Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
KLM B77W First Destinations  
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13897 times:

KLM is taking delivery of its first B773ER aircraft at the end of February next year, and the first flights with the new aircraft have recently been loaded in the reservation systems. These are the details:

First flight:

KL791 AMS GRU on Sunday, March 02, 2008

Schedule for the first aircraft:

KL791/792 AMS GRU AMS on Tue, Thu, Sun
KL427/428 AMS DXB AMS on Mon, Wed, Fri, Sat

KLM's B77Ws, two of which will join the fleet early 2008, will be configured in a 35C/393Y configuration, with the WBC section identical to that of the B772ER. The economy cabin is supposed to feature the much dreaded 10-abreast configuration. The first two aircraft will be registered PH-BVA/B. Two more aircraft are set to join the fleet in 2009, while KLM is expected to make a follow up order for the B77W.

76 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLurveBus From Philippines, joined Mar 2007, 286 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13806 times:

10-abreast? Ouch. Well, if they have the same pitch as Emirates, they shouldn't have much complaints.

What I don't understand, though, is that there should be enough space between doors 1 and 2 to accomodate 42 WBC seats. Likewise, on the 747s, there's enough space upstairs to squeeze in 2 extra WBC seats. Is it KL's policy to have a limited C cabin to control the yields or something?


User currently offlineKLM685 From Mexico, joined May 2005, 1577 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13774 times:

Wow thanks for the info! Is there any special reason as to why GRU is their first destination with the 77W?

Let's see how the 10 abreast works out for KLM.

Quoting LurveBus (Reply 1):
Ouch. Well, if they have the same pitch as Emirates, they shouldn't have much complaints.

 checkmark 



KLM- The Best Airline in the World!
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13748 times:

Quoting LurveBus (Reply 1):
10-abreast? Ouch. Well, if they have the same pitch as Emirates, they shouldn't have much complaints.

 checkmark ...I prefer EK's 10-across with 34' pitch over 9-across with 32' pitch....that's just the pits.... yuck ...

Now...I now KL won't be bringing the B773ER's to SFO for now, but hopefully they might do a "fleet substitution"..now that would be nice.. biggrin 



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13609 times:

Quoting LurveBus (Reply 1):
10-abreast? Ouch. Well, if they have the same pitch as Emirates, they shouldn't have much complaints.

As I understand it they won't. It will have the standard 31" pitch.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13559 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Thread starter):
KLM's B77Ws, two of which will join the fleet early 2008, will be configured in a 35C/393Y configuration, with the WBC section identical to that of the B772ER.

I would have thought that KL would make their 77Ws one of their most premium configured aircraft, but at 428 PAX and ten-abreast in Economy with just 31" of seat pitch, that sounds like a sardine can configuration more suitable for lower yielding destinations in the Carribean.


User currently offlinePHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1198 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13531 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 4):
As I understand it they won't. It will have the standard 31" pitch.

Ridiculous  thumbsdown 
The KL product is definately detoriating, especially compared to AF. It's like deploying the 77W with COI seating on high-yielding routes. I hope KLM learns from this greedy mistake, as there is no way I am going to sit in a 10-abreast 777 with 31" (or 32") pitch - and I'm sure many people with me.
When making a quick calculation here and there I reckon the pitch will be slightly increased, unless they put a lot of dead space in the cabin.
Maybe KLM has observed that the new demographic trend is that people are getting thinner and smaller, but in fact I think they just want to copy the downsides of the EK product. This won't work.

