Qexonial From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 84 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2884 times:
I knew it that somehow, one Singaporean airline will fly back to KCH. Silkair will be flying their A319/A320 4X weekly. But I'm shocked that BKI wasn't chosen as well. I mean SIN-KCH is daily on MH but SIN-BKI is only 3X weekly. Anyone has a take on that?
And apart from that, does anyone know the load factors on the SYD-KCH MH 142 flight? I wish to know, so as next time, I might just use that flight!
Ex_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1436 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 2777 times:
This is a newly-signed tripartite codeshare involving MH, MI and SQ, and it will involve operations to KCH, BKI, PEN and LGK. All three carriers will place their codes on one another's flights between SIN and those four points. Apparently KUA may come into play as well (good luck, I say... SQ, MH and MI all tried KUA/SIN and failed).
IIRC when SQ flew to both BKI and KCH, KCH had slightly better operations (read = less losses). At the time, SQ was flying to BKI/KCH with severe restrictions - they could only operate 2x/week, and no more than 30% of the paxs could be Malaysian passport holders. Not only was it difficult to operate a profitable services with such low frequencies, it was also difficult to enforce the latter condition. When SQ withdrew from KCH and BKI, MI did not start the routes because of these restrictions.
KEno From Malaysia, joined Feb 2004, 1842 posts, RR: 27
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 2748 times:
MI/MH codeshare has been in place for quite sometime now, but with SQ would be something new. Flights to LGK & KCH and (hopefully) BKI & KUA are/will be operated by MI, which SQ codeshares on. Not sure if MH would ever place their flight numbers on SQ-operated flights, and vice versa; not until an open sky agreement is signed in a few years' time.
Instead of KUA, perhaps MI can venture into TGG (Kuala Terengganu). Islands in that state, especially Redang are very popular with Singaporeans. When Redang airstrip was opened last year, it was said that Berjaya Air will fly to/from XSP (Seletar) as well, but there's still no news on that.
Ryanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4770 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 2688 times:
So far there is no mention if Silkair will operate into Kuching with those old restrictions. With the warming of bilateral relations, lets hope those restrictions get lifted soon. MAS is a reputable carrier and they have certainly proved themselves within the last few years, so no need to be afraid of competition anymore.
Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
Ex_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1436 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 2550 times:
Quoting Ryanair!!! (reply 4): So far there is no mention if Silkair will operate into Kuching with those old restrictions.
My understanding is that they are removed.
Quoting KEno (reply 3): Instead of KUA, perhaps MI can venture into TGG (Kuala Terengganu).
SQ started KUA, BKI and KCH all at the request of the respective state governments, but unfortunately none of these services lasted. Apparently the Pahang government is again trying to ask for services to SIN. Who knows, if the Terengganu government made enough noise....
Quoting Qexonial (reply 0): But I'm shocked that BKI wasn't chosen as well. I mean SIN-KCH is daily on MH but SIN-BKI is only 3X weekly. Anyone has a take on that?
MAS777 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 1999, 2937 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2471 times:
MAS and SIA have a difficult relationship especially on the 'Domestic' sectors.
Traditionally Singapore was a 'domestic' point and socially remains so, but as part of the separation of Malaysia-Singapore Airlines in 1972 - MAS was dealt the task of continuing 'domestic' routes whilst SIA was designed to concentrate on International sectors.
For decades, MAS operated frequent services between various points in Malaysia into Singapore to feed into SQ's International network as part of this agreement which dates back to the late 1960s. However, with cooler ties during the 1990s, together with Malaysia Airlines' large expansion internationally - MAS was under pressure to redirect domestic passengers via Kuala Lumpur and a whole new airport was thus built at Sepang as part of this masterplan. MAS management thus drastically reduced capacity on its Singapore feeder flights - and personally I think quite rightly so.
However, there still remains strong demand for most sectors between Malaysian airports and Singapore and thus this code-share could be a good answer as both nations should continue to work together on these important links for social, business and political reasons.
btw KFly - MAS and SIA were pioneers in the code-sharing world, together with BOAC, Qantas and other Commonwealth airlines, as many flights between London and commonwealth states operated on a 'code-share basis albeit under a different guise in those days.
MAS and SIA commenced joint operations in 1937 as a single airline before splitting in 1972 but continue to operate the KUL-SIN shuttle as a 'joint-service' (as the term of code-sharing had not been born) until this very day.
Econojetter From Malaysia, joined May 2001, 430 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2421 times:
I recall that there was some talk of a liberal air transport agreement between the two countries. Are there any firm plans in that direction at this point? Might this be a prelude to open skies between the two countries? When will the likes of AirAsia, Valuair and Tiger Airways be allowed to compete on these routes (plus KUL-SIN)?
Airtropolis From Singapore, joined Apr 2000, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2412 times:
With regards to MAS777's post on SQ/MH, while Singapore may feel like a domestic point in MSA's network in terms of social and familial links between the 2 countries, it never was, as both Singapore and Malaysia were separate sovereign states at that time already. That is why the airline was named Malaysia-Singapore Airlines, as both governments had joint control of the airline.
The split of MSA came about because of a difference in priorities in the governments of the 2 countries, while Malaysia wanted to develop its domestic air network, Singapore was more keen on international links. The agreement between both governments at that time was that the Singapore side would get all the Boeing aircraft (707s, 737s), facilities at the then Singapore International Airport at Paya Lebar, the corporate headquarters and the computer system which was soon to be online at that time, as well as all the international routes from Singapore. This split was admittedly in favor of the Singapore side in material terms, which was why the Singaporeans made significant reparations to the Malaysian government to correct this inbalance.
We should thus see this split as being like a normal divorce, mutually agreed on by the 2 parties, with the Malaysians being compensated for any imbalance after the divorce.
Both airlines went on to function as separate companies, developing their individual networks, based on the priorities of their individual owner states. At no time was either airline a feeder airline of the other, apart from normal interline arrangements, common to all airlines.