MAS 777-200 Withdrawal thread

[KK Lee 5]

12) The would be B777 seat and IFE retrofit worth at least MYR 150 million for all 15 unit MAS B777. This B777 will be phased out in 3 years time yet a retrofit is initiated and as it is the seat and IFE served its purpose well.

 

http://weechookeong.wordpress.com/2012/07/18/conspiracy-or-sabotage/#more-11310

 

 

Since some of our brethren believe 'GE Man' is credible, 3 years is not too far away, guess Maswingers can start speculate for 772 replacement.

[Eugene Koh 4]

I thought MAS had 17 B777s?

[Yang Zulhilmi 0]

yup..MRA-MRQ..

I thought MAS had 17 B777s?

 

right..17..MRA-RQ

[flee 5]

If MH is talking about refurbishing the B772s and using it for three years before changing them, I think that the most likely replacement for these would be a small number of B77Ws (probably less than 10) - most likely to be leased.

 

After that, both the A333s and B77Ws will be replaced with a longer term super efficient aircraft - B787/A350/B777-X/A380. Much will depend on its business plan and the outlook for the airline in the next 10-15 years.

[GeO 0]

It is sad to see one of the best wide body aircraft B777-200 to be phased out without any replace from newer version of it's kind. Same goes to B747-400. They can get the B747-800i to replace the old B747-400 without extra costs for their pilots rating coz I believe it's not much different from the old version. If they change from Boeing to Airbus, this will incur extra costs for flight crew type rating. Plus Boeing aircrafts are proven fuel effiecient.

[flee 5]

I won't discount the uprated 240t A333 either. However, I think that right now, they need to decide what routes they want to operate and which routes in which they will be leveraging oneworld partner metal. Then only can they determine what sort of planes they need to run those services.

[Isaac 0]

How about the 332IGW ? Can it makes KUL/Europe year-round without any restriction assuming it has a seating capacity around 240 passengers in a 2-class layout ?

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

It is sad to see one of the best wide body aircraft B777-200 to be phased out without any replace from newer version of it's kind. Same goes to B747-400. They can get the B747-800i to replace the old B747-400 without extra costs for their pilots rating coz I believe it's not much different from the old version. If they change from Boeing to Airbus, this will incur extra costs for flight crew type rating. Plus Boeing aircrafts are proven fuel effiecient.

 

Well MH bought the A380 (or more like the government compelled them to buy the A380) so to add the 747-8 would be suicide.

[S V Choong 4]

How about the 332IGW ? Can it makes KUL/Europe year-round without any restriction assuming it has a seating capacity around 240 passengers in a 2-class layout ?

Heard A332 is not ideal because it suffers from payload (weight vs. pax no.) penalty? The fact that A332 isn't popular compared to A333 and B77W sort of self explanatory.

 

If MH is to get rid of 772, they will be left with a gap. Sad to see them go actually. Hope they will keep them longer or at least replace with some B77Ws.

[Isaac 0]

Heard A332 is not ideal because it suffers from payload (weight vs. pax no.) penalty? The fact that A332 isn't popular compared to A333 and B77W sort of self explanatory.

 

If MH is to get rid of 772, they will be left with a gap. Sad to see them go actually. Hope they will keep them longer or at least replace with some B77Ws.

Supposedly the IGW version of the 332 that just entered service can make it year-round to Europe, because it will still have more range than the new planned 333 that MAS is rumored to be looking into.

 

The 772 is still deemed a very fuel efficient aircraft by many other airlines and the available cabin space is actually bigger than its closest rival, the 333. Don't think the new planned 333 is a good replacement for the 772, not even a temporary one. They should just order the 787 or 350, spend some money upgrading its cabin offerings on the 772 while waiting for the 787 or 350.

 

But then, this is such a messed up airline. Many other airlines manage to report a huge sum of net profit even though they too, are flying more than 10x of the the original, older, less capable 333. CX has 17 original, non-enhanced 333 which they took delivery in the 90s while TG also has 12 original, non-enhanced 333 which they bought around the same time as MAS back in the 90s. SIA too, has made tons of money using the 772. 772 is not the problem. It is still a very capable aircraft by today's standard and many other airlines are still flying this plane type. MAS is the problem and i'm afraid even if you give them the 787 or 350 now (assume all lives up to Boeing/Airbus' promises), they would still run at a loss

Edited July 24, 2012 by Isaac

[flee 5]

The main reason why MAS is bleeding is because it owns very few of the planes it flies. So every month, lease payments need to be made. In contrast, BA can fly its B744s profitably because most of them are paid for already - so they only need to pay for maintenance plus fuel these days.

 

It would be MAS' interests if it had more balance between what it owns and what it leases - airlines conventionally maintain a 2:1 owned-lease ratio but for MH, it is more like 1:9 ratio in recent years! Lets hope that with the new B738 and A333s delivered, this ratio is now better.

 

But since MAS is a "joker" in the pack, I am sure that we will be amazed and also aghast with horror, no matter what kind of fleet decisions it makes in the future! They seem to believe in magic more than logic!

