Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Malaysian Airlines  
User currently offlineRoland From France, joined Jun 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1015 times:

Hi,
can somebody tell me something about the service and the comfort(meals, seats..) of Malaysian Airlines??

Roland

mayer-r@t-online.de


14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAmir From Syria, joined Dec 1999, 1254 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (14 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 820 times:

Hi Roland, (willkommen!)
unfortunately i didn't fly with them yet. They are missing in my Asian flight experiences. But i know a lot of people who did so. All feedback was positive, especially with the PVT in Coach, including several games. They have very beautiful FA's (i used to see them in DXB)!!!


BRGDS
Amir

schaher@t-online.de


User currently offlineFlumuc From Germany, joined Oct 1999, 392 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 819 times:

Hi, Ive flown with their B777-200 from MUC-KUL 3 times. The flights were wonderful, especially the entertainment system. The food was also good (only problem was that they never served Coke).
I can only recommend Malaysia Airlines.


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12435 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (14 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 808 times:

Expect them to get only better. They have their southern neighbour in their sights and they have already taken a lead over them in certain areas. They have offered helicopter transfers to F class passengers in London (possibly elsewhere), but on a more down to earth level, they have pioneered in-seat (not just inflight) fax services and are aiming for full email and internet services. This is an airline that knows where its going.

The only negative note was that during the Asian crisis a year or so ago, they had a few VERY close calls at London, as crews were under severe pressure to keep fuel levels to a bare minimum. One aircraft landed and didn't have enough to get to its gate! It was particularly surprising as Malaysia has a very good safety record. However, after a fairly strong ticking off from the AAIB they got their act together.

I would certainly like to fly with them.


User currently offlineAshford747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 803 times:

I personally prefer Malaysian Airlines over Singapore Airlines because their crew are more friendlier than SQ. If you are flying around KL or Singapore, I would recommend MH over SQ any day. My negatives over SQ is because of the attitude of their cabin crew on a recent flight where they cleared everyone's meal tray except mine. What sort of discrimination is this. SQ has one of the most rudest and arrogant cabin crew in the world. I would blame this to SQ management for their narrow minded thinking that they are wonderful, SQ this, SQ that......what a nonsense.

The most wonderful experience that I enjoy is flying with Cathay Pacific. They have great attention to detail and nothing is too much for the crew. They are attentive and always eager to help. I would strongly recommend CATHAY PACIFIC if you are to fly into Asia.


User currently offlineSingapore 777 From Australia, joined May 1999, 1015 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (14 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 789 times:

Yes! Malaysian Airline is certainly very good on most International Segments. However, on most Malaysian (intra) routes or SIN-Malaysia, I would say SQ is better. Their 737s are way too crappy and they should find replacements soon.

By the way, Ashford747, could you please email me bout your latest SQ experience? I'd really like to hear about it.  

SQ777
mok_weng_lock@hotmail.com

Bye!


User currently offlineMas777 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 1999, 2935 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (14 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 774 times:

Dear SQ777...since when did SQ start flying intra-Malaysian routes? I have flown several times with MH within Malaysia including their Rural Air Service into Sarawak (Borneo) and their domestic service I feel is fantastic. Their workhorse 737s have an excellent reliability record - a point that Boeing has commented to MAS on several occasions. Their 737s are all fairly new and offer both speed and comfort. The connections I had to make in Sarawak on to their Rural Network of F50s and Twin Otters were quick and easy.

Remember - SIA does not have a domestic network which is a financial burden on almost every national carrier around the world. MAS offers some of the lowest domestic fares in the world...compare BA who charges over £200 LHR-MAN return - doesn't come close to RM120 KUL-PEN for a service that isn't very different.

MAS is not pressured into finding a replacement for their 737s at the moment even though Airbus is trying to taunt them with the A320/A321 fleet.

Even though I tend to choose to fly BA merely as I live in the UK and BA offers the best choices for my travelling needs - MAS is well on its way to becoming an airline to reckon with. Let's just hope negotiations into 'Wings' bear fruit.


User currently offlineSingapore 777 From Australia, joined May 1999, 1015 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (14 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 758 times:

Maybe I worded that a little wrongly, what I meant to say was Singapore - Malaysian routes (SIN-KUL or SIN-PEN). So many times I've flown these routes and as many times have I gotten crappy 737s, not that I have anything against the B737, but they really need a good refurbishment. The interior is total crap!

