Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Philippine Al To Order 100 Planes  
User currently offlinebreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1920 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 18725 times:

It looks like that Philippine Al.' s owner, Lucio Tan, has found enough money to renew Philippine Al. fleet.
100 new planes, both medium and long haul, are in the plans.
For Philippine Al. and AirPhil Express.
Apart from the money, a key point is to get out of the EU black list and to win traffic approval from the US.
London, Paris, Madrid, New York, Chicago and Miami are the potential international destinations.
Philippine Al. intends to deal more than before with Boeing. A tactical comment before a call for tender I assume.

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7389 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 18508 times:

Yay for PAL. I flew their 744 RP-C8168 yesterday, and it was very basic onboard. I still like flying them though. I really hope the best for them.

User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 18257 times:

Quoting breiz (Thread starter):
Philippine Al. intends to deal more than before with Boeing. A tactical comment before a call for tender I assume.

Here is a Philippine blog on the matter...

http://philippineairspace.blogspot.c...-airbus-for-boeing-widebodies.html

"The 747-800 may be Philippine Airlines flagship plane as the carrier intends to do more business with aircraft manufacturer Boeing Co. this time around according to Ramon Ang, President of San Miguel Corporation.

The airline is now looking more at Boeing's 747-800 program than the A380 of competing manufacturer Airbus.

Ang, a pilot himself, said the A380 cannot fit in the Philippines domestic airport, pointing the airports of Cebu and Davao as very inadequate to support the aircraft type because of its size. Meanwhile, the Boeing Aircraft (747-800) can fit at other domestic airports the airline intends to fly like Puerto Princesa, Cebu, Davao and General Santos.

Ang said there are only two airports capable of handling the A380 in the Philippines, Manila and Clark. While the Boeing 747-800 can be flown to five different domestic points. He further pointed out that the A380 is also too big for the Philippines saying that there is no market for the 600 plus capacity aircraft. The A380 seats 644 in two class configuration while the B748 seat 550 in the same class.

Philippine Airlines operates full service bi-class model, and continues to operate doing so under new management.

The carrier is now finalizing plans to order new wide body fleets, consisting of 12 Boeing 787's and and possibly 4 Boeing 747's to replace its ageing fleet which consists of 5 B747s, 4 A340s. and 8 A330's.

It has 4 Boeing 777-300ER on orders with 2 for delivery this year, and another 2 for delivery next year. It also plans to get 4 more of the same aircraft type so that by 2020 they may have a fleet of 4 B748, 10 777-300ER, and 12 B787.

The first set of B787 is scheduled to be introduced to the airline in 2016 from aircraft lessors and will replace the A330 which will go to low cost subsidiary Air Philippines.

Meanwhile, the remaining narrow bodies will still be held by Airbus A320s accounting to 75% of PAL fleets, inclusive of Air Philippine Express orders."


There a bit more info on the link above.



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlineAkiestar From Philippines, joined May 2009, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 18242 times:

There's a lot of information on this in the Philippine aviation thread. 

User currently offlineMotorHussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3334 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 18071 times:

Quoting Akiestar (Reply 3):
There's a lot of information on this in the Philippine aviation thread.

Which can be found here...

Philippines Av Thread



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12179 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 17907 times:

PR has a fleet of about 20 A-319/-320s, all less than 5 years old, IIRC. They are all leased through GECAS. When are those leases up? Will PR replace them with new B-737MAXs or A-320NEOs? My guess is when it comes time to replace the A-32Xs, it will be Boeing's order to loose.

It is good to see the B-747-8I will get some more orders. I understand they will replace the 5 PR B-747-4F6s they have. But what will replace the 4 A-340-300s they have? Could there be a follow on order for more B-748s, or do you think PR may be waiting on the B-777-8X/-9X to replace the A-343s? Or will they stick with the B-77W?

The thread title say 100 airplanes to be ordered, yet it only really talks about the 26 new WBs from Boeing, and I assume the 4 B-77Ws are not included in these numbers (ordered in 2010). So what will the other 74, or so aircraft be?