IMHO this is a wrong decision, like keeping the M11 and not fitting the 747's with PTV. It's all penny-pinching to the max with no regard whatsoever to the customer. This strategy is only based on the weakness of others (a dreadful LHR, (at the time) lack of PTV at LH, fare-cutting and the loyalty of the Dutch customers). I hope that KLM realizes it's mistake when LH is finally able to boost it's long-haul fleet and ad some capable planes that actually can get somewhere with a decent load and PTV's in the back. A good example between proper- and mismanagement between AF on the one hand (777) and LH on the other hand (346). Now don't give me this stuff about the 346 once being a good plane, LH is still ordering them while the performance is proved to be inferior, so I don't buy that argument.
If LH fixes this, there are many people in the Netherlands that can use DUS as a starting point for their trip, and with current developments AMS is loosing it's top 5 position as European Mainport anyway, especially when you look at what KLM offers at the moment: near LCC-service levels on European routes with a laughable Europe-Select product, and an only average long-haul product with old M11's, 747's and next year the 77W with 10-abreast. Only the 332 stands out, as it is configured identical to AF, but the 77W's will be like the AF COI config if this all proves true; incredible.
The only hope I have is that KLM realizes this in time and decides to go ahead with 9-abreast with 32" inch, which is bad enough on itself but would already be an improvement over the current product, which is -let's face it, pretty cramped for a legacy carrier with the "status" like KLM.


User currently offlineBHMNONREV From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1368 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13517 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 4):
As I understand it they won't. It will have the standard 31" pitch.



Quoting LTU932 (Reply 5):
I would have thought that KL would make their 77Ws one of their most premium configured aircraft, but at 428 PAX and ten-abreast in Economy with just 31" of seat pitch, that sounds like a sardine can configuration more suitable for lower yielding destinations in the Carribean.

Not that it is a valid comparison, buy EK runs 49C/385Y on their two-class 77W with the 34" pitch in Y. KLM's sounds somewhat similar, but galley and lav configurations could alter a little. But it tells me that it should be considerably more than 31"...


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13482 times:

In regard to the exact cabin layout, a couple of issues are currently still under investigation, so the 35C/393Y (which would incidentally lead to exactly the same number of passengers for the B77Ws as for the 5 B744s in the fleet) although very likely, is not yet set in stone. From what I know, KLM is currently looking into the following issues:

* increasing the number of WBC seats from 35 to 42, although this would likely lead to the undesirable introduction of a second WBC cabin;
* setting up an economy class cabin with different seats pitches, which would feature 34" in the front cabin and 31-32" in the rear cabin, so as to accommodate elite frequent flyers and higher yielding economy fares in that front cabin;
* introduction of a pod-like seat in WBC, replacing the current lie flat seat, which has come in for a lot of criticism;

As far as the 10-abreast configuration goes, this looks to be a virtual certainty, although there are still some issues about what to do with the very rear of the aircraft. EK features a 2-4-2 configuration for the last couple of rows, but it looks as if KLM is looking to anyway squeeze one more seat (3-3-3 configuration) in those back rows.

It also seems that, in any case, the WBC cabin will continue to feature the abysmal middle seat in the 2-3-2 configuration, as, for reasons that are absolutely beyond me, this middle seat concept seems to be uncontested within the airline.

As for the introduction of the B77W on the AMS GRU route, this is one of KLM's better performing longhaul routes, for sure during the busy winter season. The deployment of the B744 has often been considered for AMS GRU, but the scheduling never really seemed to work out. I would not expect the B77W to stay on the AMS GRU route during summer 2008, when it is more likely that the two available B77W will be deployed to a combination of one longer and one shorter transatlantic route, such as SFO/YYZ.


User currently offlineKL577 From Netherlands, joined Oct 2006, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13427 times:

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 6):
Only the 332 stands out,

I thought the 772 is identically configured to the 332?

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 6):
and an only average long-haul product with old M11's, 747's and next year the 77W with 10-abreast.

I flew AMS-SIN last month with KLM on a 772 and returned KUL-AMS on MH with a 744. To be fair, I found the leg on KLM better then MH (which is supposed to have one of the best economy classes in the world). Food and drink service on KL was better, and especially drinks came more frequent, quality of AVOD is similar, while MH's plane was dirty and looking worn out. But then again I fly out of Nigeria on KLM every 2/3 months, and the food on Nigeria-outbound flights is abysmal. And indeed 10-abreast doesn't sound comfortable.

