Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MH Flies The Airbus A380 To Hong Kong  
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 13149 posts, RR: 35
Posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 12352 times:

As of today, Malaysia Airlines flies the Airbus A380 to Hong Kong. This is the original press release:

Quote:
Malaysia Airlines will fly the Kuala Lumpur-Hong Kong route daily with the Airbus A380 effective May 1.

After London and Paris, Hong Kong will be the third destination for the national carrier's new 494-seater superjumbo fleet of aircraft.

The A380 will replace one of the double daily flights for the route currently serviced by the B737-800.

In conjunction with the launch, the airline is offering an attractive economy class fare starting now until May 20, for travel between May 1 and Nov 30.

The price starts from RM380 one-way and RM760 return all-inclusive.

In addition to that, eight first class seats will be available with premium features such as converted full flat bed, which is the widest among other airlines, and individual 23-inch in-flight entertainment screen.

Business class seats will feature individual 17-inch in-flight entertainment screens with power supply and USB ports.

Now can someone explain to me how MH expects to make profit on this route with an A380? KUL-HKG is only a 1,365 nm trip and the aircraft replaces a B737! The cabin is also configured for long-haul routes, who needs first class on such a short route? And we know that CZ is losing money on their domestic A380 routes.




Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17825 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 12318 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
Now can someone explain to me how MH expects to make profit on this route with an A380?

MH is just another carrier that can't figure out how to fly its 380s. Sad, but not surprising.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26152 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12249 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 1):
MH is just another carrier that can't figure out how to fly its 380s. Sad, but not surprising.

  

But atleast KUL-HKG is further than TG's even shorter BKK-HKG hop.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 506 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 11932 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 1):
MH is just another carrier that can't figure out how to fly its 380s. Sad, but not surprising.

Because they can figure it out. Nothing sad, nothing surprising. Happens all the time in Asia.

For KUL-LHR-KUL and KUL-CDG-KUL, the plane departs KUL at around midnight and returns to KUL around 7 AM. So you choose: leave it parked till the next midnight departure, or have a relatively short return to another city in Asia. So now they probably figured out it is more profitable to fly the A380 (which would otherwise be parked) to HKG and use the 738 somewhere where it is more needed.

SQ does exactly the same with one of their SIN-HKG runs. And the 738 is a bit small for this route.


User currently offlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11602 times:

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 3):
For KUL-LHR-KUL and KUL-CDG-KUL, the plane departs KUL at around midnight and returns to KUL around 7 AM. So you choose: leave it parked till the next midnight departure, or have a relatively short return to another city in Asia. So now they probably figured out it is more profitable to fly the A380 (which would otherwise be parked) to HKG and use the 738 somewhere where it is more needed.

Agree.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 3):
SQ does exactly the same with one of their SIN-HKG runs. And the 738 is a bit small for this route.

SQ's A380 HK route also serve as a marketing technique for one stop A380-A380 flight to Europe and Australia


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7305 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11520 times:

Amazing how people here know better than KE, SQ, EK, TG and now MH who all fly the A380 on short regional hops into HKG.


The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Indonesia, joined Sep 2000, 4516 posts, RR: 72
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 11408 times:

Unlike what the press release is stating, the A380 on this route is not replacing a B738. MH072/073 used to be operated with A333 (and before that with B772) and is now upgauged to A380. Although MH has published F fares for the HKG route in certain markets, the flight is sold as 2-class only.

The second daily flight MH078/079 operates with B738 (and before that with A333) and will continue doing so.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 3):
So now they probably figured out it is more profitable to fly the A380 (which would otherwise be parked) to HKG

Judging by the amount of discounting going on, I'd say there is massive over capacity for this flight now. Here in Jakarta, MH had been announcing a USD 562 all in promotional business class fare for CGK KUL HKG KUL CGK, to be booked on the A380 operated HKG sectors only. That fare has since been extended indefinitely.

As a comparison, the cheapest CGK SIN HKG SIN CGK SQ fare with A380 sectors to be booked in the discounted D bucket will set you back well over USD 3000.

MH is, by the way, running equally stunning promotions for the CDG and daylight LHR A380 flights. These promotions lead me to believe that the only route where the A380 is currently making sense for the airline is the late night KUL LHR departure. One really has to wonder whether MH would not have been better off to build its longhaul fleet around the B77W + A333 instead of the current tiny A380 fleet, which seems not only too large for all but one of its missions, but also does not offer a lot of operational flexibility with just 6 aircraft in the fleet.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26005 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 11383 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
But atleast KUL-HKG is further than TG's even shorter BKK-HKG hop.

EK also has a daily A380 BKK-HKG.

747s were once very common on routes like those. and the A380 really isn't that much bigger when you consider the growth in traffic over the years. Why do people think there's a problem using the A380 on 3 or 4 hour flights now when widebodies were very common on such routes (and often much shorter routes) as far back as the 1970s?