User currently offlineMotorHussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3334 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 17805 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
My guess is when it comes time to replace the A-32Xs, it will be Boeing's order to loose.

The following comment...

Quoting mffoda (Reply 2):
Meanwhile, the remaining narrow bodies will still be held by Airbus A320s accounting to 75% of PAL fleets, inclusive of Air Philippine Express orders."

Would lead me to think it would be Airbus' order to lose and that PR are looking for the better aircraft for the respective roles and routes, and that the NEO would be the best choice unless Boeing, by price and total package (of combined fleet offering), makes the MAX a more compelling offer.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 17219 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
The thread title say 100 airplanes to be ordered, yet it only really talks about the 26 new WBs from Boeing, and I assume the 4 B-77Ws are not included in these numbers (ordered in 2010). So what will the other 74, or so aircraft be?

In the comments section, the blogger addresses the total aircraft numbers discrepancy.

Quote:

"The Philippine AirspaceApr 27, 2012 06:58 PM
Other media sources are quoting a fleet of 100 while we are quoting a fewer number. The reason for the inconsistency was that existing orders for 4 of the 777 together with 3 320s for PR and 13 other 320's for 2P was included. They were existing orders by the airline. So we excluded them. Anyway, the argument was San Miguel will still be paying for them, thus, the 100 figure."


Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 6):
Quoting mffoda (Reply 2):
Meanwhile, the remaining narrow bodies will still be held by Airbus A320s accounting to 75% of PAL fleets, inclusive of Air Philippine Express orders."

Would lead me to think it would be Airbus' order to lose and that PR are looking for the better aircraft for the respective roles and routes, and that the NEO would be the best choice

I'm Inclined to believe that it is also the NEO's order to lose for the NB part of the order.



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 16898 times:

Quoting breiz (Thread starter):
A tactical comment before a call for tender I assume.

You may say that...though it's worth noting that while Mr. Tan retained PR's chairmanship, management control went to SMC.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
PR has a fleet of about 20 A-319/-320s, all less than 5 years old, IIRC. They are all leased through GECAS. When are those leases up?

They might just let the leases run their course. The refleeting plan will be spread over five years.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
Will PR replace them with new B-737MAXs or A-320NEOs? My guess is when it comes time to replace the A-32Xs, it will be Boeing's order to loose.

I tend to think it could be anybody's ball game for the NBs.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
It is good to see the B-747-8I will get some more orders.

It's still a big "MAY" at this point, given.....

Quoting breiz (Thread starter):
Apart from the money, a key point is to get out of the EU black list and to win traffic approval from the US.

They are not going to pay deposits on orders for planes they couldn't use due to Cat 2 and the blacklist.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
But what will replace the 4 A-340-300s they have?

The four 77Ws due (2 from Boeing & 2 thru GECAS) will likely replace those.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
Could there be a follow on order for more B-748s

The contemplated order for four 748Is might be it for the short-medium term as that would give them a balanced fleet, and any more could lead to an abrupt overcapacity. Not to mention being a huge financial burden.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
or do you think PR may be waiting on the B-777-8X/-9X to replace the A-343s? Or will they stick with the B-77W?

New technology may be needed for the outer years...so depending on how PR performs with this buy-in, they might look at the rumored 777X and others on offer by then.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 7):
and 13 other 320's for 2P

2P just got hold of the latest.....

http://business.inquirer.net/56639/a...rphil-adds-new-airbus-jet-to-fleet

Quote:
"Budget carrier Air Philippines, operator of the AirPhil Express brand, has added another plane to its growing fleet as the company looks to expand its regional operations and become a major contender in the local air travel sector.

In a statement, Air Philippines said it recently took delivery of its 20th plane, a brand-new Airbus A320 leased from Germany.

This brings the number of Air Philippines jets to 12. The company also operates eight turbo-propeller engine aircraft.

The new plane was the second addition to the company’s fleet since the start of 2012."



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stefan Welsch
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lutz Pfeiffer





[Edited 2012-05-02 10:20:53]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31409 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 16829 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
It is good to see the B-747-8I will get some more orders.
Quoting Devilfish (Reply 8):
It's still a big "MAY" at this point...