Quoting HB-IWC (Thread starter):
KLM is taking delivery of its first B773ER aircraft at the end of February next year, and the first flights with the new aircraft have recently been loaded in the reservation systems. These are the details:

So this effectively frees up a 772? Any rumours on new destinations, or will it be used for capacity increases?


User currently offlinePHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1198 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 13348 times:

Quoting KL577 (Reply 9):
I thought the 772 is identically configured to the 332?

No, the 332 has one more inch of pitch than the 772 (32 vs 31 inch). Besides that, the 2-4-2 config of the 332 is easily given the pax a more roomier look&feel than the 3-3-3 in the 772.
My claim is not that the KL product is bad, but it is just very average and I'd easily opt for connecting somewhere and not flying KL, when it means sitting in a 3-4-3 config on a 77W.
The plan of putting 3-3-3 seats in the rear of the 77W sounds very strange to me, because they already save room with one WBC cabin as compared to EK's cabin-layout. So they should easily fit all those seats in with a generous pitch of 34" in all rows.
A premium cabin is not a bad idea on itself; Finnair applies the same practise to it's M11; so you would buy a Take-Off fare and end up in the rear. Fair enough, but doesn't this involve a lot less flexibility when substitutions will have to be made? I mean, a 4 fleet "strong" 77W fleet, and seen the regular replacements of equipment at KL, isn't that asking for problems?


User currently offlineFlyEmirates From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 13335 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 5):
thought that KL would make their 77Ws one of their most premium configured aircraft, but at 428 PAX and ten-abreast in Economy with just 31" of seat pitch, that sounds like a sardine can configuration more suitable for lower yielding destinations in the Carribean.

Emirates on some aircraft such as A6-EBX have a total of 442 400Y/42J if thats not the ultimate sardine can then please tell me what is!

Dissapointed that KLM is going for 10 abreast, with a 31' inch pitch there must be quite a bit of room for disabled toilets,nice size galley at R4/L4 etc.

Having worked EK DXB-BKK-HKG recently with 400 onboard in Y class I have to say it is a nightmare..like a zoo onboard, especially as EK put minimum crew on 2 class 77W (2 down from 3 class). 3 galley operators-including supervisor (also have to go into cabin) and 5 crew to hand out 2 choices of hot meal and drinks to 400 pax in 133 mins on BKK-HKG.

Etihad I believe have 28J/350Y on 77W, now that is the ideal configuration, subsequently I travel with them as a preference over my employer.


User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13286 times:

Quoting FlyEmirates (Reply 11):
5 crew to hand out 2 choices of hot meal and drinks to 400 pax in 133 mins on BKK-HKG

Not to bash Emirates crew, but the airline really needs to figure out how to streamline your service better. Its almost amusing watching the inefficiencies on EK and QR especially as the crew struggle to get meal services done on relatively shorter legs. BA can hit hot breakfasts to a full flight on a 20 minute cruise time MAN-LGW run and I've seen other operators like AI manage to do full meals to 400+ on 90 minute sectors. 133 minutes is plenty of time to run a full service provided it is streamlined and planned better. Alas, both EK and QR are too proud to hire a consultant who can suggest where efficiencies can be found to make life not only easier for the crew - but to also give passengers an experience they will undoubtedly prefer to the current half-assed rush job.


User currently offlinePHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1198 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13263 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 8):
so the 35C/393Y (which would incidentally lead to exactly the same number of passengers for the B77Ws as for the 5 B744s in the fleet)

We all know the 77W will be the 744 replacement, so this must be the reason why KL is squeezing so many pax in the 77W. I don't see why AF isn't intervening in this practice and insisting adopting the AF cabin-layout minus the F cabin; if only for commonality purposes. It seems KL is making a number of quite irrational choices at the moment; I'm really puzzled about the current strategy, as it lacks consistency. One day flying on a 332 with 32" pitch in 2-4-2 and the next day being squeezed into the back of a 77W with 31" in 3-4-3 while paying the same fare; that is just asking for a lot of negative customer experiences and not being able to live up to expectations.