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17180 posts, RR: 66
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11220 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
Now can someone explain to me how MH expects to make profit on this route with an A380? KUL-HKG is only a 1,365 nm trip and the aircraft replaces a B737! The cabin is also configured for long-haul routes, who needs first class on such a short route? And we know that CZ is losing money on their domestic A380 routes.

As others have said, it is better than letting the plane sit idle.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
747s were once very common on routes like those. and the A380 really isn't that much bigger when you consider the growth in traffic over the years. Why do people think there's a problem using the A380 on 3 or 4 hour flights now when widebodies were very common on such routes (and often much shorter routes) as far back as the 1970s?

Quite. These routes are very busy and have a large premium market.

If you can't use widebodies on short routes, how do you explain all those domestic 747s that flew around Japan for decades?



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1117 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11207 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
Amazing how people here know better than KE, SQ, EK, TG and now MH who all fly the A380 on short regional hops into HKG.

  

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
KUL-HKG is only a 1,365 nm trip and the aircraft replaces a B737! The cabin is also configured for long-haul routes, who needs first class on such a short route?

Firstly, I think people need to a better sense of scale. KUL-HKG (1,369 nm) seems short when looking at the Asian map, but it is slighly longer than LHR-IST (1,360 nm), two big markets across Europe.

Secondly, distance is hardly a reliable indication of market size. SIN-HKG is "only" 1,380 nm. Go check out the amount of seats flying between the two cities daily.

Thirdly, MH has all along planned to upgrade this route, although there were a few flip-flopping of plans, involving the A333s as well as B772s at one point. The initial plan was for 1 A333, 1 B772 and 1 B738 daily from 15 June. Then it become two A333s. Then now with the A380, MH will instead fly one A380 and one 738 now, before moving up to one A380 and double 738 daily from 15 June. Taken in totality, it is not as massive a jump in capacity as depicted, because technically, the A380 is replacing an A333, and not a B738, and the B772 has been downgraded to another B738.

[Edited 2013-05-01 22:13:29]


It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26152 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 11161 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
747s were once very common on routes like those. and the A380 really isn't that much bigger when you consider the growth in traffic over the years. Why do people think there's a problem using the A380 on 3 or 4 hour flights now when widebodies were very common on such routes (and often much shorter routes) as far back as the 1970s?

But thankfully with continued air service liberalization across Asia, the region is going the way of Europe and North America where frequency is becoming the competitive key and carriers are shifting to smaller gauge aircraft.

It was terrible imo back in the days when airlines only had a couple flights between major centers, when today we can often find the carrier manage to operate dozen.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 8):
If you can't use widebodies on short routes, how do you explain all those domestic 747s that flew around Japan for decades?

Lack of slots, and a tightly regulated market place.

Look at Japan today, with half a dozen smaller carriers outside of JAL and ANA groups. Lots of airports and very much higher slot capacity. Even JAL and ANA groups have shifted to ever smaller planes, even RJ's!



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Indonesia, joined Sep 2000, 4516 posts, RR: 72
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 11091 times:

I believe the main question in this discussion to be whether MH is deploying the A380 to HKG because it really needs that capacity there, or because it has nothing better to do with the airframe and feels the need to deploy it somewhere. I believe that the latter is true. MH would actually do just fine with an A333 on this particular rotation reinforced with two further B738 roundtrips on the HKG route, but it needs to do something with the A380 frame which would otherwise sit at KUL for 18 hours.

Equally so, MH would do just fine with a B772 (or a hypothetical B77W, had MH ordered some) on the CDG route, but the route ended up with the A380 because the aircraft needed to go somewhere. Let's be honest, a route that has been served with a daily 2-class B772ER for quite a while, now all of a sudden sees an upgauge to a daily 3-class A388. Isn't that rather peculiar to say the least? As a comparison, SQ replaced twice daily B77W with single daily A388 on SIN CDG and TG replaced 10 weekly B77W with single daily A388 on BKK CDG.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5014 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10969 times:

Malaysia Airlines
100th A380, 9M-MNF, VHHH, 01/05/2013,
"1st MH A380 Depart HKG" , Bye!
http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/248050_10200948523973754_1606892247_n.jpg

Source:http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fb...112&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offline9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10964 times:

As others have said this is utilisation of an airframe which otherwise would sit idle in KUL & perhaps they can grab some traffic from CX who have upscaled their operations into KUL.

But unfortunately the case remains that the A380 isn't that suitable for MH. With the bilateral agreements between Malaysia & Australia capping capacity & the entry of D7 into Australia the kangaroo route can't be upgraded to A380 without cutting on frequency. So out of the original plan only the double daily LHR operation is left & now MH is left to figure out where else to use the aircraft. But at least we can say we alongside Thailand and Singapore also have the A380.



I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 13149 posts, RR: 35
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10816 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 9):
Secondly, distance is hardly a reliable indication of market size. SIN-HKG is "only" 1,380 nm. Go check out the amount of seats flying between the two cities daily.

But can you fly a big aircraft like the A380 profitable on such short routes? They carry a lot of death weight for the short trip, ANA's 747 aircraft were even modified for domestic use (like the lack of winglets).



