Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Mohd Azizul Ramli

MAS A380 - Fleet to be Retained

Recommended Posts

I also think the sudden inclusion of CDG as one of MH's A380 routes has something to do with the recent QF-EK engagement. Hopefully the appropriate MH managers behind the scene have managed to secure AF's and BA's traffics divorced by QF. I have flown MH on the B772 to CDG and back when they have started daily services into the airport and the loads both in J and Y were very good.

 

The double daily A380 to LHR might have something to do with MH's oneworld inception, in which LHR will acts as a major feed to MH. It is also a widely known fact that flight MH 1 (currently operated by the B744 and the now shelved plan B772 post 25 November 2012) is more deserving the A380 compared to flight MH 3 which is already being served by the A380 since 2 July 2012.

 

Sure enough all the other destinations previously announced as A380 routes - PEK (confirmation released [to be 2 daily A333]), MEL and SYD - will not be seeing the aircraft after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SYD, NRT & MEL won't be seeing the A380's anymore according to the latest GDS display, it seems MH is throwing away kangaroo traffic by merely just placing regional aircraft to MEL & SYD, their A330's are no match to SQ, QF, TG & EK's flagship A380 services. Much to the excitement of OW ff's in Australia they are now only disappointed by the latest decision, many were waiting to fly with MH once they joined OW.

 

MEL has x2 SQ A380, x1 EK A380 & x1 QF A380 onwards to Europe

SYD has x2 SQ A380, x1 EK A380, x1 QF A380 & x1 TG A380* onwards to Europe

 

Not sure how MH will be able to compete with that, also harder for MH is QF OW ff's can simply hop onto EK to earn points and bypass MH completely to Europe. The A380 services would have helped MH to gain some passengers and would have made it more attractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's very low fleet utilization if the A380 is only serving LHR twice daily and daily CDG (the current A380 utilization is already low as it is - with one of the A380 sitting at KUL for 15+ hours!).

 

A380 departures from KUL:

1 mid morning for MH 4

2 late evening for MH 2/20

 

A380 arrivals into KUL:

2 early morning from MH 3/21

1 mid afternoon from MH 1

 

Could definitely fit another HKG and NRT rotation for the 6 A380s. 3 A380s can do the twice daily LHR runs, 1.5 is needed for daily CDG run and 1 is needed for the daily NRT (MH 88/89).

Edited by Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a pizza hut order delivery, order, then arrived in couple of hours... I really thought the route and load to Australia is more important... how sad..

 

So they would rather let SQ to feed the passengers then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a pizza hut order delivery, order, then arrived in couple of hours... I really thought the route and load to Australia is more important... how sad..

 

So they would rather let SQ to feed the passengers then...

 

Of course not. In the business world people plan ahead and if their business plan and studies are able to justify it. Then they go and buy it. Airlines do acquire more aircraft of the same type as they realise the benefit of it. For eg. CX and SQ ordered more 77W after realizing the benefit and efficiency of it.

 

Seems like the long term vision at SQ is much better than the flip flopping style management. Perhaps they shouldn't have made the announcement earlier and change their mind later on. This is an embarrassment for themselves and seems like we could only take their statements a a grain of salt.

Edited by S V Choong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Australian travellers are pretty upset, then again they might seek after refund...

 

Haha, I think you may have overestimated the importance of MH, KUL and A380 in the Australian aviation market.

 

In Australia, we are blessed by the abundance of choices and competitions - namely QF, SQ, DJ/VA, EK, QR, EY, CX, VS, NZ, KE, TG, VN, BI and UA . Most Australian travellers to Europe do not fly into KUL for transit. Most of us chose SIN, HKG, BKK and DXB when flying westward and LAX eastward. For A380 travellers, they can always choose SQ, QF, EK and I believe TG soon. For rare aircraft types, we can opt for EY (A345/346), VS' A346 and QR's 77L. All of which have better product than MH if they are not in the same par.

 

For the average Joe public, the A380 is just another biggish aircraft. Why would we be upset when MH fares are anything but cheap? :)

Edited by S V Choong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, I think you may have overestimated the importance of MH, KUL and A380 in the Australian aviation market.

 

In Australia, we are blessed by the abundance of choices and competitions - namely QF, SQ, DJ/VA, EK, QR, EY, CX, VS, NZ, KE, TG, VN, BI and UA . Most Australian travellers to Europe do not fly into KUL for transit. Most of us chose SIN, HKG, BKK and DXB when flying westward and LAX eastward. For A380 travellers, they can always choose SQ, QF, EK and I believe TG soon. For rare aircraft types, we can opt for EY (A345/346), VS' A346 and QR's 77L. All of which have better product than MH if they are not in the same par.