User currently offlineBHMNONREV From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1368 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13166 times:

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 10):
A premium cabin is not a bad idea on itself

Agreed, ala NW with the forward Y cabin of the A333, which has 2 more inches of pitch and power ports which the rear economy cabin does not have. The forward cabin is only bookable by elites until the day of departure, then first come, first served..

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 10):
I mean, a 4 fleet "strong" 77W fleet, and seen the regular replacements of equipment at KL, isn't that asking for problems?

Not to mention the frequent cancellations and overbooking KLM is notorious for....

Sorry this was not intended as a KLM bashing thread, but as someone earlier mentioned, the needs of the customer seem to be taking a back seat to profits...


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12407 posts, RR: 37
Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13059 times:

Presumably, they intend to do the same with the 772s then, which are currently nine abreast in Y class? That will mean that the A332s (and 747s) are considerably more comfortable.

A lot of pressure can be put on airlines in this way, with routes operated by the new types being highlighted, e.g. "avoid flying to Brazil with KLM, as you'll end up with a 10 abreast 777-300; better to fly with TAM/AF via CDG or Lufty via FRA", or alternatively, where they have two different types operating, e.g. JFK, "choose the A330 flight over the 77W". If this is sustained, it can help to "embarrass" an airline into changing its mind on configuration, particularly if it's pointed out that the other 2 (or 3, if you include AZ) major 777 operators in Europe operate 777s in nine abreast layout.


User currently offlinePHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1198 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13014 times:

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 15):
If this is sustained, it can help to "embarrass" an airline into changing its mind on configuration, particularly if it's pointed out that the other 2 (or 3, if you include AZ) major 777 operators in Europe operate 777s in nine abreast layout.

This is partly what I mean with offering a consistent service level.
The current product is already sub-standard, seat-wise, there are indeed 3 or 4 main 777 operators in Europe:
Y:
BA: 31" pitch in 3-3-3
KL: 31" pitch in 3-3-3
AZ: 32" pitch in 3-3-3
AF: 32" pitch in 3-3-3
J:
KL: lie-flat in 2-3-2
AF: lie-flat in 2-3-2
BA: flat-bed in 2-4-2
AZ: recliners in 2-2-2

KLM's long haul fleet will be composed of:

M11 in 3-3-3 no PTV 31"pitch
74M / 744 in 3-4-3 no PTV 31" pitch
77W in 3-4-3 with PTV 3?" pitch
772 in 3-3-3 with PTV 31" pitch
332 in 2-4-2 with PTV 32" pitch

Now it is not a problem on itself to use different equipment and config for different missions, but the problem lies in the inconsistency that is being offered when the 744, 772 and 77W will be rotated on the same destination.
For JFK you can reasonably expect a mix between 332, 74W, 772 and 77W; a total lack of consistency, easily disappointing the customer.

[Edited 2007-05-09 13:10:30]

User currently offlineAerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2683 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13005 times:

Quoting KL577 (Reply 9):
744. To be fair, I found the leg on KLM better then MH (which is supposed to have one of the best economy classes in the world).

Wow! Then you must've been on a very, VERY rare MH flight! My longhaul experience on KLM was the absolute worst on any airline I have ever been on. Seat-pitch, IFE, onboard "service", actual seating, boarding procedure - all absolutely abysmal. I will never fly them again. 10 abreast on the 777 doesn't bother me, provided that it has improved legroom, as others have mentioned.

MH's economy is a superb product and I am grateful for any airline that provides 34" pitch - so much so that I now actively seek them out. News of the KLM 77W config doesn't surprise me, to be honest, but does revalidate my vow to absolutely avoid KLM always.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12965 times:

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 16):
Now it is not a problem on itself to use different equipment and config for different missions, but the problem lies in the inconsistency that is being offered when the 744, 772 and 77W will be rotated on the same destination.
For JFK you can reasonably expect a mix between 332, 74W, 772 and 77W; a total lack of consistency, easily disappointing the customer.