MAS777, since you've flown intra-Malaysian routes, you should know how their 737s are like right? They have very cramped seating arrangement. And on one F50 I was on, the windows were scotched taped!!

MAS' international service and reputation is very good and maybe excellent but they need to ramp up their regional services.


User currently offlineTca256 From Belgium, joined Dec 1999, 729 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (14 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 749 times:

Ashford747...please stop to say b****** over SQ
and saying at last Cathay Pacific is the best....on
which fact do you take the opportunity to say that
SQ is very bad, FA's arrogant and so on ?? I wonder
if you have never flown them in your life to say such
craps !! Maybe you flew one time SQ and you had bad
service...maybe, that unfortunately happens time to
time...but saying that SQ is bad for a single flight is
nonsense !! By the way, I flew MAS B777 from Bali
to Kuala Lumpur two years ago...I had the bad luck
that FA's forget me when serving meals...all people were
already eating their meal when I asked with a smile the
hostess that I had not mine...she replied me rudly
and gave me a plate !! Well...that was a bad experience
but I always think that MAS is a good company like
SQ is a good one.....Ashford747, come back later when
you have better arguments and please stop your
adverts for Cathay.....we all know CX is also good !!!


User currently offlineKuantan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 754 times:

Ashford, you sound distinctly like another individual, namely Airline 2000, who also would post the usual rantings about SQ and their staff......by the way you remarked that they cleared everyones trays except yours.....I have a good idea why that might have happened...perhaps if you were a bit nicer to them, they would reciprocate....in my experience if you are nice to them, they are nice to you........They're flight attendants, not personal slaves.

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (14 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 750 times:

I have heard that MAS is not at all happy with their A330s. Does this have any validity? I was also wondering why Airbus is so hot to trot to replace 737s that are for the most part new. Seems to me they are bulging eye wide mad for market share. On the other hand their 747-400s and 777-200s and 300s are great.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineMas777 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 1999, 2935 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (14 years 7 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 740 times:

CX747 - MAS isnn't totally happy with the Airbus A330 for a variety of reasons. MAS was a major player in the building and testing of the aircraft before it entered service in the early-90s, but the aircraft has failed MAS on several counts - albeit not through the fault of MAS or Airbus.

The situation in Asia of boom and bust particularly in the Aviation industry meant that as MAS launched the A330 - the predictions worked out by MAS and Airbus were quite wrong. In fact, MAS didn't really NEED the A330 - a situation that was further compounded by the arrival of the Boeing 777.

Today MAS finds itself operating its 10 A330 aircraft on limited routes that have wide variations in capacity. Due to its limited range...the A330 is operated to India, East Asia and a couple of Australian cities, but out of those flying hours, the A330 finds itself deployed on local domestic routes - where the aircraft is just too big for MAS.

The 777 however has been MAS' new toy that has provided MAS with a similar aircraft in size to the A330, that when not being used on direct non-stop routes into Europe and extra long-haul flights to New York can be deployed successfully on regional routes which pleases both MAS AND the passengers (who love its comfort).

The A330 now feeling rather redundant is facing an uncertain future (although MAS insists that it will keep flying the A330) - a future which can only be secured by Airbus selling MAS its new A340 range of aircraft.

Another point that MAS and Airbus had a sour-turn in the 1990s was the fact that MAS is still rather restricted in its operations into France, where the French govt. has only granted MAS 4 flights a week into CDG and has refused to allow CDG to go up to daily and allow MAS to start flights into Nice. The US govt. meanwhile signed an 'Open-Skies' treaty with Malaysia soon after MAS' large orders for the Boeing 737,747 and 777.


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12435 posts, RR: 37
Reply 12, posted (14 years 7 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 738 times:

What you say makes a great deal of sense. I do agree (being Irish and seeing the impact the A330 has had on Aer Lingus) that the A330 is a phenomenal aircraft, but I think MH could use it on more regional routes if it wanted to. True, the 777 is more versatile (and for my money, looks better in MH colours - not that this has any bearing on things!). I would not be at all surprised to see a lot of diplomatic activity between Paris and KL, linked to MH trading its A330s in against new A340s - and more flexible rights to CDG. Don't know about the 737s though. Can't see them being traded in for A320s. In the final analysis, while it may be a marginally better aircraft, MH has a big fleet, is well used to them and any advantage of the 320 would be swallowed up in the cost of converting about 500+ crews to the new type.