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinecelestar From Singapore, joined Jul 2001, 415 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10767 times:

Curious to know, how many gates at HKIA can handle A380? With so many scheduled A380 going to HK, I thought there was only a gate or two that had been modified to handle the A380 and I definitely could be wrong on this.

User currently offlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10571 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
EK also has a daily A380 BKK-HKG.

The flight will continue to Dubai. Actually, most people will get on/ off at Bangkok (both directions),
so basically it is a DXB-BKK & BKK-HKG routes using a single plane.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 14):
But can you fly a big aircraft like the A380 profitable on such short routes? They carry a lot of death weight for the short trip, ANA's 747 aircraft were even modified for domestic use (like the lack of winglets).

Yes, they may burn more fuel than other aircrafts, however, you are utilizing the long down-time of the A380, therefore, you no need to invest a fleet of regional jets/ free up some regional jets to somewhere else. Airlines in Asia are known for such "mis-use" of long haul fleet. The saving will outweight the increase in the fuel cost.

Quoting celestar (Reply 15):
Curious to know, how many gates at HKIA can handle A380? With so many scheduled A380 going to HK, I thought there was only a gate or two that had been modified to handle the A380 and I definitely could be wrong on this.

Currently 3 gates (with third airbridge) can handle A380.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 13149 posts, RR: 35
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10559 times:

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 16):
Yes, they may burn more fuel than other aircrafts, however, you are utilizing the long down-time of the A380, therefore, you no need to invest a fleet of regional jets/ free up some regional jets to somewhere else. Airlines in Asia are known for such "mis-use" of long haul fleet. The saving will outweight the increase in the fuel cost.

That makes sense, thanks.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5014 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10484 times:

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 16):
Quoting celestar (Reply 15):
Curious to know, how many gates at HKIA can handle A380? With so many scheduled A380 going to HK, I thought there was only a gate or two that had been modified to handle the A380 and I definitely could be wrong on this.

Currently 3 gates (with third airbridge) can handle A380.

3 gates is pretty disappointing considering SYD have 6 x A380 capable bays. Wasn't HKG design designed to handle the A3XX=A380?

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineairpearl From Malaysia, joined May 2001, 958 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10484 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 14):
But can you fly a big aircraft like the A380 profitable on such short routes? They carry a lot of death weight for the short trip,

Another way of framing the question is: Which results in a lower loss - flying your A380 on a 1,365 nm route where there is some chance of a positive financial return or parking a plane for more than 16 hours every day at home base between two long haul flights? I have no idea actually, but I presume this is an issue management has grappled with already.

The ship has long sailed on the question of whether MH should be operating the A380 in the first place. (It shouldn't, in my opinion, but then, who am I to say?) Assuming that the disposal of the A380s is out of the question, I suspect that KUL-HKG is one of the few MH regional routes with a good enough mix of business and leisure traffic that can realistically support it (or at least one that results in a lower loss). MH and CX code share on the sector for a start, so that helps; also, traffic appears to be dense enough to justify CX flying in its own widebody metal 4 times a day (a mix of A333s, B773s, B77Ws).

It's also worth noting that looking purely at the morning KUL-HKG flights (generally more popular than the flights later in the day), the MH A380 still offers far fewer seats (at 494 seats) than the two morning CX flights that leave KUL within about an hour of each other (one B773, and one A333, with a total 709 seats).

.


User currently offlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10455 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 18):
3 gates is pretty disappointing considering SYD have 6 x A380 capable bays. Wasn't HKG design designed to handle the A3XX=A380?

More gates will be modified. In additional, some gates of the mid-feild terminal (currently in construction) will be A380 capable as well. With the addition of MH's A380 flights, all 3 gates will be utilized at the same time in the afternoon (SQ, TG & MH) and late night (QF & EK*2).


User currently offlineChris7217 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2002, 169 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 9999 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Photos of the arrival/departure and the entire event in HKG can be found here:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.249572745183563.1073741826.151415914999247&type=1


User currently offlinejohnclipper From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2005, 855 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 9707 times:

Booked on in on 10 MAY KUL-HKG...USD500 for one-way biz class...not a bargain

User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8541 times:

Many airlines operate even a new long range aircraft at first domestically, e.g. LH used the 747-400 for a while between Frankfurt and Hamburg. This is mainly to give the staff a chance to develop procedures, get practical training and to shake down the new aircraft for faults before it enters a more prestigious route.
Also some countries might insist that new aircraft types for an airline will be checked out on shorter routes first. E.g. we had for a while an Ethihad B777 freighter replacing an A330 on a the route between DXB and HHN, even though it was much too big for the intended cargo. The reason was that the Chinese authorities, where the plane was ultimately to go, insisted that it should develop a record of reliability outside China first with this airline befor commencing to fly to China.

