the crap out of me every time I watch it. I guess it was the 'island hopping' + the sea water that did the damage. I sure hope no passengers would have to endure that again. I keep wondering how was the stewardess' last few moments.

[dean hizudy 0]

i think the boeing 7374s might would only for a temporary periods with FY.i believe they will replace it with younger next-generation aircrafts.remember that mas has 20 options for the boeing 7378s.perhaps those option is for FY....

[reyneo 0]

any chance that FY would fly KUL-SIN on top of SZB-SIN? or any other existing route that they currently fly out of Subang? because while SZB is great and close to the city center, its probably not so good for flight connections... just like LCY which is very much a destination airport not used for onward connections...

 

734s are a good test bed aircraft to launch jet services from the LCCT since they are practically 'free' from MAS. FY could later order and maintain their own aircraft, separate from MH, just like how Jetstar started. Jetstar once operated 717s from Qantas and later ordered A320s on their on own (separate from QF who use 738s). Or as dean hizudy mentioned, they can use a portion of MAS's 738 order & options in the future.

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

This article confirms that FY will operate a dual hubs in Kuala Lumpur (SZB and KUL) when announcing its 5 year plan. Since almost all the destinations in its plan overlap with MH's, I think MH-FY strategy will not emulate SQ-MI but rather SQ/MI-TR where in some routes both MH and FY will serve them, but cater for different segment of clients, MH for the premium/business travellers while FY for leisure/LCC travellers.

 

Firefly embarks on 5-year expansion drive

By Marina Emmanuel Published: 2010/08/24

http://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BTIMES/articles/flies/Article/

 

FIREFLY, the low-cost carrier owned by Malaysia Airlines, appears to have revealed its ambition to fly as far as China, India and Taiwan.

 

On Saturday, it put out a full-page advertisement in an English daily to fill positions for pilots with ATR and Boeing 737 experience to be based at Subang Airport and KLIA.

 

It was also looking for flight and ground operations staff as well as those in engineering, commercial and support services.

 

"Having been in operation for several years, we are now embarking on a very aggressive expansion plan over the next five years," the advertisement read.

 

"We provide exclusive routes to various points within Peninsula Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore.

 

"Our future destinations include Sabah and Sarawak, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, China, India, Taiwan and many more."

 

Although Firefly did not identify itself in the ad, the advertiser described itself as a leading regional airline wholly-owned by a public-listed company with a majority shareholding by the government.

 

Meanwhile, Firefly yesterday said it has submitted its application to relevant authorities for the expansion of its operations.

 

"We will furnish more information once the approvals are obtained," FlyFirefly Sdn Bhd managing director Datuk Eddy Leong told Business Times.

 

He was responding to questions following a Business Times report that parent company MAS is set to allow Firefly to operate its B737-400 aircraft to Sabah by the end of this year.

 

Firefly is also in talks with Sabah tourism authorities.

 

MAS has 36 B737-400 aircraft, which are due to exit from service by 2014.

 

Firefly now operates the ATR 72-500 turbopropeller servicing routes in Peninsular Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia from its two hubs at the Penang and Subang airports.

 

Sources said that both Firefly and MAS will operate the Sabah routes, with Firefly flying out of the KL International Airport (KLIA) in Sepang.

 

It is now learnt that Sarawak is also likely to be on Firefly's radar as talks have started this week in Kuching between Firefly staff and the local tourism officials.

[Ja Singh 2]

Just curious,will firefly operates the oldest fleet in the region with aircraft age a little less then 20 years or is there some other airline somewhere in south east asia or ndonesia with an even older fleet?

 

If not mistaken, after a string of mishaps Indonesia has leap forward with new planes in their sky. Not sure tho.

[flee 5]

It would be good for Firefly to have flights from LCCT. Competition is good for the consumers. However, since the current LCCT does not have any more capacity, Firefly should operate from the MTB until the new PLCCT is ready. On a similar note, should any other airline wish to operate turboprop services from SZB, they should be allowed to do so.

 

I am not sure if the level of business/private jet traffic is high enough to justify turning SZB into a "business airport". If so, then the old Sg Besi Airport would be ideal for such traffic as it is located right in KL City.

Edited August 24, 2010 by flee

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

It would be good for Firefly to have flights from LCCT. Competition is good for the consumers. However, since the current LCCT does not have any more capacity, Firefly should operate from the MTB until the new PLCCT is ready. On a similar note, should any other airline wish to operate turboprop services from SZB, they should be allowed to do so.

 

I am not sure if the level of business/private jet traffic is high enough to justify turning SZB into a "business airport". If so, then the old Sg Besi Airport would be ideal for such traffic as it is located right in KL City.

 

If I'm not mistaken, Sg Besi Airport would be redeveloped into a commercial/residential/recreational area.

