MAS A380 - Fleet to be Retained

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Not really, Jet Airways was in financial difficulty at that time and was looking for opportunity to divest their B77W. Gulf Air and Turkish Airlines took up the offer. Jet Airways went on to cancel one of the B77W on order [the completed frame went to Abu Dhabi Amiri Flight], and converted another two B77W order to B737NG order.

 

The boat has sailed for MH to order B77W. The nearest slot that Boeing can offer MH would be August 2015 and it cost a USD305.6 million a pop. MH can hardly afford it. Maybe they can consider some early EK-machines when EK offloaded some of theirs. Even better, just order A350 since their EIS is in 2015.

 

The current B772ERs are killed by the new generation of A330-300. Some are heading for scrapping already.

 

Just to add, TG joined GF and TK bandwagon too in having a taste of 9W's B77Ws.

 

As at 31 December 2012, for the 777 family, Boeing has 365 frames of backlog and 298 of them are the B77W. So just imagine how long MH would have to wait if it places an order now.

[affendi osman 0]

 

Just to add, TG joined GF and TK bandwagon too in having a taste of 9W's B77Ws.

 

As at 31 December 2012, for the 777 family, Boeing has 365 frames of backlog and 298 of them are the B77W. So just imagine how long MH would have to wait if it places an order now.

Pardon my ignorance

but what is so great about 77W?

Edited January 23, 2013 by affendi osman

[Lock SH 0]

Approx 18 hrs fuel endurance, could carry ~ 440 pax (some of the EK's config), plenty of belly space, the operator could mix & match between payload and fuel. Apparently, 77W (and 77L) are the true star in ULR ops, at least until XWB comes into play.

 

 

[Josh T 0]

Oh, one more thing that MH needs to do - if A333s are going to replace B744s for the Aussie routes, there must be F class accommodation. Otherwise, product consistency will not be there on the kangaroo route.

I agree. All they need is just 1 row of F. They'll be able to fit 3 seats (1-1-1) but that would mean taking out 2 rows of J to accommodate it though.

[BC Tam 2]

All they need is just 1 row of F. They'll be able to fit 3 seats (1-1-1) but that would mean taking out 2 rows of J to accommodate it though.

Well, life is one big juggling game

Someone, somewhere, sometime along the line will have to decide if it's more likely to have a F pax (hopefully premium revenue generating) or having to turn away J class pax(es?)

We who are accustomed to cattle class are less of a headache I suppose - pay us peanuts or don't travel

Though on our recent EY adventure, we were invited to make an offer for an upgrade from Coral(Y) to Pearl(J), subject to said airline's accetance and T&C - brilliant piece of of marketing gimmick

Edited January 24, 2013 by BC Tam

[Josh T 0]

Well, life is one big juggling game

Someone, somewhere, sometime along the line will have to decide if it's more likely to have a F pax (hopefully premium revenue generating) or having to turn away J class pax(es?)

We who are accustomed to cattle class are less of a headache I suppose - pay us peanuts or don't travel

Though on our recent EY adventure, we were invited to make an offer for an upgrade from Coral(Y) to Pearl(J), subject to said airline's accetance and T&C - brilliant piece of of marketing gimmick

LOL! You will rarely find me in cattle class nowadays when it comes to long-haul travel...

[affendi osman 0]

LOL! You will rarely find me in cattle class nowadays when it comes to long-haul travel...

 

In most cases Josh.....

malaysians want to travel, but don't care about seats they are flying. as long as they can get from point A to point B, take photos, shopping....and update facebook status by adding some overseas place in it, and everybody will like the status....

 

so...I don't think 3 first class seats will be very economical these days.

 

in terms of crewing, they need 2 crews there, so extra crews needed only to man this 3 FRCL seats

[BC Tam 2]

.....

malaysians want to travel, but don't care about seats they are flying. as long as they can get from point A to point B, take photos, shopping....and update facebook status by adding some overseas place in it, and everybody will like the status....

In our case, priorities were/are:

1) get from point A to point B (disputed by wife, refer point C)

2) take photos (admittedly that slipped down priority list once apathy held traction)

3) shopping (wife's priority, not mine)

4) facebook - what status ?!

[KK Lee 5]

 

In most cases Josh.....

malaysians want to travel, but don't care about seats they are flying. as long as they can get from point A to point B, take photos, shopping....and update facebook status by adding some overseas place in it, and everybody will like the status....

 

so...I don't think 3 first class seats will be very economical these days.

 

in terms of crewing, they need 2 crews there, so extra crews needed only to man this 3 FRCL seats

 

 

From KUL to EUR, EY fare is from about RM3,000 to RM6,000; J fare range from RM6,000 to RM12,000. With the exception of lucky few that have gomen, organization or company to pay for their J fare, few Malaysians are willing to blow 2 to 4 weeks of their salary on J fare especially if they are travelling with family and have commitment on housing loan, car loan, credit cards repayment, kids education, etc. Some bean counters believe money saved could spend on hotel (more comfortable than lie flat bed), food (certainly superior than in-flight meal) and shopping. Of course, some insist to travel on J-class as cattle class are too lowly for them.

 

J fare is relatively low for Aussie, European and American salary vs Malaysian salary; naturally, more Aussie, European and American travel on J than Malaysians.