 

For the average Joe public, the A380 is just another biggish aircraft. Why would we be upset when MH fares are anything but cheap? :)

hence the decision for MH to not send A380 there is wise...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Malaysia Airlines Cancels Planned A380 Australia Service in NW12

by JL

Update at 1350GMT 05OCT12

As per 05OCT12 GDS inventory display, Malaysia Airlines has cancelled planned Airbus A380 service to Australia. In addition, planned Boeing 747-400 retirement is also postponed till Feb 2013, which continues to operate service to Sydney.

Details:

 

Kuala Lumpur – Melbourne Planned A380 service on MH129/128 from 01MAR13 is cancelled. Service to maintain 2 daily A330-300 service

MH129 KUL1015 – 2110MEL 333 D

MH149 KUL2210 – 0905+1MEL 333 D

MH128 MEL0045 – 0605KUL 333 D

MH148 MEL1500 – 2020KUL 333 D

Kuala Lumpur – Sydney Planned A380 service on MH123/122 from 25NOV12 is cancelled. In addition, Malaysia Airlines has revised planned Boeing 747-400 retirement date, which the 747-400 continues to operate MH123/122 until 28FEB13 (01MAR13 from SYD)

MH141 KUL0900 – 1955SYD 772 D

MH123 KUL2250 – 0945+1SYD 744 D

MH122 SYD1540 – 2050KUL 744 D

MH140 SYD2155 – 0320+1KUL 772 D

MH123/122 from 01MAR13 (02MAR13 from SYD) operates with Boeing 777-200ER.

MH141/140 from 07MAR13 operates with Airbus A330-300 (This plan remains unchanged)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or a long long shot will be Emirates persuaded Qantas who then persuaded MH not to send A380 there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or an even longer shot - the people in MAS finally woke up to possibility that EK/QA tie up will provide something far superior and cost effective than what MH can possibly afford to provide at the moment. So, management balls shrunk a few sizes and common sense prevailed - no point sending over a bus when all can fit into a kancil :)

Does that sound too far fetched ?

(I mean about the 'waking up' and 'common sense' parts :))

Edited by BC Tam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could definitely fit another HKG and NRT rotation for the 6 A380s. 3 A380s can do the twice daily LHR runs, 1.5 is needed for daily CDG run and 1 is needed for the daily NRT (MH 88/89).

HKG may be but not NRT. NRT is too far and they can easily run into problems should things go disarray.

 

 

I think the Australian travellers are pretty upset, then again they might seek after refund...

If they did pay a premium to fly on MH 388, then yes. They should. Just a few months ago, the LHR flight operated by 388 always seemed to be much more expensive than the 744 flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HKG may be but not NRT. NRT is too far and they can easily run into problems should things go disarray.

 

Not really. 3 needed for the twice daily LHR turns, 1.5 needed for the CDG turn, 1 needed for the NRT turn and 0.5 needed for the HKG turn. There are still a lot of ground time for the A380 at KUL.

 

The three 380s can run MH 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> 1 -> 2 rotation (still with about 3-5 hours ground time in KUL between turns). Two A380s can run MH 20 -> 21 -> 72 -> 73 -> 21 (with about 4-5 hours ground time between 73 -> 21 turn) and the last 380 frame can do solely MH 88/89 turn with about 6 hours ground time in KUL.

 

Not many airlines have an extra A380 sitting around whole day just in case of irrops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very disappointing news that MH is no longer sending the A380 to SYD and MEL. However, sending the A380 to CDG more than makes up for it. Flying to LHR is always more expensive than CDG and I love flying to CDG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang! Did anyone booked tickets on the A380 to SYD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HKG may be but not NRT. NRT is too far and they can easily run into problems should things go disarray.

 

Couldn't agree more. Would imagine the load on HKG should be better than to NRT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang! Did anyone booked tickets on the A380 to SYD?

 

Yes, I did, in Jan 2013. Anyway, on positive side I still have the chance to fly MH B744 before it retires

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH now have the operating cost numbers of the A380. Perhaps the CASK for the A380 is far superior to that of the B772.

 

Also note that MH introduced the A380 on their less popular flights. Maybe they noticed that bookings shifted to the A380 flights from the more popularly timed ones. As such, they should have no problems filling A380s on a double daily KUL-LHR service.

 

With the KUL-CDG also scheduled for A380 operations, MH is using their equipment for real long haul flights (sectors above 10 hours flying time). As such, the operating economics should be very good. This should help MH cut its losses.

 

Now the only decisions left would be what to do with all those surplus B744s and B772s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget MH has already opened up the the sales and bookings for A380 flights to SYD and MEL with higher fare, passengers who have made the booking are now told they won't fly on the brand new big jumbo would definitely need some compensation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Couldn't agree more. Would imagine the load on HKG should be better than to NRT.

 

Did they not recently downgraded one of the daily flights to B738? There should be a lot of happy passengers if they upgraded it to an A380 :)

 

I still find it hard to believe they are sending B738 to HKG, especially CX has twice as many flights and all are operated by wide bodies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...