But hasn't this always been the case with KLM? And with many other airlines as well, for that matter? The introduction of the B77W, which will not be replacing any other aircraft type, will only be extending a situation that has been going on for a long time. As it goes, the problem of product inconsistency has been somewhat mitigated with the retirement of the B767 and its vastly inferior cabins two months ago.

As much as I agree with you about the product inconsistency, this is hardly new. Currently, well before the introduction of the B77Ws, destinations like JFK (soon A332, B772, B74E, B744), YVR (A332 last winter, now MD11), YYZ (B744, B772), LAX (B74E, B772), SFO (MD11 last winter, now B744, next winter B772 and MD11), CAI (B74E, B772), DEL (MD11, B772, next winter B744) and NRT (B772, B74E, B744) are suffering from these large service gaps, not to talk about the ongoing B747 cabin retrofits, during which it is one's best guess whether a retrofitted or non-retrofitted aircraft will be deployed.

Sure enough, this situation has the potential of easily disappointing the customer, yet, looking at KLM's strategic moves over the past couple of years, I have long since accepted that customer satisfaction is taking a back seat to other considerations at KLM. The introduction of the B77W and its 'enhanced' - I'm pretty sure that's what the press release will state - configuration is only contributing to this overall atmosphere.


User currently offlinePHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1198 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12857 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 18):
But hasn't this always been the case with KLM? And with many other airlines as well, for that matter? The introduction of the B77W, which will not be replacing any other aircraft type, will only be extending a situation that has been going on for a long time. As it goes, the problem of product inconsistency has been somewhat mitigated with the retirement of the B767 and its vastly inferior cabins two months ago.

Yes, you are right HB-IWC. Of course every airline has large discrepancies in it's fleet. Alitalia and its 763 and 772 product, that are light years apart in terms of cabin comfort for example.
But the point is, with a parent company in Paris, it would make sense to standardize products in the future. A vision for the group as a whole. You might say that AF will be the premium brand and KL just an average carrier. Well, that's fine.

But then they upgrade the 332 to AF standards. OK, no big deal, as it's an improvement for the customer. But this is the first diversion from that strategy.

With the 772 they go back to industry averages; fine, sounds like a plan. It fits in the KL strategy and no wonder they are happy with this bird in the fleet.

The 744 was going to be fitted like the 772, but proved"impossible" at least unfeasible. This can happen of course, but why not replace it with 77W's that are on par in terms of cabin comfort? That would make sense in the corporate strategy.

Now, the M11 is kept until 2015, at least that's the plan, refitted cabins with 3-3-3 seating and PTV later on during the year, being deployed on COI-routes so to speak. Doesn't make sense, does it? The M11 cabin will be superior to the 744 and even 77W if your horror scenario proves true. The M11 on the COI routes is fine, but now there are talks of an early phase-out. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the M11 doesn't get PTV's at all. It's just to show it's not vision driven, but mere contingency management.

You say the 767 is gone because of inconsistency. Well; why phase-out 10 year old planes while sub-standard M11/744's aren't a problem. There is something seriously wrong with KL management; either you go for full service and get your product consistent along the entire fleet; of which improved WBC and 3-3-3 on the 77W would be a first step.
Or you decide to get sub-standard ala Iberia with no frills on European routes, and no frills on long haul. But then why replace the 767, add more 332's in AF config and refit the M11 with PTV? See my point?


User currently offlineKL577 From Netherlands, joined Oct 2006, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12843 times:

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 17):
Wow! Then you must've been on a very, VERY rare MH flight! My longhaul experience on KLM was the absolute worst on any airline I have ever been on. Seat-pitch, IFE, onboard "service", actual seating, boarding procedure - all absolutely abysmal. I will never fly them again. 10 abreast on the 777 doesn't bother me, provided that it has improved legroom, as others have mentioned.

Maybe, I was looking forward to fly MH (based on all the positive stories from A.net and other sites), but found it a very big disappointment. My main criterium to rate airlines is in fact food and drink service, and I found it very poor. The meals were tasteless and between dinner and breakfast (which is about 9 hours), they only came round with drinks two times.