Jan


User currently offlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8112 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 23):
Many airlines operate even a new long range aircraft at first domestically, e.g. LH used the 747-400 for a while between Frankfurt and Hamburg. This is mainly to give the staff a chance to develop procedures, get practical training and to shake down the new aircraft for faults before it enters a more prestigious route.
Also some countries might insist that new aircraft types for an airline will be checked out on shorter routes first. E.g. we had for a while an Ethihad B777 freighter replacing an A330 on a the route between DXB and HHN, even though it was much too big for the intended cargo. The reason was that the Chinese authorities, where the plane was ultimately to go, insisted that it should develop a record of reliability outside China first with this airline befor commencing to fly to China.

Obviously, the MH A380 HK flight is nither for traning or compliance of regulation purpose.


User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1725 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7940 times:

I think the A380 will becoming the vanity aircraft similar to how the 747 purchased by many in the 1970s. I well recall how every major European airline had to have the 747, and poor nations even Africa purchased their single 747 specimen.

Like the 747, the time will come when airlines realize that the 380 is not easy to operate and make money on.
Sure some carriers truly need them, but for many its more an exercise in ego, or falling for the Airbus sales pitch.

Unfortunately, we know MH has many deep problems which will only get worse as its competitors grow both in size and numbers. Frankly I think biggest plane MH needed is indeed like the A330 or 77W and maybe A350 in future.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 13149 posts, RR: 35
Reply 26, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7860 times:

Quoting airpearl (Reply 19):
Another way of framing the question is: Which results in a lower loss - flying your A380 on a 1,365 nm route where there is some chance of a positive financial return or parking a plane for more than 16 hours every day at home base between two long haul flights? I have no idea actually, but I presume this is an issue management has grappled with already.

Fair enough. I never realized that 1 frame would stick on the tarmac for 16 hours until it can be rotated in the European network. In that case it makes sense to use it on a short trip.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinecloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 27, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7913 times:

Quoting celestar (Reply 15):

Curious to know, how many gates at HKIA can handle A380? With so many scheduled A380 going to HK, I thought there was only a gate or two that had been modified to handle the A380 and I definitely could be wrong on this.
Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 16):
Currently 3 gates (with third airbridge) can handle A380.

Currently capable are E15, N60, N62, N66. At least 3 more contact stands are sized for A380 in the existing PTB but yet to be converted. 2 more when the Midfield Concourse opens.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 18):
3 gates is pretty disappointing considering SYD have 6 x A380 capable bays. Wasn't HKG design designed to handle the A3XX=A380?

It's a matter of demand and hence supply. You don't build what you don't need. We don't have a base carrier with Code F equipment, yet.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5014 posts, RR: 4
Reply 28, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7679 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 18):
Wasn't HKG design designed to handle the A3XX=A380?

Edit: was meant to say 'designed'

Quoting cloudyapple (Reply 27):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 18):
3 gates is pretty disappointing considering SYD have 6 x A380 capable bays. Wasn't HKG design designed to handle the A3XX=A380?

It's a matter of demand and hence supply. You don't build what you don't need. We don't have a base carrier with Code F equipment, yet.

Regardless, HKG is a major Asian hub therefore need to cater the needs of the carriers which serve it.

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2366 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7630 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 28):
Regardless, HKG is a major Asian hub therefore need to cater the needs of the carriers which serve it.

Is HKG having trouble meeting those needs?


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17180 posts, RR: 66
Reply 30, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 7573 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 25):
I think the A380 will becoming the vanity aircraft similar to how the 747 purchased by many in the 1970s. I well recall how every major European airline had to have the 747, and poor nations even Africa purchased their single 747 specimen.

There was a significant difference. When it was introduced, the 747 was the only aircraft that could serve many long routes. Nowadays the A380 is hardly the range champ. This only reinforces your argument of course.

Having said that, the value of image and prestige is much higher for East Asian carriers than it is for, say, American ones. Different market.

Quoting Polot (Reply 29):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 28):
Regardless, HKG is a major Asian hub therefore need to cater the needs of the carriers which serve it.

Is HKG having trouble meeting those needs?

Hardly.

There is also a difference between having only so many 380-capable gates and "not being ready". When HKG was built, it was quite clear there would be larger aircraft in service soon. There are probably no issues with taxiways or alleys. Adapting gates is probably not a big enterprise relatively speaking.

As cloudyapple says.

Quoting cloudyapple (Reply 27):
Currently capable are E15, N60, N62, N66. At least 3 more contact stands are sized for A380 in the existing PTB but yet to be converted. 2 more when the Midfield Concourse opens.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26005 posts, RR: 22
Reply 31, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7470 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 10):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
747s were once very common on routes like those. and the A380 really isn't that much bigger when you consider the growth in traffic over the years. Why do people think there's a problem using the A380 on 3 or 4 hour flights now when widebodies were very common on such routes (and often much shorter routes) as far back as the 1970s?

But thankfully with continued air service liberalization across Asia, the region is going the way of Europe and North America where frequency is becoming the competitive key and carriers are shifting to smaller gauge aircraft.

