Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
alberttky

MAS B772 Fleet Decommissioned on 27 January 2016

Which one type of a/c is suitable for MH?  

212 members have voted

  1. 1. A350 or B787

    • A350
      125
    • B787
      87


Recommended Posts

 

77W is too big - if the A380 wasn't already in the fleet then it would be the perfect aircraft for the job.

I know, I was just thinking ahead - what if the B77W can help MH expand its market share on thinner routes in the same way as the A380 helped MH boost its KUL-CDG traffic? Then this aircraft would be considered an inspired choice.....

 

Happy New Year Suhaimi!

Edited by flee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAS' network - both current and for the foreseeable future - can't justify the B77W and B777-9X. It's too big of an investment to have another fleet, without having a network of great economic scale, for the purpose of developing "thinner" routes. Besides, with a MTOW of 351t, it's not exactly a small aircraft, is it? If they hadn't committed to the A380 years ago, the B777-9X would have made sense, similar to the future strategy being pursued by Cathay Pacific. So in summary for MAS, it's either the B777-9X or the A380. Not both.

 

As for their current B772s, they are badly in need of a long-overdue retrofit to bring them up to at least the standard of their A380s and A333s. And if they do, they need to change the horrible 2-5-2 configuration to a 3-3-3. The B772 is of course less efficient compared to the A350. But seeing MAS' circumstances, the B772 is still a very able aircraft for long-haul routes that can't sustain an A380. Retrofitting them would be a worthwhile investment. Assuming that MAS would miss A350 delivery slots for the first 4-5 years of production, it is the best interim solution. Another option would be to start leasing A350s from those leasing firms with early A350 delivery slots while waiting for their future own A350s.

 

MAS needs the A350 as it's future wide body workhorse replacing the current A333s and B772s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for their current B772s, they are badly in need of a long-overdue retrofit to bring them up to at least the standard of their A380s and A333s. And if they do, they need to change the horrible 2-5-2 configuration to a 3-3-3.

 

Still prefer the 2-5-2 configuration if you are travelling in a pair.. Having a 3 on the side gives big problem to the person sitting innermost.. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for their current B772s, they are badly in need of a long-overdue retrofit to bring them up to at least the standard of their A380s and A333s. And if they do, they need to change the horrible 2-5-2 configuration to a 3-3-3. The B772 is of course less efficient compared to the A350. But seeing MAS' circumstances, the B772 is still a very able aircraft for long-haul routes that can't sustain an A380. Retrofitting them would be a worthwhile investment. Assuming that MAS would miss A350 delivery slots for the first 4-5 years of production, it is the best interim solution. Another option would be to start leasing A350s from those leasing firms with early A350 delivery slots while waiting for their future own A350s.

 

Is MH still with the reasoning that they need 8 years for the ROI if they change the seats on the B772 fleet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its almost April now, not long until the end of Q1 of 2014. I wonder whether MH will reach a decision by March (or earlier, very unlikely). Let's wait and see.

 

Another thing which interests me is whether MH will be ordering other aircrafts (more A330s and A380s?) alongside replacement aircrafts for the 77E's. I also hope MH will reconfigure the seating of the A380's (especially the C cabin) so that every seat could provide direct access to the aisle. My favourite C class seat is CX's reverse-herringbone configuration pioneered by US Airways (even though many people are not aware of this).

 

Even though CX's product is so competitive by today's standards, it is aiming to introduce new seats by 2016 on its A350s so MH should really take CX as a good example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH insiders in the forum have repeatedly mentioned that the return on investment for the current new seats is 8 years.

 

Historically, MH has never had a seat replacement exercise on any particular fleet. The older F, J and Y seats previously were installed when MH acquired the aircraft (744, 772, 330, 332, 734) and it stayed/s until the very end of its life with MH some 20 years later. The only major refurbishment which involved the seat is when MH changed the seat covers to the smarties colours.

 

Therefore based on those facts, there is 0 probability to this fancies.

 

I also hope MH will reconfigure the seating of the A380's (especially the C cabin) so that every seat could provide direct access to the aisle. My favourite C class seat is CX's reverse-herringbone configuration pioneered by US Airways (even though many people are not aware of this). Even though CX's product is so competitive by today's standards, it is aiming to introduce new seats by 2016 on its A350s so MH should really take CX as a good example.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH insiders in the forum have repeatedly mentioned that the return on investment for the current new seats is 8 years.

 

Historically, MH has never had a seat replacement exercise on any particular fleet. The older F, J and Y seats previously were installed when MH acquired the aircraft (744, 772, 330, 332, 734) and it stayed/s until the very end of its life with MH some 20 years later. The only major refurbishment which involved the seat is when MH changed the seat covers to the smarties colours.