But back to the topic, with the 77W and 2 additional 332 coming next year, are there any insights on new destinations, or will KLM use the extra capacity for nonstops to TPE and CGK?


User currently offlineAUA747 From Aruba, joined Jul 2006, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 12608 times:

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 17):
My longhaul experience on KLM was the absolute worst on any airline I have ever been on. Seat-pitch, IFE, onboard "service", actual seating, boarding procedure



Quoting LTU932 (Reply 5):
that sounds like a sardine can configuration

Can't agree more. IMO I think KL has a the most beautiful look then any other airline. However, their inflight service including seat pitch is very disappointing. Last time I flew KL long haul was about 5 yrs ago AUA-AMS on the MD11 which made me feel like a sardine can. For the last 5 yrs, I take CO via EWR or IAH which gives you a much better service and more kilo allowance. KL to the Caribbean gives a total of 20kg (44lbs) baggage allowance and if you exceed this they will charge you a bit over 30 euro per each additional kg, while most other carriers have a baggage allowance of 25 kg (55lbs) per suitcase, max of 2. Personally, I don't understand why.
Also, the dutch is the avg tallest person in the world, shouldn't KL take this into consideration when considering the seat pitch?

However, I have to say that my experience with their inter-europe flight was very nice.

HB-IWC, on another note, since you are very familiar with KL's operation you might be able to know this. By the end of this year AUA will do some work on its runway which will shortened the runway for a few months. There are rumors that since KL is already on a weight restriction with its MD11 when taking off out of AUA , KL is considering sending either the A330 or B777 to AUA during those months. Do you know anything about this?


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3161 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 12556 times:

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 6):
f LH fixes this, there are many people in the Netherlands that can use DUS as a starting point for their trip, and with current developments AMS is loosing it's top 5 position as European Mainport anyway

Eh, you suggest people should use DUS for a long-haul trip? Then you'll almost always need a connection at another airport (LHR, FRA or CDG?) to get your long-haul flight. From the Randstad, add 2 hours extra driving time and it's a whole longer trip. And: the LH in-flight product in economy isn't special either; to fly BA you need to transfer at LHR (have fun) and when customers decide to fly AF, there is no problem for KLM either.

I also do not agree with you on the correlation between KLMs in-flight product and the fact that AMS will soon be the no. 5 airport in Europe. How do you see this relation? The growth of AMS is limited by the political-environmental limits, whereas MAD has plenty of room to growth with it's new runways and T4. If AMS was able to grow as much as MAD (and would be able to guarantee it to the airlines that need to invest) it would be bigger than it's now.

DUS will not take so much traffic from AMS. Not because that market isn't there, but simply because DUS is even more capacity-limited than AMS and only has very few capacity left at the good times.


User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 12503 times:

I fly AMS-SIN-AMS at least once a year, normally on SQ. Next month I'll fly KLM on their 777 for the first time and I wonder if comfort will compare to the SQ seats. The KLM (and SQ) 744's are a bit cramped and the KLM 744's have no personal IFE, so I hope this will be better with the T7. If KLM will ever switch to 10 abreast, I'll immediately ditch KLM as an option and go back to SQ as first (& only?) choice and pay a few €10's more. 10 abreast? brrr... Imagine having a big person next to you for 12 hours...  scared 

E


User currently offline747433 From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 12503 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Thread starter):
will be configured in a 35C/393Y

KL should be able to offer this config with 9 abreast Y seating at 31" provided galleys are kept to a minimum.