Boeing's been mumbling about more 747-8 Intercontinental orders this year, have they not? PR could be one of the.



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
But what will replace the 4 A-340-300s they have?

The rumored 12 787-9s would directly replace their 8 A330--300s and 4 A340-300s.


User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16246 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
Boeing's been mumbling about more 747-8 Intercontinental orders this year, have they not? PR could be one of the.

Then they should sell them with discount. As they have 77W with 400 seats, selecting the 748 would be odd in my opinion. The A380 would have a better chance. I put my money on a Boeing order, 737 and 787 (80 vs. 20). This is because the CEO of Phiippine Airlines has stated that he would like to do more business with Boeing.

Good year for Boeing so far, poor year for Airbus (so far)......


User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4849 posts, RR: 44
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 15356 times:

If PAL do end up flying to MIA, I hope it is operated using a B77W via YVR with 5th freedom traffic rights.

As far flying to MAD, LHR and CDG in Europe are concerned, my take on the matter is that LHR and CDG are ok but MAD is not required at all. Instead PAL should seriously look at Rome and Milan where the annual market sizes are 78,000 and 46,000 respectively to/from MNL over the past 12 months.

One must also note that in Western Europe, there is now a huge influx highly qualified Filipino nurses and doctors moving there especially in the Benelux and Scandinavia regions.

With regards to a possible B748i purchase, good move as they have demand for this aircraft size to USA in particular, however I would suggest to PAL to convert all their B744s into freighters and create a strong PAL Cargo subsidiary which will provide much required additional revenue and maybe profitability as well to the overall company as everyone knows cargo demand in the ASEAN region is booming and also taken up at good yields.

Question...can the B748i operate nonstop without any payload problems in both directions from MNL to ORD and NYC?


User currently offlineChicagoflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 15034 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
Question...can the B748i operate nonstop without any payload problems in both directions from MNL to ORD and NYC?

Just looked it up on great circle mapper and it looks like 8131 nm with an initial heading of 328.2.

The 747-8i published range is 8,000 nmi (9,210 mi; 14,800 km) at MTOW with 467 passengers and baggage. So it looks like it is just out of range. Probably will stop in YVR.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31409 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 14832 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 10):
As they have 77W with 400 seats, selecting the 748 would be odd in my opinion. The A380 would have a better chance.

The President of the airline feels that the A380 cannot operate effectively out of enough domestic airports where he feels the 747-8 can.

Per Wiki, the 777-300ER seats 370 - 42C and 328Y. Looking at their 747-400s, they could probably get over 450 in a 747-8 in two classes, giving them a fair capacity gap.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12179 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 13674 times:

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 10):
selecting the 748 would be odd in my opinion. The A380 would have a better chance.

The A-380 can only operate out of two airports PR uses in the Philippines, the B-747-8I can operate out of all 5 airports PR uses for international travel.

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
Question...can the B748i operate nonstop without any payload problems in both directions from MNL to ORD and NYC?
Quoting Chicagoflight (Reply 12):
Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):Question...can the B748i operate nonstop without any payload problems in both directions from MNL to ORD and NYC?
Just looked it up on great circle mapper and it looks like 8131 nm with an initial heading of 328.2.

The 747-8i published range is 8,000 nmi (9,210 mi; 14,800 km) at MTOW with 467 passengers and baggage. So it looks like it is just out of range. Probably will stop in YVR.

I get MNL-JFK at 7404 nm, initial heading out of MNL of 013 degrees, and about a 16.5 hour flight, 450 knots, no ETOPS restrictions.

MNL-JFK&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=450&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=&MAP-STYLE=" target="_blank">http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=M...STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=&MAP-STYLE=

MNL-ORD is only 7066 nm, initial heading of 023 degrees, about a 15.75 hour flight, 450 knots, no ETOPS restrictions.

MNL-ORD%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=450&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=" target="_blank">http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=M...E=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=

The B-747-8I can even make MNL-MIA, with a load restriction. It is 8098 nm, initial heading is 027 degrees, about an 18 hour flight, 450 knots, no ETOPS restrictions.