[flee 5]

Yes it is - real estate experts believe that will give a better return on investment than a business airport can!

 

The only doubt hanging over this development is that the govt. has privatised it and the job is given to another of their cronies.

[reyneo 0]

Since it'd most probably start flying with only one or two birds, it shouldn't have much of a problem operating out the the LCCT. Its probably not the best idea to start from MTB and then 'downgrade' to the LCCT a year or two later...

 

MH's 734s are not THAT old per se, definitely not "Indonesian-old", its newest 734 was from 1996 i think, most of them are from 1991-1994 with an average age of 17 years old. Most of the old Indonesian aircraft are from the 70s and 80s and not all of them have very good maintenance, hence their spotty safety record. There really is nothing wrong with starting out services on old aircraft and moving on to newer ones later, as long as they are well-maintained, most LCCs do it.

[Kenneth Chong WT 0]

FY doing KUL-KCH-CGK and DPS? Hmm....knowing our Tourism Authority, it will be all talk and nothing done...MFM:AXED,CAN:AXED,CGK:AXED,DPS:AXED,PER:AXED...ALL AXED AXED AXED!

[dean hizudy 0]

It would be good for Firefly to have flights from LCCT. Competition is good for the consumers. However, since the current LCCT does not have any more capacity, Firefly should operate from the MTB until the new PLCCT is ready. On a similar note, should any other airline wish to operate turboprop services from SZB, they should be allowed to do so.

 

I am not sure if the level of business/private jet traffic is high enough to justify turning SZB into a "business airport". If so, then the old Sg Besi Airport would be ideal for such traffic as it is located right in KL City.

They already allowed to do so.The skypark terminal management had make a proposal with several turboprop operators in the region such as bangkok airways and riau airlines to operate flight to szb last year...

[Tafe 0]

It would be good for Firefly to have flights from LCCT. Competition is good for the consumers. However, since the current LCCT does not have any more capacity, Firefly should operate from the MTB until the new PLCCT is ready. On a similar note, should any other airline wish to operate turboprop services from SZB, they should be allowed to do so.

 

I am not sure if the level of business/private jet traffic is high enough to justify turning SZB into a "business airport". If so, then the old Sg Besi Airport would be ideal for such traffic as it is located right in KL City.

 

Till today, i dont get clear justification on using Old Sg Besi for commercial purpose.

KLIA and SZB have ample area to cater commercial flight regardless for business or leisure.

The vicinity shouldn't be the issue since at least two expressways linking KL and Subang.

 

So, utilize the SkyPark to the max!

[Waiping 12]

I remember there were talks of more prop-jet operators to operate from SZB, one of them a Thai operator with some funny name. Is it Happy Air?

[Radzi 2]

Still not sure where FY B734 will come from, but their pilots are already doing ground training.

[Josh T 0]

I wonder if MH is considering using FY in the same way SQ uses MI. We might see FY flying the KUL-SIN route and just leaving the peak travel times to MH and SQ.

[flee 5]

I think it would be real interesting to see how Firefly develops in the next 2 or 3 years. Logically, FY should be assisting MH fight off the competition. However, its business model should be clearcut (e.g. like how AirAsia and AirAsia X carves out their routes) so that they do not overlap. Defining the business models clearly will ensure that FY does not actually compete against MH!

[Josh T 0]

I think it would be real interesting to see how Firefly develops in the next 2 or 3 years. Logically, FY should be assisting MH fight off the competition. However, its business model should be clearcut (e.g. like how AirAsia and AirAsia X carves out their routes) so that they do not overlap. Defining the business models clearly will ensure that FY does not actually compete against MH!

There are quite a few business models out there that MH can learn from for how they can use FY to complement them and to compete against the LCCs. There's the QF/JQ combo and SQ/MI combo for starters.

[alberttky 0]

FY doing KUL-KCH-CGK and DPS? Hmm....knowing our Tourism Authority, it will be all talk and nothing done...MFM:AXED,CAN:AXED,CGK:AXED,DPS:AXED,PER:AXED...ALL AXED AXED AXED!

I fully agree! There's simply not enough traffic out of KCH to all these destinations.

[Alan B. 5]

Some information that I have gathered.

 

1. The first 2 737-400 are coming from ex-Garuda and ex-Air One

2. It will NOT be called Firefly..... it will be called Firefly... (like MASwings) there will be an add on to the name. Won't let you know yet hehehe

3. The crew uniforms will not be the same as FY

4. It will operate as a true LCC unlike Firefly ATR operations with complementary refreshments but will be BOB

5. They will have male FA's

6. Will operate from the MTB

Edited September 30, 2010 by Alan B.

[Y. J. Foo 0]

Interesting information you have Alan. Funny they operate from MTB though ISO LCCT/KLIA2. Any idea when the first 2 a/c to come?