A few MH longhaul changes

[Richard A 0]

Hello all, apa kabar? My first post on this forum. Was introduced by Raj.

 

From March 19th, 2007:

 

- LHR is reduced to 2x daily from 18pw.

- KUL-SYD-BNE-KUL daily 744 replaces the current KUL-SYD-KUL daily 772 and KUL-BNE-KUL 6pw 772.

- MEL becomes 2x daily 772, currently 1 744 + 1 772.

 

Anyone know of others? Other than KUL-TPE-LAX going daily from Jan 07.

 

Richard.

Edited December 8, 2006 by Richard A

[BC Tam 2]

The inevitable parting of ways with Virgin dawning upon MH already ? I could be wrong though

[Pieter C. 5]

The inevitable parting of ways with Virgin dawning upon MH already ? I could be wrong though

 

Meaning those 4 LHR slots went to Virgin ?

[KK Lee 5]

 

 

On paper KUL-SYD-BNE-KUL, looks better than operating KUL-SYD-BNE-SYD-KUL or KUL-BNE-SYD-BNE-KUL. However, it adds at least 90 minutes of transit time either inbound or outbound. Pax ex-BNE and ex-SYD have many airlines to choose from for flight to Europe. Doubt they will be happy to spend more time traveling. In the long term, it will cannibalize ex-SYD and to BNE load and yield, and consequently effecting load and yield to and from Europe.

 

I just don’t understand MH management.

 

 

[Hakan 2]

I've been in Istanbul Malaysia Tourism Office few hours ago. Just I visited for taking last brochures about "visit Malayisa 2007". Officers said that, KUL-IST-KUL direct flight will be change with Dubai stop over. I don't know what will be waiting hours in there, we will see at April!.

[Desmond Loo 0]

[

- LHR is reduced to 2x daily from 18pw.

 

I can't believe that MH is dropping its third flight to/from LHR. It is a busy route. This comes in addition to the withdrawal of MAN flights earlier this year. Sad to see the gradual withdrawal of MH from the UK.

[Keith T 2]

Welcome to MW, Richard.

 

[BC Tam 2]

Meaning those 4 LHR slots went to Virgin ?

From what I understood and recall, MH was only granted 14 slots at LHR years ago after huge hue and cry. Anything above that, they are using Virgin's rights at LHR. Perhaps it's time to drum up another diplomatic campaign, it has been quite a few years already !

[S V Choong 4]

On paper KUL-SYD-BNE-KUL, looks better than operating KUL-SYD-BNE-SYD-KUL or KUL-BNE-SYD-BNE-KUL. However, it adds at least 90 minutes of transit time either inbound or outbound. Pax ex-BNE and ex-SYD have many airlines to choose from for flight to Europe. Doubt they will be happy to spend more time traveling. In the long term, it will cannibalize ex-SYD and to BNE load and yield, and consequently effecting load and yield to and from Europe.

 

Didn't MH used to do KUL-SYD-MEL-KUL run a few years back? Or was it KUL-MEL-SYD-KUL? Of course they are not allowed to carry domestic pax whilst on the MEL-SYD or SYD-MEL run.

[Keith T 2]

Didn't MH used to do KUL-SYD-MEL-KUL run a few years back? Or was it KUL-MEL-SYD-KUL? Of course they are not allowed to carry domestic pax whilst on the MEL-SYD or SYD-MEL run.

 

It was KUL-SYD-MEL-KUL. But there were also direct dailies to both MEL and SYD in their own right IIRC.

 

I think domestic pax are allowed if they're on an incoming international connection. Not too sure about this, but I managed to book SYD-MEL on UA as a connection from SIN-SYD on SQ.

Edited December 9, 2006 by Keith T

[Sim Lim Shen 0]

From the schedule, Australian capacity will be reduced a bit. Is that due to the Southern winter season? Or MH is also starting to get rid of the B744? I am quite surprised they will not be offering any F class service to MEL next year.

[Keith T 2]

I am quite surprised they will not be offering any F class service to MEL next year.

 

That came in the footsteps of TG dropping F to MEL.

We're more a leisure destination it seems.

Edited December 9, 2006 by Keith T

[Richard A 0]

The scheduling for KUL-LHR is rather messy. 4pw MH8 (morning departure) and 3pw MH4 (noon departure). I guess that'd be to offer connections for the morning arrivals for BNE, MEL, SYD, PER?