MNL-MIA%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=450&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=" target="_blank">http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=M...E=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=


User currently offlineLIPZ From Austria, joined Jun 2006, 1075 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 13246 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
Instead PAL should seriously look at Rome

They are already targeting Rome as well

http://ph.news.yahoo.com/philippine-...0-planes-beef-fleet-080004252.html


User currently offlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 10679 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):

The rumored 12 787-9s would directly replace their 8 A330--300s and 4 A340-300s.

The 789 has too much range for the routes PR currently fly their A333s on.

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
Question...can the B748i operate nonstop without any payload problems in both directions from MNL to ORD and NYC?
Quoting Chicagoflight (Reply 12):
Just looked it up on great circle mapper and it looks like 8131 nm with an initial heading of 328.2.
The 747-8i published range is 8,000 nmi (9,210 mi; 14,800 km) at MTOW with 467 passengers and baggage. So it looks like it is just out of range.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
I get MNL-JFK at 7404 nm, initial heading out of MNL of 013 degrees, and about a 16.5 hour flight, 450 knots, no ETOPS restrictions.
[.....]
MNL-ORD is only 7066 nm, initial heading of 023 degrees, about a 15.75 hour flight, 450 knots, no ETOPS restrictions.
[.....]
The B-747-8I can even make MNL-MIA, with a load restriction. It is 8098 nm, initial heading is 027 degrees, about an 18 hour flight, 450 knots, no ETOPS restrictions.

I don't know if I would want to be on a plane for 18 hours.                    

On the other hand, the 789 might just be the right plane to pioneer direct flights from MNL to the other destinations above.....

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/787-9prod.html

.
http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=mnl+-+ord+/+jfk&MS=wls&MX=540x540&PM=*

.....until such time when loads warrant an upgauge (if ever). 777X?

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
I would suggest to PAL to convert all their B744s into freighters and create a strong PAL Cargo subsidiary which will provide much required additional revenue and maybe profitability as well to the overall company as everyone knows cargo demand in the ASEAN region is booming and also taken up at good yields.

PAL had refurbished their remaining 744s and may intend to sell those. However, they'd let them soldier on if they couldn't get a reasonable offer. What's the going rate for P2F conversion for 744s this old? PR might just decide to start cargo operations if there's a compelling business case. Isn't it a depressed market at the moment?


[Edited 2012-05-02 20:09:02]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31409 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 10304 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 16):
The 789 has too much range for the routes PR currently fly their A333s on.

Nothing is stopping from PA from de-rating the MTOW to save some money. Plus the fuel savings.


User currently offlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9645 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):
Nothing is stopping from PA from de-rating the MTOW to save some money. Plus the fuel savings.

The 789's price does. Are you saying it's so much more efficient that it will offset this big difference with the A333? Paying for capability you will not use then defeating it is rarely profitable.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4849 posts, RR: 44
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 7350 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 16):
The 789 has too much range for the routes PR currently fly their A333s on.

true but the intention with which PAL would order B789s I would hope is as follows:

1. A333 cannot fly with a full payload from MNL to Middle East/Europe except UAE however the B789 can easily fly nonstop in both directions to all Middle East and EU destinations without any payload issues.

2. The on board 2 class capacity of the B789 i.e. 290-300 seats is ideal for PAL to use on new medium density long haul routes in the future such as:

a) MNL-KWI
b) MNL-DMM
c) MNL-DXB
d) MNL-FCO
e) MNL-CDG
f) MNL-DOH
g) MNL-SAN
h) MNL-SYD
i) MNL-MEL

Also to be very frank, if airlines such as QR who have a bigger number of J class pax flying into Qatar per year versus Philippines, I feel that PAL's 42 J class seat cabin on the B77Ws is a bit too much. They should maximize the cabin space of the B77Ws by having 30J class seats max along with 373Y class seats giving a total of 403 versus the 370 currently on their B77Ws (42J/328Y).

