Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
Naim

We don’t need aerobridges, AirAsia tells MAHB

Recommended Posts

stupid tony. pay so much the fare and still have to run in rainy day.

You are not forced to fly with them. If you want aerobridges, just fly with MAS, Firefly or other airlines at the MTB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not forced to fly with them. If you want aerobridges, just fly with MAS, Firefly or other airlines at the MTB.

 

yeah, my aging parents have stopped using airasia, now using either mas or firefly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is why I do not take AK....so far I only use FY or 3K when the need arises n 3K have yet to dissapoint me....sorry for those who likes AK but looking at the why they operate, I dont like it at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not forced to fly with them. If you want aerobridges, just fly with MAS, Firefly or other airlines at the MTB.

 

 

u r wrong! i was indeed forced to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is why I do not take AK....so far I only use FY or 3K when the need arises n 3K have yet to dissapoint me....sorry for those who likes AK but looking at the why they operate, I dont like it at all

The best way to complain is not to fly with them. Vote with your feet.

 

You are doing the right thing by boycotting AK because it does not give you what you want. :clapping:

 

yeah, my aging parents have stopped using airasia, now using either mas or firefly.

Same here - AK is not friendly for aged/disabled people, no matter what their marketing blurp tells us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way to complain is not to fly with them. Vote with your feet.

 

You are doing the right thing by boycotting AK because it does not give you what you want. :clapping:

 

Same here - AK is not friendly for aged/disabled people, no matter what their marketing blurp tells us!

 

Now, now, everyone please don't quarrel. There are many choices out there. If michgyver is really being forced to take AK, then we should understand his situation. If others prefer other airlines, then let it be. Its free world, should support one another not screaming at each other. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since AK airfare is exclude of airport tax and MTB pax are paying subsidy to ERL, why can’t MAB include the use of aerobridge in LCCT airport tax? :sorry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now the airline is telling the airport what to do?

Emirates and Singapore Airlines told Airbus what they wanted during the development of the A380. If I am not mistaken, SQ is very prominent in giving their input for the A350 program as well. But I guess there should be nothing to be surprised about this matter. The airlines are the customer in this context - customer is the boss.

 

With regards to the topic, the current aerobridge charges at KLIA (that Uncle Tony is so unwilling to pay) is RM 85 per landing. Excerpt is from an analyst/investment bank report which was issued out on 9 November 2010, when Firefly announced their jet operation:

 

Aerobridge.jpg

 

Should AK wants to distribute this cost to the passengers, each passenger on a fully loaded A320 will have to pay RM 0.47 (RM 85/180 passengers) for using the aerobridge. This should translate into an increase of a mere 50 sen to the airfare.

 

Personally, I am very curious on why AK is so unwilling to bear this cost, because it is really not much on per cost basis. Even if AK use a load factor of 50% on each of their A320s as the basis for the charges to each passenger/increase in airfare, it will only be RM 0.94 (RM 85/(50% x 180 passengers)), that's less than 1 Ringgit.

 

On the topic, here are some other operational charges with regards to AK's operation at the LCCT, copied from our Statistic Thread:

 

On the other hand, this is the reference chart for the current airport charges at the LCCT, which I think might be beneficial for some of our calculations in this thread in the future.

 

LCCT2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not stupid. He's clever, very clever.

 

He raves and rants, cry bloody foul to get what he wants. When he does get what he wants, he'll blame someone else when he screws up or dumps it back when he cant make it work. All the time, he makes a huge money for himself along the way. He never looses (money that is). Remember RAS. How the AK fanboys forget.

 

He takes everyone for a ride, literally.

 

So for everyone who can now fly, enjoy the ride whilst being lied to and robbed.

 

Stand-up everyone who can't now fly without aerobridge. Oops you've all gone to the other airlines.

Edited by Tim Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, now, everyone please don't quarrel. There are many choices out there. If michgyver is really being forced to take AK, then we should understand his situation. If others prefer other airlines, then let it be. Its free world, should support one another not screaming at each other. smile.gif

 

Julius, dont worry...we all aint fighting here...we r just sharing our feedback and opinion.......which is why this forum is for...good.gif ...cheer n have a great day.cool.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, is this the same MAHB that has been pretty bad in attracting foreign airlines to fly here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of charging RM85 aerobridge fee to airline, MAB should charge RM1 extra to passenger service charge for the use of aerobridge at KLIA2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emirates and Singapore Airlines told Airbus what they wanted during the development of the A380. If I am not mistaken, SQ is very prominent in giving their input for the A350 program as well. But I guess there should be nothing to be surprised about this matter. The airlines are the customer in this context - customer is the boss.

 

With regards to the topic, the current aerobridge charges at KLIA (that Uncle Tony is so unwilling to pay) is RM 85 per landing. Excerpt is from an analyst/investment bank report which was issued out on 9 November 2010, when Firefly announced their jet operation:

 

Aerobridge.jpg

 

Should AK wants to distribute this cost to the passengers, each passenger on a fully loaded A320 will have to pay RM 0.47 (RM 85/180 passengers) for using the aerobridge. This should translate into an increase of a mere 50 sen to the airfare.

 

Personally, I am very curious on why AK is so unwilling to bear this cost, because it is really not much on per cost basis. Even if AK use a load factor of 50% on each of their A320s as the basis for the charges to each passenger/increase in airfare, it will only be RM 0.94 (RM 85/(50% x 180 passengers)), that's less than 1 Ringgit.

 

On the topic, here are some other operational charges with regards to AK's operation at the LCCT, copied from our Statistic Thread:

 

http://tmi.me/4q89W

 

he says that it will cost 51 ringgit per pax.

