MAS weighs new plane options

[flee 5]

Yields also improve if the capital cost of the aircraft is lower. That is why Delta and some other airlines are buying cheap, old aircraft these days.

 

MH can also buy cheap and instantly available used aircraft, if it wants to improve yields. As the CEO said, they will look at more wide bodies at the end of the year. So lets wait and see what they decide.

[Ruiz Razy 1]

Yields also improve if the capital cost of the aircraft is lower. That is why Delta and some other airlines are buying cheap, old aircraft these days.

 

MH can also buy cheap and instantly available used aircraft, if it wants to improve yields. As the CEO said, they will look at more wide bodies at the end of the year. So lets wait and see what they decide.

 

767-400 as interim measure?

[Josh T 0]

It is a fact that;

1. MH doesn’t have enough load for daily 772 service to FRA, CDG, JNB, etc.

2. Those routes (e.g. SYD, MEL, NRT, ICN, etc) that justify daily 772 will be covered by A33E

3. Frequency means high yield.

 

For MH to improve yield, MH should replace 772 with smaller aircraft like 787.

It seems that MH must have pretty good load factors for LHR and AMS to justify the use of the B747-400. Loads to CDG must be pretty good too or picking up if they've increased the frequency back to daily. Does anybody know what the average load is to FRA and ROM?

[Johan Z 0]

Do you mean FCO? I believe the load is not bad, considering MH has codesharing agreement with Alitalia. They get the traffic from Australia-bound pax.

[Josh T 0]

Do you mean FCO? I believe the load is not bad, considering MH has codesharing agreement with Alitalia. They get the traffic from Australia-bound pax.

Yes. I always forget the code for Rome. Thanks for clarifying.

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

767-400 as interim measure?

 

Is it cost-effective to introduce a new type into the fleet, even if the plane's cheap since it's used?

[flee 5]

767-400 as interim measure?

I was thinking more in line with what Royal Brunei is doing - lease some SQ T7's...

[Johan Z 0]

EK for sure will retire half of their fleet soon. Their aircraft are much younger than most of MH's.

Edited June 15, 2010 by Johan Z

[Ruiz Razy 1]

I was thinking more in line with what Royal Brunei is doing - lease some SQ T7's...

 

T7 is a 300 seater aircraft , which has proven that it's big for MH operations into Europe such as ZRH / VIE / MUC / ARN and even in maintaining daily ops to FRA / CDG / FCO /AKL / ADL.

 

Ideally a 200 - 250 seater with say just 24 - 30 seats for premium club and remaining 170 - 220 economy and eco. plus would be ideal fit for MH. This is where 764 / 332 may do the trick ( as an interim) , similar to CO / AA / UA and even JL / NH / BA have started such move ( e.g. JL's ops to KUL and NH's / JL's opts into SIN. That's how EK started "conquering" every airports in Europe with 332s!

 

If a 250 seater is available , operations to AKL / ADL / FRA may be daily, which is more convenient and preferred compared to just 4 - 5 times a week. Once capacity builts up, twice daily ops would be FANTASTIC as there wud be greater choices and variety , compared to a single daily of 772 or 380.

 

In the long run Dreamliners / A350s are best fit for such ops. IMHO, MH livery wud look sexier in Dreamliners then A350s.

[Johan Z 0]

It's better off for MH to order (ETA: or lease) A332 than introducing a new aircraft into their fleet, if they want 200-250 seats.

Edited June 15, 2010 by Johan Z

[Josh T 0]

Doesn't the new A330-200 have a longer range than the A330-300?

[Johan Z 0]

Yes. According to Airbus, A332 can fly 13,400 km (vs. 10,800 km for -300), but carry less pax than A333.

[Josh T 0]

Yes. According to Airbus, A332 can fly 13,400 km (vs. 10,800 km for -300), but carry less pax than A333.

Sounds like a good plane to get then for MH. They'll have better loads than using the B777 and they'll be able to fly the distance. It'll be good to get FRA and FCO service up to daily with the A330-200.

[flee 5]

MH might probably decide to soldier on with the B772s until they get new B787 or A350 planes. As some have said here, old planes are still OK provided the cabins are refreshed. Fully amortised old planes may also have lower total cost of ownership, thereby increasing yields.

[Johan Z 0]

Might be tricky for an A332 to do KUL-CDG and -FRA with fully loaded pax and their bags and some cargo underneath. 787 is so far the best aircraft for this mission.

[Dr Frasier 0]

fairly simple to fix IMO - soldier on with the 777s and add the Economy Plus cabin to reduce load numbers but at the same time gain higher yielding full-Y passengers.

[Ruiz Razy 1]

fairly simple to fix IMO - soldier on with the 777s and add the Economy Plus cabin to reduce load numbers but at the same time gain higher yielding full-Y passengers.

 

Alternatively upgrade EY with 2-4-2 seating abreast ( on top of improvered IFE) . This will definately "top up the notch" against others! MH can have another item to "brag" - WIDEST ECONOMY SEATS! Aircraft will be lighter, less fuel consumption plus greater satisfaction by their "Guests". However, yield / revenue management may need to be scrutinized further.

[flee 5]

It would seem that airlines are realising that getting new aircraft is very costly these days and the increased efficiency is insufficient to overcome the high acquisition costs. Add to that the delivery delays of new, unproven aircraft and the equation is quite clear. As such, airlines may now decide to wait until new aircraft comes into service before placing orders. The latest airline to refresh cabins on existing aircraft is Swiss: Swiss to retrofit entire A340 fleet by mid 2011

[jani 0]

Tengku Azmil said this on Twitter:

 

"B777-300 is a possibility, but no immediate plans yet. We may look at it in conjunction with the B787/A350."

[Johan Z 0]

TG also just ordered 8 777-300ER and will get as soon as 2012. If MH makes their move now, they will receive new aircraft before their 747 get too old and at the same time as the whales.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100618-702867.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines

[Ruiz Razy 1]

TG also just ordered 8 777-300ER and will get as soon as 2012. If MH makes their move now, they will receive new aircraft before their 747 get too old and at the same time as the whales.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100618-702867.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines

 

Yeap, the sooner these new 77W arrives, the more cost savings! , The 4 engined 744's consumes more fuel compared to the twin engines 77Ws , both at almost similar capacity and range (may be some crossings may be problamatic due to it's ETOPS limitations). But then again it should not be a problem flying to EUR / AUS / AFRICA from KUL.

 

A far sighted airline wud have ordered years ago or alternatively , they cud have leased them first ( like someone did) and be operating right now! .