The 403 seater B77W should for all purposes be an adequate replacement for PAL's entire B744 fleet which seats between 391 passengers! In this way, there would be no need for PAL to order B748is but rather it can concentrate on big cost saving synergies by revolving its high density long haul fleet around the 403 seater B77W exclusively, the medium density long haul and regional fleet around the B789 and the short haul regional fleet around the A320 family thus enabling it to have only 3 aircraft family types in its fleet versus the many more it currently has which incur massive extra costs all across the board.


User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 504 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7183 times:

Why does everyone think PAL is suddenly going to fly all over the globe just because they can borrow some money to buy new planes? They have been continuously in big trouble for a long time and new planes are not going to fix that.

Given the reason for buying 787-8s because of access to Puerto Princesa, Cebu, Davao and General Santos shows that reality is still absent in PAL. Nobody is flying to those places from distances which justify a 748. Buy A321 or 739ERs and I would say it could work, with 738 and A320 probably a better fit.

PAL had a good look at the Kingfisher model and is going to do everything to be like them, including their illusions of grandeur, spectacular collapse and failure to disappear completely thanks to some funny business.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31409 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6959 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 18):
The 789's price does. Are you saying it's so much more efficient that it will offset this big difference with the A333? Paying for capability you will not use then defeating it is rarely profitable.

The list price for an A330-300 is actually $3 million more than a 787-9.  

Now I expect that the Average Sales Price for an A330-300 in 2012 is lower than that of a 787-9, but I also expect that difference is not very great due to the strong interest in the A330-300. Also let us not forget that the 787-9 is expected to have lower operating costs on an annual basis, so even if the 787-9 did command a not-insignificant price premium, when amortized over a couple or few decades, the numbers should still favor the 787-9.


User currently offlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6666 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 19):
true but the intention with which PAL would order B789s I would hope is as follows:

1. A333 cannot fly with a full payload from MNL to Middle East/Europe except UAE however the B789 can easily fly nonstop in both directions to all Middle East and EU destinations without any payload issues.
.
PR intends to transfer their A333s to 2P to restart their Middle East flights. 2P's low-cost model could allow them to take a little payload hit.

Quoting behramjee (Reply 19):
2. The on board 2 class capacity of the B789 i.e. 290-300 seats is ideal for PAL to use on new medium density long haul routes in the future such as:

a) MNL-KWI
b) MNL-DMM
c) MNL-DXB
d) MNL-FCO
e) MNL-CDG
f) MNL-DOH

Whether 2P would use Econ+/Econ or reconfigure their inherited A333s to a true, high-density, single-class layout for a no-frills assault on the OFW market remains to be seen. Neither would they fly to every middle eastern city mentioned. JED is the farthest with a high concentration of Filipino workers that merits a station. IMHO, they'd set up another stop at DMM or at any one of the GCC states at most.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=mnl+-+jed+/+dmm&MS=wls&MR=540&MX=720x360&PM=*
http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=mnl+-+jed...+dmm&MS=wls&MR=540&MX=720x360&PM=*

In such a scenario, their existing A333s (slight payload hit noted) should do just fine for the time being.

I don't know if PR would compete with the Gulf full-service giants in the future...precedent says they might just code share...or join an alliance. But the 789 would certainly be an asset for their planned European return.

Quoting behramjee (Reply 19):
g) MNL-SAN
h) MNL-SYD
i) MNL-MEL

The 789 is a given for MNL-SAN, should PR get the authority and decide to fly there. The stillborn 783 would've been better suited for the latter two...though it's moot since they'd most likely order the 789.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
The list price for an A330-300 is actually $3 million more than a 787-9.

But as already noted, 2P would fly their A333 hand-me-downs for the ME destinations. Using brand-spanking-new 789s on cattle-class services hardly sounds like a good market strategy.   .

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
Now I expect that the Average Sales Price for an A330-300 in 2012 is lower than that of a 787-9

Mr. Ang should take note of this when bargaining for their regional aircraft needs. His staff would have the data to contest the rest.  .