 

uh what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a feeling if MAHB insisted on using the aerobridge in the first place we wouldn't have this problem now. Considering AK have no choice but to use them in other airports that they fly to, unless they don't want to fly there. It's like buying cars - who needs airbags?

Edited by Waiping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you note the fares from overseas destination, some of them include other airport charges too. Passengers have shown that they are prepared for higher charges at those airports.

 

With so many conflicting statements all over the place, I think it all boils down to turnaround time. With aerobridge, there is only one exit and entrance whereas with stairs, there are two. This will impact on their operations - and delays at LCCT are no fun for pax.

 

One other point - AK does not have much confidence in MAHB providing a good service with such critical timing for flight turnarounds. I remember on one flight I was on, the MAHB ground service was so poor. They did not have the air conditioning unit hooked up to the plane.

 

Now imagine if that was an aerobridge - when plane arrives, there are no aerobridges available, or they are slow to deploy. It is a very feasible and real situation. As I said earlier in the thread, MAHB are quite poor in on time execution. So there you go - TF is using the "threat" of increased fares (if aerobridges are used) to persuade passengers that MAHB is the bad guy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

With so many conflicting statements all over the place, I think it all boils down to turnaround time. With aerobridge, there is only one exit and entrance whereas with stairs, there are two. This will impact on their operations - and delays at LCCT are no fun for pax.

 

 

Current situations from my observation, eventhough AK now using stairs without aerobridges at LCCT but their flight still delayed and time punctuality very poor. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually aerobridge doesn't cost much,

what they care is the passenger disembark speed,

aerobridge only got one exit, if they use staircase they got two exit, passenger disembark speed will increase..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he says that it will cost 51 ringgit per pax.

Would that be logical? I don't think it is that expensive. Plus the charges of RM 85 per aerobridge matches the other operational charges that MAHB imposed to AK at the LCCT.

 

RM 51 per passenger would mean a fully loaded A320 will have to pay RM 9,180 (RM51 x 180 passengers) per landing. That costs so much more than the combined landing and parking fees for an A330, which does not make sense. Plus I don't think the analyst/investment bank got the wrong info. Very highly unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By using two doors, pax can deboard and board aircraft faster than with only one door but turnaround time couldn’t be shorten as it takes time to refuel, and unload and load baggage.

 

At airports (e.g. BKK, DAC, VTE, etc) that use aerobridge, AK managed to turnaround within 25 minutes most of the time. Hence, by using aerobridge would not delay AK 25 minutes turnaround.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you note the fares from overseas destination, some of them include other airport charges too. Passengers have shown that they are prepared for higher charges at those airports.

 

With so many conflicting statements all over the place, I think it all boils down to turnaround time. With aerobridge, there is only one exit and entrance whereas with stairs, there are two. This will impact on their operations - and delays at LCCT are no fun for pax.

 

One other point - AK does not have much confidence in MAHB providing a good service with such critical timing for flight turnarounds. I remember on one flight I was on, the MAHB ground service was so poor. They did not have the air conditioning unit hooked up to the plane.

 

Now imagine if that was an aerobridge - when plane arrives, there are no aerobridges available, or they are slow to deploy. It is a very feasible and real situation. As I said earlier in the thread, MAHB are quite poor in on time execution. So there you go - TF is using the "threat" of increased fares (if aerobridges are used) to persuade passengers that MAHB is the bad guy!

 

Yeah, MAHB is a bad guy.First they let AA operate at KLIA,afer seeing AA's "cheap passengers" around it was an eyesore for them.They rather have "cheap foreigners"at KLIA after all it is the taxpayer's money to build KLIA.Then they sent AA to operate at the wharehouse.Later they found out that these wharehouse airport boys are making money.Now they called them back to KLIA2.It's all about money,ain't it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RM 51 per passenger would mean a fully loaded A320 will have to pay RM 9,180 (RM51 x 180 passengers) per landing. That costs so much more than the combined landing and parking fees for an A330, which does not make sense. Plus I don't think the analyst/investment bank got the wrong info. Very highly unlikely.

I think TF meant MAB is trying to push everyone to pay RM 51 airport tax. Anyway, this is his Tweet, so make what you can out of it!

 

Would be huge anount. We are fighting all the time for p#!@%*#angers. MAB just want to out up costs. They want to get rid of terminals and charge everyone minimum 51 ringitt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think TF meant MAB is trying to push everyone to pay RM 51 airport tax. Anyway, this is his Tweet, so make what you can out of it!

If that is what he meant, then clearly he does not understand the question. Airport tax and aerobridge charges are 2 different thing. AK has agreed to move to KLIA2 so if MAHB decided that the airport tax in KLIA2 is RM 51 per passenger, then AK is subjected to the cost. Whether using aerobridge or not at KLIA2, passengers will still have to pay this alleged RM 51 airport tax. By the way, RM 51 for an airport tax at KLIA2 would be too exorbitant, isn't it? Same with the rate at MTB. And if that is the case, why bother construct KLIA2 in the first place, when AK can just moved back to MTB to be charged with the same airport tax. Clearly this is not right. See just how misleading all the assumptions be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just let air asia park their aircraft out in the open with out the aerobridge,who cares any way. The areobridges at KLIA2 can be utilize by other low cost operators such as Firefly, Lion Air or who ever want the service. Its the Rakyat's tax money that build the airport,not tony fernandes'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AK is using aerobridge in BKK, HAN, SGN, DAC, VTE, SIN, etc. It seems only in Malaysia that AK is not using aerobridge :sorry:

 

It is more likely that MAB is charging exorbitant price for the use of aerobridge.

 

I agree...Maybe MAB is charging sky high price for use of aerobridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...