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

MAB Proposed 25 New Widebody Aircraft Purchase in 2017

Recommended Posts

According to CAPA again, MAB intend to increase seat capacity of 738s from 160/166 to 178 by reducing 1 row business seat and introducing new regional J class on 738 with wifi connectivity and 189 seats for all-economy configuration without wifi. And transferring some of 738 to Maswings.

 

Why don't MAB transfer some of its international flights from BKI to Maswings when MH intends to transfer 738 to Maswings and soley focusing at KUL-BKI trunk route. It is easier to streamline operation and connectivity with domestic sector in East Malaysia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope its the A330. Love the 2-4-2 seating as I normally fly with wife. Used to love the 767 2-3-2 as well. MAS 777 2-5-2 was also good. Never liked the 3-3-3 or 3-4-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take the A330 over the 787. Been on the 787 twice already and I really don't like it at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between A339Neo to A359 is marginally USD 20 million less, while B789 to A333 is roughly around 5 million extra. Transition costs between 737 MAX and Dreamliner, can be reduced and leaving alone A380 to A350. Window shading factor is a wow, no headache for crew to ask the passenger to pull up. From technical aspect, B787 should provides better comfort in term of air-conditioning and jet lag from lower cabin altitude. A condition that provides invisible comfort. Since it's looking for widebody replacement, i'm voting for B787-9/10 Dreamliner. But MAB is not looking at this, period :crazy: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take the A330 over the 787. Been on the 787 twice already and I really don't like it at all.

Me too. The 787 feels decidedly cramped. The benefits of lower altitude cabin pressure does not make it any more comfortable for me. Comfort is inferior to the A380 too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought that MAS should have retained the 777s until they figured out their long term widebody replacement plans.

 

I guess it was understandable why they were so eager to get rid of them. But a refurbished set of 777s would have addressed their current capacity issues.

 

Moving forward, I don't think MAS has the economics of scale to have both the 787 and 350. It would be either one, and I think looking at where MAS is right now, the 350 would suit them best. Maybe throw in a few 300neos too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too. The 787 feels decidedly cramped. The benefits of lower altitude cabin pressure does not make it any more comfortable for me. Comfort is inferior to the A380 too.

Not just only cramp, but also the position/location of the IFE box that makes an already cramp aircraft layout feels even worse! And while 3-3-3 is fine for the middle row, it sucks for the window seat users. Give me the A330/340's 2-4-2 any time of the day, thank you very much. Better for when travelling as couples too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it comes to configuration. I prefer 2-4-2 config on a330 compared to 3-3-3 787.

 

Been on NH/QR 787-8 and it's cramp.

 

So if MH to maintain 2-4-2 config on their future widebodies I think I'm fine with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it comes to configuration. I prefer 2-4-2 config on a330 compared to 3-3-3 787.

 

Been on NH/QR 787-8 and it's cramp.

 

So if MH to maintain 2-4-2 config on their future widebodies I think I'm fine with that.

 

The A350 will most likely be a 3-3-3 configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What 787 flights have u guys taken? JL/NH/TG or JQ/TZ??

 

HU - Hainan Airlines 787-8 for me :). The interior feels like a Chinese restaurant in the West.

 

I don't feel it's cramp at all

Edited by S V Choong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it comes to configuration. I prefer 2-4-2 config on a330 compared to 3-3-3 787.

 

Been on NH/QR 787-8 and it's cramp.

 

So if MH to maintain 2-4-2 config on their future widebodies I think I'm fine with that.

Believe colour scheme play a role in perception of roominess. Light and soft colour scheme like those in silk air make a320 looks bigger and more comfortable than ak a320 and MH 738. Edited by KK Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those electronic windows on the 787 are the worst. They don't block out the sun completely. Did someone forget that there is no cloud cover for the sun when you're above the clouds?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it comes to configuration. I prefer 2-4-2 config on a330 compared to 3-3-3 787.

 

Been on NH/QR 787-8 and it's cramp.

 

So if MH to maintain 2-4-2 config on their future widebodies I think I'm fine with that.

Yes, most of the B787s airlines have are fitted for eonomics and not comfort. If it is 3-3-3 seating but with better seat pitch (32" or more), it will feel less cramped.

 

I think A330/340s are at their best in 2-3-2 configuration.

The A350 will most likely be a 3-3-3 configuration.

A350XWB is wider than the B787 - so it feels OK.

Those electronic windows on the 787 are the worst. They don't block out the sun completely. Did someone forget that there is no cloud cover for the sun when you're above the clouds?!

Another gimmick that needs more R&D....

Believe colour scheme play a role in perception of roominess. Light and soft colour scheme like those in silk air make a320 looks bigger and more comfortable than ak a320 and MH 738.

Yes, it makes a huge difference and so does cabin lighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To match capacity with routes demand to optimize yield require a mix fleet/capacity.

 

Whatever aircraft type order today could effects p&l in years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, he is including what is currently available in the market and B77Ws are coming off lease in big quantities as the original leases expire. Being a good businessman, he should look at all options and find the best one for MAB.

 

Yes, more A333s to solve the current aircraft shortage problems.

 

Longer term, the lowest cost is still the A330-900 as the transition cost is very low. They have the 6 A350-900 and these aircraft, as well as the A350-1000 may well be most suited for MAB's long term needs. But the big problem for them would be the cost. Just like B777X and B787s, buying the A350 will incur much larger CAPEX than buying the A330-900. So we will have to wait to see what kind of decision will finally be taken.

Believe in airlines, opex is more important than capex.

 

Take a33e and a350 for comparison; if a350 operator to charge fare at a33e operating break even point. A33e operator could not make enough to pay for lease or capex. Due to lower casm, a350 operator is still profitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe in airlines, opex is more important than capex.

 

Take a33e and a350 for comparison; if a350 operator to charge fare at a33e operating break even point. A33e operator could not make enough to pay for lease or capex. Due to lower casm, a350 operator is still profitable.

CAPEX has a direct impact on OPEX - so if a plane costs more, the lease rates will be higher. If it is owned, the borrowings and interest payments will be higher.

 

Determining your break even point without taking into account lease payments and/or finance costs is not being very clever!

Personally, I hope it is anything BUT the B777. Having MH flying the B777 again so soon feels like an insult to me and colleagues.

Yes, MAB will be faced with a lot of unhappy people who were made redundant as a result of the retirement of the B777-200ER fleet.

 

As I have said before, MAB has a lot of resources for Airbus widebodies and it would be a shame if these were made redundant too. With the A350-900 already in the fleet, the lowest cost to expansion of the wide body fleet is via the A350/A330neo/A330 route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and 787 over A330neo please!!

 

Why?

 

Laws of probability shows that there is no way MAB will be going for an 8 across on the 787 in Y...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why?

 

Laws of probability shows that there is no way MAB will be going for an 8 across on the 787 in Y...

 

A330s are 8 abreast and 787 has 9 abreast in standard format, IIRC!

I am saying I would prefer MH to get the B787!

Edited by S V Choong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...