On the other hand, airport capacity in Asia isn't keeping pace with the huge increase in traffic, making larger aircraft one way to cope with demand during peak periods when slots may not be readily available.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5014 posts, RR: 4
Reply 32, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 7213 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 29):

Quoting EK413 (Reply 28):
Regardless, HKG is a major Asian hub therefore need to cater the needs of the carriers which serve it.

Is HKG having trouble meeting those needs?

Perhaps you can confirm if the airport is or isn't meeting the needs? I'm just factoring in all the A380 flights presently serving HKG & there certainly is an increase in flights.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 30):
Quoting Polot (Reply 29):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 28):
Regardless, HKG is a major Asian hub therefore need to cater the needs of the carriers which serve it.

Is HKG having trouble meeting those needs?

Hardly.

There is also a difference between having only so many 380-capable gates and "not being ready". When HKG was built, it was quite clear there would be larger aircraft in service soon. There are probably no issues with taxiways or alleys. Adapting gates is probably not a big enterprise relatively speaking.

Thanks for clarifying and the detailed response.

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineSkyguy From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 486 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6785 times:

Could EK's success in channeling traffic from KUL (and other SE Asian cities) through DXB to LHR and other European destinations have anything to do with MH's ability to successfully fill up their A380's at fares that made them decent money as well? Seems like TG and MH are both feeling the effects of leisure travelers who don't mind the transit in DXB to get to Europe (and vice-versa) with EK at competitive fares and with multiple daily flights, some of which are on A380's.


"Those who talk, do not know, and those who know, do not talk."
User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1725 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6743 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 31):
On the other hand, airport capacity in Asia isn't keeping pace with the huge increase in traffic, making larger aircraft one way to cope with demand during peak periods when slots may not be readily available.

The clear trend is Asia is for smaller planes and much higher frequency.

The arrival of LCCs has pushed thus along nicely with even major carriers getting involved in going down in aircraft size in favor of frequency.

Use of craft like the A380 will be exception not the rule. More common and preferred will be things like the A320 up to A330 size.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26005 posts, RR: 22
Reply 35, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6699 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 34):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 31):
On the other hand, airport capacity in Asia isn't keeping pace with the huge increase in traffic, making larger aircraft one way to cope with demand during peak periods when slots may not be readily available.

The clear trend is Asia is for smaller planes and much higher frequency.

The arrival of LCCs has pushed thus along nicely with even major carriers getting involved in going down in aircraft size in favor of frequency.

I agree but how long can it continue? I was making the point made in this article.
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/archi...airports-cant-keep-up-with-demand/


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2366 posts, RR: 1
Reply 36, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6607 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 32):
Perhaps you can confirm if the airport is or isn't meeting the needs? I'm just factoring in all the A380 flights presently serving HKG & there certainly is an increase in flights.

I already knew that HKG has had no issues. I'm also not the one complaining about the number of A380 capable gates at HKG vs SYD.


User currently offlineplanesmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 1094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6170 times:

Sydney might have 6x gates capable of handling A380-sized aircraft, and Melbourne ??. But can they actually handle the passengers? Can they provide an appropriate number of seats in departure? Toilets? And Customs capacity for transfers?

Australian airports are kidding themselves if they think passengers are impressed with their A380 support.


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7305 posts, RR: 57
Reply 38, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6083 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 10):
ut thankfully with continued air service liberalization across Asia, the region is going the way of Europe and North America where frequency is becoming the competitive key and carriers are shifting to smaller gauge aircraft.

Part of Asia may be going this way, but China is most certainly not. The opposite is happening.

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 34):
The clear trend is Asia is for smaller planes and much higher frequency.

Distances in Asia are huge, hubs work, and regional routes are suited to 787/333 sized aircraft.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5014 posts, RR: 4
Reply 39, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6037 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 36):
I already knew that HKG has had no issues. I'm also not the one complaining about the number of A380 capable gates at HKG vs SYD.

Did I really give you the impression I was "complaining" about A380 gates????? I was simply comparing a International Hub airport 'HKG' vs a non Hub airport. Just for the record my debate ended with

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 30):

which provided a detailed response & that's all I wanted to know.

Quoting planesmart (Reply 37):

Yes, SYD ain't an airport to brag about, I'm well aware it and don't need it brought to my attention. Probably we should stop reading to deep into it!

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17825 posts, RR: 46
Reply 40, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5961 times:

Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 13):

But unfortunately the case remains that the A380 isn't that suitable for MH. With the bilateral agreements between Malaysia & Australia capping capacity

Even if the Australia bilateral weren't capped, there is so much competition on the Kangaroo route I don't think any of it is worth having any more.

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 16):
you are utilizing the long down-time of the A380, therefore, you no need to invest a fleet of regional jets/ free up some regional jets to somewhere else

Well the plane would sit otherwise, so there's no incremental ownership to flying it instead: just the direct operating costs that need to be covered.

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 25):
I think the A380 will becoming the vanity aircraft similar to how the 747 purchased by many in the 1970s

  

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 30):
When it was introduced, the 747 was the only aircraft that could serve many long routes

Airlines are still downsizing from the 747 today

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 38):
Part of Asia may be going this way, but China is most certainly not. The opposite is happening.

