Odie From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1641 posts, RR: 1 Posted (8 years 4 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5105 times:
With effective from April 1, 2005, Malaysia Airlines will fly its B744 to EWR and ARN instead of the B772. Pax load factor from EWR to ARN is around 60% (with about 60% of that traffic going onwards to KUL). The ARN-KUL leg is doing extremely well with pax load factor around 90% for December '04. Perhaps they should increase the frequency first before upgrading the equipment.
PS: Rome is going to be upgraded to B744 too come summer '05.
ZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5020 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 5012 times:
Is that because they want to keep it a 3 class service?
How many 772's are 2 class now?
Odie I always ask this hope it doesn't bother you.
How about AKL? Over the NZ winter it will see 3 744's and 4 772's a week, currently daily 744's. My question is will AKL remain a 3 class service year round? Personally I wouldn't be surprised if AKL eventually gets increased frequency and 772's used year round.
Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4954 times:
3 B772s are now 2 class.
Carfield. Actually, the first aircraft to be fitted with the new F and J, is one of the older ones in the B744 fleet as it undergoes its D check. Other planes will follow as they come in for C or D checks so generally the 'older' planes will be fitted first over the next 2 years. First B744 with the new F class will be out in around a month.
Odie, I too think they should increase frequency first before upgrading equipment. EWR-ARN sectors will see a drop in load factors again when a bigger aircraft is deployed. However, I think this could be due to lack of B777s which on top of more flying is also doing lots of A330 replacement flights as we lack crew to fly the A330s. If ARN-KUL flights seem to be in so much demand, I'd think it'd be better they operate extra flights that terminate at ARN and not go on to EWR using even the B744.
Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4922 times:
MH is already fare dumping so to speak ex-USA (LAX and EWR) from time to time. They even had introductory $99 one way to ARN from EWR! I suspect yields are still not up to acceptable level with that huge amount of cheap fares they are selling in Y.
Odie From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1641 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4377 times:
MH seems to be dedicating more B772s to Australia/regional routes that were previously served by B744s. For example, MH 72/73 to Hong Kong, MH124/125 to Perth and MH 148/149 to Melbourne.
ZK-NBT: AKL will still be served 3 weekly B744 and 4 weekly B772.
Flyguy1: As STT757 mentioned, all 3 airlines that fly from New York to Stockholm departs from Newark and none from JFK. MH has been operating from Newark since day one but they only switched its stopover city from Dubai to Stockholm late last year. Initially, MH was supposed to code-share with CO while MH is flying EWR-DXB-KUL. The code-share fell through but MH decided that it's best to operate in and out of Newark due to CO's domestic operation in EWR that can feed into MH's flights.
Perhaps, the best solution is for MH and CO to code-share on the EWR-ARN route, with MH operating daily on that route. It's going to be a win-win situation for both airlines as MH will have daily flights to ARN and EWR while CO is able to add a new destination in Europe without its own metal. What was previously a daily A333 flight between the two cities will soon be increased to 3 weekly B744, once daily A333 and B757 each.
AF022 From France, joined Dec 2003, 2081 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4258 times:
no one will use MH to connect to interior US points on CO if CO can offer online connections straight through.
that introductory fare is long gone. according to travelocity, MH's lowest fare of 404.00 is 100.00 more than LH
although MH might be at EWR because yields are higher than JFK, once CO enters the market they would be much better off moving to JFK, where there is no ARN service, and where DL has a strong presence (assuming MH might join SkyTeam at some point).
Flyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1691 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3632 times:
EWR's well served to Stockholm, with three airlines on that route starting this Summer (CO, SAS, MH).
I was referring to competition on NYC to Asia routes as to why EWR gets MH service, as opposed to JFK. JFK already has quite a few Asian carriers, with more coming. My assumption is that MH serve EWR since they do not have as much competition. (SQ, CO, and BR only airlines with Asian operations at EWR)
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16256 posts, RR: 52 Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3359 times:
"I was referring to competition on NYC to Asia routes as to why EWR gets MH service, as opposed to JFK. JFK already has quite a few Asian carriers, with more coming. My assumption is that MH serve EWR since they do not have as much competition. (SQ, CO, and BR only airlines with Asian operations at EWR)"
Technically you would have to include Air India and El Al's service into EWR since both are technically in Asia. Korean Air dropped EWR after 9-11, if Korean does not come back eventually I could see CO adding nonstop EWR-Seoul especially with their recent 7E7 order. Then there's the upcoming China route awards which CO has applied for both the '05 and '06 authorities to operate EWR-PEK and EWR-PVG.
Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10 Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2888 times:
That is because online booking is not yet available ex-ARN.
And how much is the fare to fly SAS? It's not fair to compare a non-stop to a connection flight which most of the time is cheaper. Not to mention MH is one of the best (or dare I say, the best) carrier ex-EWR for Y class pax except their FFP.
However, I am overall skeptical of MH's survivability on the EWR-ARN sector esp when CO comes online. Although CO will have inferior product and service, they have a stronger feed and base of customers in the US which is always an edge.
The Ticketor From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 434 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2416 times:
MAS IBF (internet booking facility) is being implemented in Europe soon. Europe is supposed to be included in February/March (i think, the notes from the meeting is at home). Some are already in the system though.
And as stated, the vast majority of pax ex EWR are bound for KUL.