 

That came in the footsteps of TG dropping F to MEL.

We're more a leisure destination it seems.

 

Thanks for the warm Keith!

 

There are still quite a few F seats sold daily to MEL from QF, SQ, CX, and EK. So perhaps MH was just having a hard time getting the business travellers?

 

Looks like MH needs the 77W quite badly.

[KK Lee 5]

 

On one hand, MH is trying to rationalize routes to improve yield; on the other hand, new route will only attract low yield pax.

 

On Kangaroo route, typical SQ transit time at SIN is 2 hours. MH at KUL is 3 hours. Is MH admitting MAB is less efficient?

 

By adding a further 90 minutes to a 21 hours journey (EUR-KUL-SYD-BNE-KUL-EUR) may be acceptable to budget travelers. Believe most premium pax have better things to do than strapping themselves in the auliminium tube.

 

No doubt, MH operated KUL-SYD-MEL-KUL previously. What was the load and yield ex-SYD and to MEL on this flight?

 

Likewise for MH KUL-MLE-CMB-KUL route; unless the fare difference with UL is huge, there is no reason why I should spend extra 3 hours to reach CMB, so UL is the preferred airline to CMB.

 

Don’t see why premium pax will choose MH. Eventually, MH will have no choice but to attract low yield holiday makers to fill their seats.

 

Old wine in new bottle.

 

 

 

[Keith T 2]

So perhaps MH was just having a hard time getting the business travellers?

Looks like MH needs the 77W quite badly.

 

That could be true too. Someone from SQ once commented that the 77W is a better a/c for the MEL market than the 744.

[KK Lee 5]

 

Believe MH needs 200 to 240 seats aircrafts to serve routes that are too small for A333 and 772.

 

787 is ideal, may be MH should consider trade in A333 for 787.

 

 

[S V Choong 4]

Believe MH needs 200 to 240 seats aircrafts to serve routes that are too small for A333 and 772.

 

787 is ideal, may be MH should consider trade in A333 for 787.

 

I believe for the time being, MH has a type of craft that meets this requirement. The A332. Unfortunately MH is abusing them on short hauls. The A333's in-flight entertainment is poor.....

[Jessnor Arif 1]

I believe for the time being, MH has a type of craft that meets this requirement. The A332. Unfortunately MH is abusing them on short hauls. The A333's in-flight entertainment is poor.....

 

MH should upgrade of its A330 already.. or replace it with A300 or B767 for doing medium range...

 

 

and divide its B737 to 2 categories: International and Domestic. and upgrade the International categories.. at least with PTV. So that it' is consistent with its whole product.. It would be good if it can be done during the B737 Replacement... for Domestic flight B737 current configuration is enough.

 

[Min Chun 0]

- MEL becomes 2x daily 772, currently 1 744 + 1 772.

 

Richard.

Yeah, will get B772's safety card then instead oif geting B774's again

[Seth K 3]

MH should upgrade of its A330 already.. or replace it with A300 or B767 for doing medium range...

and divide its B737 to 2 categories: International and Domestic. and upgrade the International categories.. at least with PTV. So that it' is consistent with its whole product.. It would be good if it can be done during the B737 Replacement... for Domestic flight B737 current configuration is enough.

Yeah, like DL, the 737 will get PTV, pretty sweet! Replacing 333 with 300 and 767 will do no good! 333 is better than those 2 airplanes, they might want to consider 787, which is long overdue

[Jessnor Arif 1]

Yeah, like DL, the 737 will get PTV, pretty sweet! Replacing 333 with 300 and 767 will do no good! 333 is better than those 2 airplanes, they might want to consider 787, which is long overdue

 

oo you must mean 787-300 is it? in that case you are right.. wide body short medium range... perfect replacement for A333 and A332. previously I thought you mean 787-800 so it is sort of the same abuse I think...

[Sandeep G 1]

oo you must mean 787-300 is it? in that case you are right.. wide body short medium range... perfect replacement for A333 and A332. previously I thought you mean 787-800 so it is sort of the same abuse I think...

 

787-800 and -900 are ideal for replacing the old A330s and possibly even the 777s - Although, I think the 777 fleet in MAS should be replaced with newer models like the 772LR, 77W, etc.. Fleet should be standardised.