China is also on Neptune in terms of deregulation. If Chinese airlines were remotely allowed to compete on a network basis, the fleets, networks, and schedules would look nothing like they do now.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offline744FOREVER From France, joined Mar 2013, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5947 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 11):
As a comparison, SQ replaced twice daily B77W with single daily A388 on SIN CDG and TG replaced 10 weekly B77W with single daily A388 on BKK CDG.

IIRC, SQ also operated 10 weekly 77W to CDG.



Star Alliance Gold, Skyteam Elite Plus, Oneworld Ruby
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1117 posts, RR: 2
Reply 42, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5658 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 10):
But thankfully with continued air service liberalization across Asia, the region is going the way of Europe and North America where frequency is becoming the competitive key and carriers are shifting to smaller gauge aircraft.

It was terrible imo back in the days when airlines only had a couple flights between major centers, when today we can often find the carrier manage to operate dozen.

There are more flights and choices today because the Asian markets have exploded in demand. This is by no means any indication that the Asian air market is "going the way of Europe and North America".

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 34):
The clear trend is Asia is for smaller planes and much higher frequency.

The arrival of LCCs has pushed thus along nicely with even major carriers getting involved in going down in aircraft size in favor of frequency.

Use of craft like the A380 will be exception not the rule. More common and preferred will be things like the A320 up to A330 size.

If there is a "clear trend", it should be easy to offer evidence of that? Care to share some with us, because I remain thoroughly unconvinced.

In my home market of SIN, the only possible support of your thesis is the SIN-KUL route, and even then, it was an unusual case of an extremely regulated route with equal profit-sharing which was suddenly liberalised, and the unusual situation of SQ flying widebodies on such a short route. With the drop in demand due to price pressure rather than scheduling preferences, SQ reduced its widebody flights to a handful and left the rest to MI, representing a drop in capacity. And for the record, MH has been and continues to fly smaller aircraft on this route, and even they had to trim frequencies as demand shifts to the LCCs due to cost. So where exactly is there a shift due to preferences for higher frequencies by customers alone?

In the rest of Asia, the arrival of LCCs has pushed down prices, but they certainly did not lead to the patterns as you have described in the vast majority of markets. Most LCCs routes are still relatively infrequently served (just look at the number of LCC routes with just one flight per day or less), so just where is the pressure for main carriers to add more frequencies?

The A380 will continue to play a bigger role across Asia, not by replacing frequencies, but by increasing frequencies and with even more capacity.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 40):
Airlines are still downsizing from the 747 today

Last I checked, major Asian airlines are upsizing and hesitation is not due to lack of demand, but lack of competing products in that segment.

Quoting 744FOREVER (Reply 41):

IIRC, SQ also operated 10 weekly 77W to CDG.

So your point being? Last I checked, 77Ws are huge widebodies, not little 737s. They fly this much into CDG because the demand is humongous at all times of the day, and not mere because of "customer preferences for choices in flight timings" and that kind of nonsense.

Come back to us if SQ decides to pull out its widebodies into CDG and replaces them with 40 MI flights (ironically, SQ actually pulled its MI flights out of CDG over time)

So in summary, Asia's aviation will *not* go the way of the European or American experience in the near future unless the following factors disappears in Asia:
- Rising purchasing power and demand for air travel.
- Continued aviation growth exceeding airline's capability to meet demand.
- Regulated airspaces and rights restricting schedule and capacity flexibility.
- Congested airports with insufficient room for growth.
- Consumer preference for larger, quieter planes with superior service.

[Edited 2013-05-05 04:43:29]


It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offline744FOREVER From France, joined Mar 2013, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5615 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 11):
As a comparison, SQ replaced twice daily B77W with single daily A388 on SIN CDG and TG replaced 10 weekly B77W with single daily A388 on BKK CDG.
Quoting huaiwei (Reply 42):
So your point being?

My point being that, it was 10 weekly SQ 77W SIN-CDG and not twice daily ... that's it ! ... Relaxxxx ...

Indeed, I have flown a "couple" of times the 777's (77W/773/77L/772/777) and could noticed that they are pretty big vs. the 737 (which I have flown also) ...  



Star Alliance Gold, Skyteam Elite Plus, Oneworld Ruby
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17825 posts, RR: 46
Reply 44, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5440 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 42):
Last I checked, major Asian airlines are upsizing and hesitation is not due to lack of demand, but lack of competing products in that segment.
NH and JL have gotten rid of all their long haul 744s. SQ has not replaced their 744s with 380s 1:1 but rather closer to 2:1. Most, if not all, other Asian carriers will have far fewer A380s, if any, than 744s in their fleets.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 42):
This is by no means any indication that the Asian air market is "going the way of Europe and North America".

It is, guaranteed. You can almost set your watch to it. SQ is laying off pilots, reducing fleet counts, and has started its own (unfortunate) LCC--the revolution is *here*.