 

Therefore based on those facts, there is 0 probability to this fancies.

 

Sad to know. I thought the 77Es and the 744s were refurbished sometime in 2005 when MH introduced the new C and F seats? There was F on the 77Es prior to the refurbishment right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH insiders in the forum have repeatedly mentioned that the return on investment for the current new seats is 8 years.

 

Therefore based on those facts, there is 0 probability to this fancies.

 

 

Bean counters at MH can be conservative creative, probably they presumed worst case scenario low yield like NRT-LAX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad to know. I thought the 77Es and the 744s were refurbished sometime in 2005 when MH introduced the new C and F seats? There was F on the 77Es prior to the refurbishment right?

 

Yup. Row 1 and 2, in a 2-2-2 config. J started row 4. 2nd cabin started row 9 2-3-2 config.

 

Don't remember when it started though - but when they removed F seats, they originally put in 6 rows of 2-3-2 J seats, then afterwards took out one row to make it the 5 rows you see today.

Edited by Suzanne Goh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its February 2014 and there is still no indication on their wide body replacement plan as yet. They are sounding like MAHB, keep postponing their deadlines!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the management have higher priority headache at the moment i.e. the announcement of the FY2013 financial results, which has been informed to us as a SIGNIFICANT losses event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vietnamese, Indian and Thai carriers will place orders for over 100 Airbus or Boeing passenger jets worth $12 billion at list prices, industry officials say. Malaysian Airlines could also place an order for Airbus long-haul and medium-haul jets.

 

http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/singapore-airshow-companies-look-to-ink-asia-deals-despite-emerging-market-worries-114020700578_1.html

 

How credible is this news? But, it sounds like MH would choose Airbus over Boeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All will be revealed next week.

 

If they chose Airbus for wide bodies, it would appear to be a cost saving measure as all wide body flight crew can be in one pool of resources. A mixed fleet of A and B would mean more costs as they will need two different type ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As they still have the options for A330, they might order A330 HGW (-200HGW can make AMS/FRA and they would receive it earlier) and A350 for the real 777 replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A330-200 can already fly AMS/FRA right now.

 

The 242t A330-300 will be able to do so for the first time due to the activation of the centre fuel tank.

 

See: http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/news-events-single/detail/airbus-offers-new-242-tonne-a330-takeoff-weight-capability-to-extend-market-coverage/

 

 

The new take-off weight capability combined with the fuel capacity increase enables operators of these new A330-300s to carry additional payload on longer missions. Overall, the full payload range now increases by around 500nm over today’s 235 tonne A330-300, and by around 350nm over today’s 238 tonne A330-200.

 

The A330-300’s optional fuel capacity increase will be achieved by activating the centre wing tank for the first time on this model. The centre tank and its associated systems have always been present as standard on its longer-range sibling – the A330-200. The additional fuel capacity for the A330-300 allows operators to fly new longer distance routes, such as direct flights between South-East Asia and Europe. For example, it will permit westbound direct flights such as Kuala Lumpur to Frankfurt or Paris, with the ability to carry additional cargo on the eastbound return flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is actually could be flown from NRT to LAX if MH never axed the route...

Which can always be reinstated if MH decides to buy the aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought MH is thinking of getting replacement aircrafts for the 77Es from leasing companies in order to benefit from earlier delivery slots by 2017? Or is MH going to place additional orders during the Singapore Air Show 2014? Perhaps exercising the remaining A330 options?


It's just that MH is not interested in getting the Dreamliner.

 

If not, I think a sub-fleet of 5-6 Boeing 787-8/9 may be good for long-haul thin routes as MH used to operate a fleet of 5 A330-200s. Again, this may increase the cost of maintenance for MH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH should order the 333HGW as it would likely be faster delivery instead of the A350 or B789. Looking at MH status and its loads there's no necessity to purchase any higher capacity aircrafts - unless it get can its house clean, and do a turn around and rid itself of yearly losses which will take sometime if its even able to do so. even at thi stage MH is pulling out services like its LAX which means it had even shrunk the international routes and continents that it flies too compared to a decade ago. MH keeps blaming it on high fuel sosts and "old planes" but is it really??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's just that MH is not interested in getting the Dreamliner.

 

 

 

I really hope MH will order A350 for long haul operations. Looking at the current operators, all of them (except JAL and ANA) opted for 3-3-3 configuration, which reduced the seat width to 17" or less. 787 at 3-3-3 is fine for medium haul, but for 10+ hours that would be uncomfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...