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

The main reason why MAS is bleeding is because it owns very few of the planes it flies. So every month, lease payments need to be made. In contrast, BA can fly its B744s profitably because most of them are paid for already - so they only need to pay for maintenance plus fuel these days.

 

I guess you can thank Binafikir & the much maligned Danny Nanny for that one!

[Isaac 0]

Is PMB is around ? If i am not mistaken, almost all the 333, 772 and 744

The main reason why MAS is bleeding is because it owns very few of the planes it flies. So every month, lease payments need to be made. In contrast, BA can fly its B744s profitably because most of them are paid for already - so they only need to pay for maintenance plus fuel these days.

 

It would be MAS' interests if it had more balance between what it owns and what it leases - airlines conventionally maintain a 2:1 owned-lease ratio but for MH, it is more like 1:9 ratio in recent years! Lets hope that with the new B738 and A333s delivered, this ratio is now better.

 

But since MAS is a "joker" in the pack, I am sure that we will be amazed and also aghast with horror, no matter what kind of fleet decisions it makes in the future! They seem to believe in magic more than logic!

But then, didn't MAS own most of the aircraft before they set up PMB about 10 years ago when MAS started to loss money ? I was still a high schooler then but then, if my memory serves me correctly, MAS finally made money again soon after they transferred all the aircraft ownership to PMB. Back then, while MAS was finally back in the black, people were questioning the financial position of PMB... It seems that MAS didn't make money even when they owned most of the aircraft... and it seems that nothing is good at MAS since 1997...

[nrazmoor 0]

With the reduce no. from 17 to 15 is there a possibility of routes cut? Btw, read somewhere earlier AJ saying that they still nego with the gov to cut some more unprofitable routes. If that correct my guess would be LAX and CDG..

[JuliusWong 0]

If I am not mistakne, based on previous Idris Jala's BTP Plan, the only profitable international route is London. LAX and CDG are more for prestige reasons.

[filipeseda 0]

Not really, one must consider that MAS will have more wide-bodies considering the new A333 which amount to 15 frames. Up from 12 previously. With the new oneworld alliance, it would be stupid to cut more routes. MH already has a small enough network. Even with codeshares it cannot let itself be eaten up by other airlines. So far, there don't seem to be signs of cutting. More recently, AJ did state that MH was committed towards increasing its network to feed OW traffic.

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Btw, read somewhere earlier AJ saying that they still nego with the gov to cut some more unprofitable routes. If that correct my guess would be LAX and CDG.

 

With CDG going daily at the moment, I don't think it is in trouble. LAX is of different case though. Other high on the list of the chopping board should be IST. Yeah, LAX and IST are a more probable candidates.

[KK Lee 5]

Is PMB is around ? If i am not mistaken, almost all the 333, 772 and 744

But then, didn't MAS own most of the aircraft before they set up PMB about 10 years ago when MAS started to loss money ? I was still a high schooler then but then, if my memory serves me correctly, MAS finally made money again soon after they transferred all the aircraft ownership to PMB. Back then, while MAS was finally back in the black, people were questioning the financial position of PMB... It seems that MAS didn't make money even when they owned most of the aircraft... and it seems that nothing is good at MAS since 1997...

 

The rot started when mr 019 took over the airline.

[flee 5]

Yes, MH is more interested in expanding routes and frequencies in Asia Pacific and cutting unprofitable European and US routes. However, since it is the flag carrier, it has to obey the govt. and operate unprofitable routes. The govt. has then to bail them out, if they get into financial difficulties!

[KK Lee 5]

If I am not mistakne, based on previous Idris Jala's BTP Plan, the only profitable international route is London. LAX and CDG are more for prestige reasons.

 

LAX has never been profitable.

[nrazmoor 0]

LAX with only 4x weekly and the only service to US put MH in a difficult position. Thy should fly there daily and include more routes like JFK/SFO and etc (not to forget the right tag on destination as well) to make sure their present is felt in the US. Funny thing is, read lots of good reviews from the american saying how good MH services and etc... too bad MH cannot leverage on that as their main selling point. Well, i guess its abit too late for MH now..

[S V Choong 4]

What about NRT? Is it profitable? Wouldn't it make more sense for MH to utilize their Slot at HND?

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

What about NRT? Is it profitable? Wouldn't it make more sense for MH to utilize their Slot at HND?

 

Do they still have the HND slots or has someone in red taken it all?

[flee 5]

Do they still have the HND slots or has someone in red taken it all?

D7 are operating daily flights to HND nowadays... For KIX, it is still 4X weekly.

 

However, HND slots suck big time as they arrive late at night - close to public transport shut down time. So you may need to use expensive taxis to get down to your hotel!

[Isaac 0]

However, HND slots suck big time as they arrive late at night - close to public transport shut down time. So you may need to use expensive taxis to get down to your hotel!

If i'm not mistaken, when MAS was operating BKI/HND, the flight departed from BKI in the midnight and the return flight departed from HND around 8am or 9am or 10am (GMT+9). Looks fine to me Anyway, thank God there are still Dragonair and Asiana Airlines.