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 20):
Why does everyone think PAL is suddenly going to fly all over the globe just because they can borrow some money to buy new planes? They have been continuously in big trouble for a long time and new planes are not going to fix that.

Only you say that it will be sudden. What makes you think they don't have what it takes to turn the company around?

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 20):

Given the reason for buying 787-8s because of access to Puerto Princesa, Cebu, Davao and General Santos shows that reality is still absent in PAL. Nobody is flying to those places from distances which justify a 748. Buy A321 or 739ERs and I would say it could work, with 738 and A320 probably a better fit.

You're the one out of touch with reality. No one suggested in this thread to buy 787s to fly to those places. And FYI, PR flies their 744s to CEB, and A320s to SIN and the rest of SE Asia...if you hadn't noticed. The blog merely said the 748 could be accommodated...not that it should be bought to fly there.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 20):
PAL had a good look at the Kingfisher model and is going to do everything to be like them, including their illusions of grandeur, spectacular collapse and failure to disappear completely thanks to some funny business.

So very kind of you to share with us your very astute insights. Now, if you'd just please come down from your pedestal for a moment so that we clueless dolts may better partake of your infinite wisdom?   


[Edited 2012-05-03 11:42:52]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineAkiestar From Philippines, joined May 2009, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6499 times:

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 20):
They have been continuously in big trouble for a long time and new planes are not going to fix that.

Their labor problems seem to be behind them, and the public's sympathy seem to have turned against PALEA/FASAP (the unions). That's just the biggest problem: the others (Cat II and the EU blacklist, overcapacity at MNL, etc.) seem to have the airline willing to pull its own weight to help address issues beyond their control. Care to share whatever other problems that you think they have that we're probably not already aware of?

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 20):
PAL had a good look at the Kingfisher model and is going to do everything to be like them, including their illusions of grandeur, spectacular collapse and failure to disappear completely thanks to some funny business.

I remember SQ "laughing" about PR starting LAS, maybe in the same way you think PR will repeat what happened in the 1990s. I remember forumers here preaching about how PR will not make the 77W work. Hm, how times have changed, I see.


User currently offlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5910 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
so even if the 787-9 did command a not-insignificant price premium, when amortized over a couple or few decades, the numbers should still favor the 787-9.

I guess the clincher could be Boeing's version of the "Cash for Clunkers" program               .....

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/0...oeing-airbus-idUKBRE83T1BR20120501

[Edited 2012-05-04 22:29:08]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
25 lightsaber : I would like to know what dimension on the airfield keeps the A380 out. I have been looking to find airports that could operate the 748 but not the A
26 Post contains links and images Devilfish : Of the airports mentioned, Cebu comes in second (after MNL/CRK) with passenger traffic volume that could justify a 748i..... http://www.gcmap.com/air
27 KC135TopBoom : It really depends on the airport's configueration, but the airfield improvement costs alone could be in the tens of millions USD. In the US the stand
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...
Emirates To Order 100 Planes Shortly posted Wed Jan 24 2007 14:57:39 by UAL777UK
Delta To Order 100 X 739ER (Part 2) posted Thu Aug 25 2011 04:13:17 by SA7700
Le Figaro : Air France To Order 100 Widebodies posted Tue Jun 10 2008 09:38:31 by Beaucaire
Etihad Airways To Order 100 Jetliners... posted Thu Mar 27 2008 03:48:09 by HummingBird
Asiana To Order 20 Planes posted Thu Dec 13 2007 23:14:23 by Flying-Tiger
Egyptair And Egyptair Express To Order New Planes posted Sat Nov 10 2007 08:05:49 by SOBHI51
Qantas To Order 70 planes including 20x787+NB Plus Fleet Spin Off posted Thu Jun 28 2007 23:58:30 by Jimyvr
Fly Asian Xpress To Order 15 Planes posted Thu Mar 8 2007 07:22:51 by N1786b
Philippine Airlines To Order A320 Tuesday posted Mon Dec 5 2005 11:12:03 by BestWestern
TAP To Order 17 Planes posted Mon Nov 21 2005 11:59:39 by Manni