Edited January 24, 2013 by KK Lee

[H C Chai 4]

Terrible. I flew in to LHR on Friday on EK and landed at 13.35, but did not get off the plane till 15.15 - stands could not be vacated in time so we sat on the Tarmac staring at snow. Next day I flew our to JFK on BA and T5 was a huge mess- people in sleeping bags on the floor. Consider myself lucky as my flight was only delayed 4 hours (deicing related). Not fun

And there are still a lot of people who think Heathrow does not need a new runway... honestly... !!!

 

I bet you were sitting comfortably in J, or F, or R

Edited January 24, 2013 by H C Chai

[Suzanne Goh 0]

And there are still a lot of people who think Heathrow does not need a new runway... honestly... !!!

 

I bet you were sitting comfortably in J, or F, or R

It was awful regardless of class of travel.... But erm you guess correctly - was on an EK380 in F and at least the Belgian captain came out to chit chat with us and explain stuff. But yeah - we shut down all engines three times only to restart when we could move.

[sweekee 0]

As per 31JAN13 GDS inventory display, Malaysia Airlines from 01MAY13 introduces Airbus A380 service on Kuala Lumpur – Hong Kong route. The A380 operates MH072/073 service. The airline previously planned to introduce 3rd daily service from 15JUN13 (MH432/433), this remains unchanged for the moment followed by the operational aircraft changes.

 

MH072 KUL0915 – 1305HKG 380 D
MH432 KUL1540 – 1930HKG 738 D
MH078 KUL1915 – 2305HKG 738 D

 

MH079 HKG0845 – 1225KUL 738 D
MH073 HKG1445 – 1825KUL 380 D
MH433 HKG2030 – 0010+1KUL 738 D

 

resource:airline route

[Johan Z 0]

That's a big capacity gap between A380 and 738. At least A380 will be more competitive than old A330.

[flee 5]

Hopefully this is not another mistake on MH's part!

[zamim 0]

MAS management has been making mistakes since day one, so history will repeat itself.

[Isaac 0]

This is a very smart decision, IMHO. To deploy it to NRT or Australia is a bit of over stretch and it will face the kind of problem BI faced back in December 2012 if any one of their 388 goes wrong. Besides, HKG is a major financial centre and a big Oneworld hub. This decision to put the 388 on KUL/HKG makes a lot of sense

[flee 5]

MAS management has been making mistakes since day one, so history will repeat itself.

The mistake I meant was the mistake in loading the GDS. We had a premature disclosure last December!

 

See: http://www.malaysianwings.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=7280&page=133

[Mulyadir Fitri 0]

The flight is available for booking already. Tried dummy booking for travel in June and the total amount is RM878 vv. Is that a good deal? Base fare is very cheap (RM300++) but surcharges are insane. Really tempted to try the dugong.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Mulyadir Fitri

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

This could be a good thing for customers. MH fares on this route has always been high and that CX controls the majority of the market share. The extra capacity created with the deployment of the A380 will result in the followings:

 

- lower MH's fares for sure, hence makes it more competitive with CX's offering.

- if the product + fare are really good, MH can erode CX's market share on the route.

- if the fare difference is not too material and within tolerable margin with AK's offering, AK could be in serious danger. HKG might be another CMB waiting a repeat.

[Ruiz Razy 1]

This could be a good thing for customers. MH fares on this route has always been high and that CX controls the majority of the market share. The extra capacity created with the deployment of the A380 will result in the followings:

 

- lower MH's fares for sure, hence makes it more competitive with CX's offering.

- if the product + fare are really good, MH can erode CX's market share on the route.

- if the fare difference is not too material and within tolerable margin with AK's offering, AK could be in serious danger. HKG might be another CMB waiting a repeat.

 

If CX & MH coordinates well as a team ( after all this route is a code share service) , the third possible may happen .

[Amirul Mazlan 0]

This could be interesting. MH now can play the volume game while tip toeing with the right pricing. Can easily reduce AK's share on the same route. I would want to be on MH rather than AK. Very obvious choice.

[Kris Kim 0]

This is a very smart decision, IMHO. To deploy it to NRT or Australia is a bit of over stretch and it will face the kind of problem BI faced back in December 2012 if any one of their 388 goes wrong. Besides, HKG is a major financial centre and a big Oneworld hub. This decision to put the 388 on KUL/HKG makes a lot of sense

 

The last part of your statement also applies to NRT/MEL/SYD, all 3 of these "once proposed" destinations are major financial HUB's and are major OW HUB's of member airlines; JL & QF respectively.

 

The problem quite simply lies in MH's onboard hard product, especially on the Kangaroo route. The product will not be consistent in a premium pax's point of view, MEL/SYD-KUL will have the recliner seats whilst their LHR/CDG legs will be on lie flat seats on the A380. One would like to travel on the same product through out their entire journey, I for one would love to have lie flat seats from Australia to Europe. This will certainly put off potential OW premium customers (which Australia has a large base) from flying MH, they could alternatively fly on CX or QF instead to Europe.

[Jon M 0]

What aircraft will be deployed to Sydney once they retire B747?

[Johan Z 0]

A330 (and 777) to SYD.

[Kenn Leong 0]

Very sad that SYD doesn't get the A380. I think the 777 will be gone too later this year and only have the A333?