25 PHKLM : People living in the catchment area of DUS could start their trip out of DUS; people in the Randstad area could simply connect on any other carrier t
26 Emirates029 : I never get the fuss over how many seats there are in a row i.e. 9 vs 10 abreast. Maybe I'm not a very wide person, but give me more seat pitch over l
27 Jfk777 : 7 accross in Business and 10 abreast on a 777 in coach in BAD. KLM should know better and have 6 accross in BIZ in the 777 and 9 in coach. KLM could d
28 Jaysit : While the 31" pitch on KLM is horrible and feels far worse than AF's 31" pitch, the inflight service on KLM far exceeds AF in Economy. The IFE is bet
29 JRadier : Right..... so first it's sub-standard (tho it looks to me it's more on the low side of average, not sub-standard), and then it's average again? Tho y
30 Joost : I have the impression that for KLM, in order to survive with their extensive network, cutting costs is a lot more important than it's argued in the t
31 Gigneil : Um, the 777-300ER might be better, but the 346 is a fantastic aircraft. NS
32 Blast : I so agree here. Also, I will be flying to JFK in September and being from Amsterdam myself, I really will not look at flights originating anywhere e
33 IL76 : Maybe you are not wide, but in general, chances on having a very large man sitting next to you are a lot higher than having a skinny little asian nei
34 PHKLM : Certain KLM planes are definately sub standard. I'd be ashamed recommending KLM, and having him end up in a 74M without decent IFE and whatsoever for
35 JRadier : yet you start about the 777 in the post I was referring to.
36 PHKLM : Correct. To clarify: Do I think the current 772 config is sub-standard? For C, yes, a middle-seat is doubtful at least. For Y, no, I think it is at p
37 JRadier : Yet it stacks up pretty good in your list, especially with BA 2-4-2. Can't respond to it from a passenger POV tho. Have to agree here, but it might h
38 Jaysit : Yeah, but a 2-3-2 on most carriers with their semi-lie flat seats can't touch BA's unique 2-4-2 in J. I would actually call BA's configuration more o
39 Post contains images PHKLM : Trying to get us utterly confused, don't you
40 Viscount724 : Not me, but it helps if you're not too tall. I was on 2 BA 772s a month or so ago in Y, both close to full, and couldn't imagine squeezing in one mor
41 Incitatus : I am not fond of 10-abreast in the 777, but for those criticizing KLM, think again. Coach is uncomfortable no matter what. It can only be good on an e
42 2wingtips : Great. Fantastic it may be, but success is derived from Orders. 346 orders are virtually zero now and have been for quite a while. The 773ER has deci
43 Jacobin777 : EK seems to pack 'em in on many flights....it can't be too bad, otherwise pax would revolt.....I have spoken with many people who have flown EK and p
44 Mindscape : Sorry to ask, but in which way do AF and KL A332 are the same ? AF A332 : 40J 179Y KL A332 : 30J 221Y Do galleys and lavatories are located at the ex
45 Joost : IMO, they can't. They do not have the highest possible profit-generating home market like AF, BA or LH. Although connecting people can be great busin
46 LarSPL : @ Joost, KLM can not differentiate to much from AF, otherwise their markets will not complete each other. The big win is that a pax from A to D can no
47 PHKLM : Exactly. And it might even be the case that the KLM brand name disappears. Or at least integration is taken to the next level in order to reap the ad
48 HB-IWC : As far as I know, the nonstop terminators to AUA will be cut for that period of time, and flights will refuel elsewhere in the region before heading
49 Post contains links Kappel : I just saw on www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl that KLM will be selling Y seats with extra pitch (most likely the emergency exit seats) for EUR 50 extra per fl
50 PHKLM : They are moving more and more to some kind of a LCC model when it comes to generating additional revenues: because in the same article states that lu
51 SK601 : EXTRA luggage allowance, which will be cheaper than paying the overweight fee at the airport.
52 KL577 : This already exists, but you have to call the reservations center. The change is now that you can book it online.
53 PHKLM : Yes, extra allowance. Sorry that I created the impression that KL is changing its policies; but what I mean with LCC-techniques is searching for addi