[Edited 2013-05-05 08:25:55]


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26152 posts, RR: 50
Reply 45, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5238 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 42):
If there is a "clear trend", it should be easy to offer evidence of that? Care to share some with us, because I remain thoroughly unconvinced.

Very simple look at the fleet profiles of Asia's airline industry today to lets say 20-years ago.

There is massive orders for small narrowbody aircraft like the A320/737 families in region. Even props like the ATR are selling like hot cakes in the region.

The day where bulk of routes were served by mega jumbo jets like the 747 are largely gone, today you are more likely to be on a A320 or A330.

There is a clear downgauge in capacity in the region in favor of frequency.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26005 posts, RR: 22
Reply 46, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5199 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 45):
The day where bulk of routes were served by mega jumbo jets like the 747 are largely gone, today you are more likely to be on a A320 or A330.

There is a clear downgauge in capacity in the region in favor of frequency.

Isn't the heavy recent use of the A330 on domestic routes in China really an upgauge in capacity?


User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1725 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5189 times:

Even AAPA (Association of Asia Pacific Airlines) say traffic trends in regional reflect shift to smaller aircraft with more frequency as result of liberalization in market.

Per February 2013 document.

Asia-Pacific airlines will lead global demand for ever more eco-efficient aircraft types over the next 20 years, according to the latest market forecast for the region by Airbus. The forecast was presented this month in Singapore by John Leahy, Chief Operating Officer, Customers, Airbus.

Altogether, airlines from the region will take delivery of around 9,870 new passenger and cargo aircraft during the forecast period, valued at US$1.6 trillion. This represents 35 per cent of all new aircraft deliveries worldwide over the next 20 years, ahead of Europe and North America.

In the passenger market, the fleet of aircraft operated by Asia-Pacific carriers is expected to more than double in the next 20 years, from 4,300 aircraft today to a total of 10,440 jets, based on higher than average annual traffic growth of 5.8 per cent and replacement of nearly 3,500 aircraft in service today.

Reflecting the high levels of urbanisation and geographic distances in the Asia-Pacific region, traffic will continue to be concentrated around a growing number of major cities. As a result, Airbus predicts that carriers in the region will acquire some 3,840 widebody aircraft over the next 20 years, accounting for 44 per cent of worldwide demand in the larger aircraft categories.

The widebody deliveries to the region will primarily include 3,080 twin-aisle aircraft, such as the A330 and all-new A350 XWB, and around 360 very large aircraft with over 400 seats, such as the A380, for the busiest routes. At the top end of the market, the region will lead global demand for airliners such as the A380, accounting for 45 per cent of deliveries in this size category.

In addition to long haul services, carriers in the region will continue to operate large numbers of mid-size widebodies on regional services, with denser intercity routes being served by aircraft carrying more than 250 passengers.

While Asia-Pacific carriers will lead demand in the larger aircraft segments, the latest Airbus forecast also sees the robust growth in numbers of single aisle aircraft in the region accelerating in the coming years.

This will be largely driven by the ongoing growth in the low cost sector, which has increased by seven per cent annually for the last ten years, outpacing overall industry expansion. This growth, plus replacement cycles, will generate demand for some 6,030 new single aisle aircraft in the region, such as the best-selling A320 Family, producing a significant move towards smaller aircraft offering capacity in the 150-190 passenger range by various manufacturers.



The future in Asia aircraft is like Europe and Americas where the focus is the single aisle narrow body.


User currently offlineCX Flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6642 posts, RR: 55
Reply 48, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5103 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 18):
3 gates is pretty disappointing considering SYD have 6 x A380 capable bays. Wasn't HKG design designed to handle the A3XX=A380?
Quoting EK413 (Reply 32):
Quoting Polot (Reply 29):

Quoting EK413 (Reply 28):
Regardless, HKG is a major Asian hub therefore need to cater the needs of the carriers which serve it.

Is HKG having trouble meeting those needs?

Perhaps you can confirm if the airport is or isn't meeting the needs? I'm just factoring in all the A380 flights presently serving HKG & there certainly is an increase in flights.

There has not been a situation yet where an arriving A380 has had to wait for a gate because the others were occupied so yes HKIA meets the needs. At the moment, many of the A380s arrive at different times of day and as mentionned earlier, only around midday are there three A380s here, TG, SQ and MH, and the TG normally pushes back like clockwork as the SQ taxies in. Add to this the LH 748 that occupies another of the bays.


User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1566 posts, RR: 3
Reply 49, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5072 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 47):

You just defeated your own argument

9,870 new passenger and cargo aircraft
3,080 new twin-aisle aircraft
6,030 new single-aisle aircraft
360 very large aircraft

That is a completely different distribution than Europe and especially the USA today.
A much higher percentage of twin-aisle and larger aircraft.
One twin-aisle for every two single-aisle.

What is it in the USA 1 to 4 or 5 and no VLA?


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26152 posts, RR: 50
Reply 50, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4886 times:

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 49):
That is a completely different distribution than Europe and especially the USA today.
A much higher percentage of twin-aisle and larger aircraft.
One twin-aisle for every two single-aisle.

I don't think so. He made his point very well.

2/3 of aircraft sold in Asia-Pacific region will be smaller single aisle narrowbodies.

The growth rate and need for narrowbody aircraft is faster then any other category.

Look back a couple decades, and much of the regions airline fleet was widebodies, not any more.

Simply put, there is a massive shift towards acquisition of smaller gauge aircraft and network priority towards focus on frequency - very much the model the industry has grown into in mature markets like Europe and the Americas.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1566 posts, RR: 3
Reply 51, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4567 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 50):
Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 49):
That is a completely different distribution than Europe and especially the USA today.
A much higher percentage of twin-aisle and larger aircraft.
One twin-aisle for every two single-aisle.

I don't think so. He made his point very well.

2/3 of aircraft sold in Asia-Pacific region will be smaller single aisle narrowbodies.

The growth rate and need for narrowbody aircraft is faster then any other category.

Look back a couple decades, and much of the regions airline fleet was widebodies, not any more.

Simply put, there is a massive shift towards acquisition of smaller gauge aircraft and network priority towards focus on frequency - very much the model the industry has grown into in mature markets like Europe and the Americas.

It seems that we use different mathematics.

If you say that 1 of 6 airplanes is a wide body in the USA, is about the same as 1 of 3 a wide body in Asia, than you could be right, I would call it twice as many wide bodies in Asia not starting to speak of VLA.
And when I count all the CRJ and E-jets than 1 in 6 is to high a count in the USA.

Regarding the routes, most of the old routes in Asia, having been served by wide bodies decades ago, are still being served by wide bodies. The new narrow bodies are not replacing wide bodies by offering higher frequencies on old routes, but open up new routes.
A completely different evolution of the market than in the USA.


User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1725 posts, RR: 2
Reply 52, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4499 times:

I guess some people fail to recognize the shift in landscape in Asia.

Today, the market is no longer composed of a few national airlines with heavy reliance on widebody fleets.

Even these national airlines have sought to acquire fleets with much smaller crafts, even RJs. Then we have the massive arrival and expansion of LCCs across the region which themselves focus on smaller narrowbodies.

The facts are the market is changing - in favor of smaller capacity aircraft and offering higher frequencies - such as what has developed in America and Europe.
America evolution saw US airlines themselves dump the 747, DC-10 and now 767 in favor of A320/737NG to run domestic routes. No longer is airline operate 3x daily California-NY using a widebody but they do so 6x with A320 instead.

Go to major Asian airports, even Japan a former 747 heaven, today you will see similar growing use of smaller aircraft, following the America and Europe evolution model. Its no longer such widebody exclusive heaven.


User currently offlineplanesmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 1094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4401 times:

Japan is a conservative, more mature market, so is it really comparable? Japan may not be 747 heaven, but still widebody heaven.

Problem many legacy carriers have, is they cannot keep widebody aircraft utilised 365 days of the year, without positioning flights and downtime. And following thru from that, they cannot obtain funding, or more correctly, as competitive funding. Plus they have large fleets of old aircraft, with outdated interiors, replacement of which are naturally the first priority.

Which airlines do you think the finance industry currently offer the lowest margins to? Or make the most unsolicited funding proposals to? Or have the biggest waiting lists of willing funding syndicates? Or are most receptive to funding new routes, acquisitions and investments?

Wonder how the landscape would change if there was unrestricted widebody only access to the US and Europe?


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17825 posts, RR: 46
Reply 54, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4169 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 46):

Isn't the heavy recent use of the A330 on domestic routes in China really an upgauge in capacity?

It might be, but China is very much regulated, so it's similar to the US market pre-deregulation where DC-10s and L10s were flying things that are now flown more frequently by RJs.



E pur si muove -Galileo
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...
MH Flies The B 747-400 To HKG Every Friday? posted Thu Nov 29 2007 05:31:33 by United Airline
Does Qantas Operate The B 747-300 To Hong Kong? posted Sun Dec 9 2001 04:35:48 by United Airline
Competitor To The Airbus A380... If It Happened.. posted Thu Dec 10 2009 20:02:15 by DariusBieber
Win A Trip On A380 With LH To Hong-Kong 50 People posted Tue Mar 6 2007 14:24:32 by LHStarAlliance
What's It Like To Fly On The Airbus A380? posted Tue Sep 12 2006 13:43:09 by WINGS
Rumor: Did A380 Ever Come To Hong Kong Last Year? posted Fri Nov 25 2005 16:41:58 by CaptainTim
Qatar Airways Codeshares With MH To Hong Kong posted Sat Jul 20 2002 16:56:42 by QatarAirways
CI611 Missing On The Way To Hong Kong (VHHH) posted Sat May 25 2002 11:05:58 by Airbus_A340
Will The Airbus A380 Make It To Production? posted Thu May 31 2001 03:35:14 by Airplanetire
Lufthansa 747-8 To Hong Kong posted Fri Mar 8 2013 01:20:53 by tailfin