54 GFFgold : I don't know anything about TPE but non-stop AMS-CGK would be suicidal. Average load on the CGK-KUL leg is so poor that KL do all manner of cheap dea
55 HB-IWC : KLM will take delivery next year of at least 3 additional widebody aircraft (1 A332 and 2 B77W) and these aircraft will be uniquely used for network
56 Bmacleod : Hope to see KLM 77W in YYZ, not sure about YUL....
57 Post contains links PHKLM : You can find an article by the famous Dutch writer Leon de Winter on http://www.elsevier.nl/opinie/weblog...rtnr/150326/weblogid/59/index.html Sorry,
58 HECA : Which other carriers, next to EK, offer 10-seats abreast in the 77W?
59 Viscount724 : Chiina Southern, also certain AF aircraft that operate to French territories in the Caribbean and Reunion in the Indian Ocean. TG also has 10-abreast
60 PHKLM : AF to start with, but these planes are only deployed on low-yielding routes in the Caribbean and Indian Ocean.
61 JRadier : While discussing this column is not very relevant for our english friends, I do feel he is overreacting. I've flown AMS-USA (including the mentioned
62 Jfk777 : Air France may want to operate KLM as a cheaper version of a full service European airline, but doing so and not calling KLM an LCC are two different
63 HB-IWC : The B77W is a virtual certainty for AMS YYZ and highly unlikely for AMS YUL, although one can always expect the unforeseen sub at YUL, at least as lo
64 Kappel : What is the seat pitch on these Caribbean 77W's of AF? Anybody here have any experience with them? I'm just curious because it may be a preview of th
65 Post contains links PHKLM : The 77W in COI config consists of: 14 C seats in 2-3-2 36 Alizé / Premium Economy seats with 36" pitch in 3-3-3 422 Y seats with 31" pitch in 3-4-3
66 Post contains images Cba : Agreed. I'd think that KL, like AF would want to make these new birds the flagship of the fleet with a fantastic new product in both F and J. Unfortu
67 Hardiwv : GRU deserves to be the launching destination of KL's B77W. This morning I arrived in AMS with KL791 in WBC from GRU and the scene is always the same:
68 HB-IWC : The high load factors is one of the reasons that the B77W will be launched to GRU. However, for the past couple of weeks the AMS GRU sector (KL791) h
69 LipeGIG : Is the same as TP.. loads and yields on Europe-Brazil flights during the last two weeks are really low (about 50 to 70% with some flights with 35%),
70 HB-IWC : I don't think KLM will keep the B77W on the AMS GRU route during the Norther Summer 2008. By the end of March 2008, there will be 2 B77Ws in the flee
71 Hardiwv : Correct. That's why I am not in favour of KL deploying the B77W to GRU which means a boost in Y seats. In my view, KL B747 would provide the perfect
72 HB-IWC : Well, 2007 is not yet over, so there's still some time for a surprise announcement with regard to the upcoming winter schedule. KLM has some non-allo
73 Hardiwv : I dont think Brazilian authorities would want to limit the number of flights NL-Brazil to 7 for each country. The current trend shows that Brazil has
74 HB-IWC : In that case, I could really envisage KLM effectively starting a second flight, and I know that they have been looking at options in the region. They
75 PHKLM : That would be great, as I really hope the ties between the Netherlands and Argetnina will become stronger in the future. There is a lot of interest f
76 HB-IWC : AMS EZE would be possible for the KLM B772ER, because, although longer in distance than any of KLM's current B772ER flights (the longest are SIN, LIM
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Easyjet First Destinations Outside EU! posted Wed Mar 1 2006 11:03:09 by HBDAN
KLM Fokker 50 Destinations posted Thu Feb 23 2006 02:29:41 by KLMyank
Video KLM A330 First Arrival Eham posted Fri Aug 26 2005 16:05:07 by Fkruiver
A380 Delivery And First Destinations posted Mon Dec 27 2004 17:15:51 by WindowSeat
KLM's First 777 Destinations. posted Fri Feb 7 2003 00:14:54 by Skippy777
KLM Cargo Destinations posted Thu May 3 2007 18:44:48 by KL577
KLM Destinations In Asia posted Fri Mar 23 2007 00:04:35 by Qazar
KLM's First 737NG With Winglets! posted Tue Mar 6 2007 03:18:32 by AirplaneFan
KLM Flies 777 To JRO For First Time posted Tue Jun 6 2006 21:14:57 by Omoo
KLM's New Code Share Destinations In China posted Mon Jun 5 2006 21:16:48 by 777way