I would certainly like to fly with them, indeed I was just working out that if I were to fly from MAN to SYD, via KUL (also getting the free stopover than MH usually offers), I could fly on all of the MH types - 777 from MAN, 737 and A330 domestically (has to be planned carefully though!) and 747 to SYD. Mmm . . .


User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (14 years 7 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 738 times:

I just received my copy of the MAS schedule dated 31 OCT 1999- 24 MAR 2000 and here is where the A330s are deployed,

KUL to:

BWN-Bandar Seri Begawan
BKK-Bangkok
BJS-Beijing
(BEY-Beirut-they used to earlier)
BNE-Brisbane-(Equipment varies it states but I do remember them going there)
CNS-Cairns
MAA-Chennai
DRW-Darwin
DEL-Delhi
DAC-Dhaka
DXB-Dubai
FUK-Fukuoka
CAN-Guangzhou
HKG-Hong Kong-(again it states equipment varies-this is a frequently seen equipment notation in the MAS schedule I might add for all aircraft and on many-many routes)
IST-Istanbul
JKT-Jakarta
JED-Jeddah
KHI-Karachi
BKI-Kota Kinabalu
KCH-Kuching
LDU-Lahad Datu
MLE-Male
MNL-Manila
MEL-?Melbourne? It says EQV so it could be the 330/777/744
NGO-Nagoya
OSA-Osaka
PEN-Penang
PER-Perth
HKT-Phuket
SDK-Sandakan
SEL-Seoul
SIN-?Singapore? Another EQV equipment at certain peak times of day
SUB-?Surabaya? Another EQV category but during a mid morning departure
SYD-?Sydney? Another EQV category
TPE-Taipei (I've seen them there, look marvelous (Grin)
TWU-Tawau
NRT-Tokyo-Narita

I've flown MAS and enjoy them very much, their service is excellent. Comparable in many ways to SIA.

As for any 'problems' with the A330, it appears to me they are flying them mostly on regional to long routes with some much longer hauls thrown in.

If they are such a 'plagued airplane' as some would rhetoricize, then other carriers like Cathay, DragonAir, Garuda, Thai, Aer Lingus, and many others would -never fly them-. Their cargo capacity is truly awesome and if effectively used can earn these planes exceptional profit, along with their capacious passenger abilities. If planned with the right route structure and network, the A330s can pay for themselves flying just cargo only, with passengers as pure gravy on top. My connection at Air Canada has stated such and I believe them. I've read this point stated by other carriers also.

MAS's A330 are PW powered, as are Thai's, And both serve regional to long routes in a similar fashion, what's the huge difference with MAS versus Thai? I havent heard a peep from Thai. That's why I veiw these problems with a large meteorite sized 'grain of salt' (LOL!)

Any aircraft needs effective planning and route management, this I think could be a factor in any sort of 'problems', and I cant resist the feeling that some of the 'problems' could be used in some ways to secure something in return for those CDG routes? Who knows? We saw some quid-pro-quo for the Open Skies signed with Malaysia and the US didnt we? Of course we did.

I expect this rumored A345/A32X order/re-equipment to happen, although anything can happen. MAS has had range problems with other aircraft in it's route structure (early 777 deliveries) but did not receive notice or attention like that paid to the A330, I think that in parcel could be due to the extensive restructure of MAS Boeing deliveries that were required and negotiated during the Asian Crisis as well. It was reported in Air International and I remember seeing one of the major US Airliner enthusiast magazines ACAR and/or World Airline Fleets News reporting same. I remember it -clear as day-.

It was also reflected in the MAS 1998-99 schedules. I had the a few of these schedules and sure enough, 777s summer routing DXB-EWR, same route in winter using 747-400s. Reasoning that was stated in these periodicals being "headwinds" were just 'too much' on the initial 777s in service. The 747-400s were flown in it's place.

This route is now with 777s 'year round' but I also note the route is marketed as the "777 SuperRanger" service, which it was not before. And given the nature of MAS's schedule to have the "Equipment Varies" moniker. I question if this applies to their EWR route? I question if the 777s now used on this routing are new build 777-2H6ERs or possibly modified early 777-2H6ER models? I'd love to find that out.

I got into this somewhat heated discussion on one of the airliner order boards when one of the members challenged me and disbelieved everything I said on this, attempted to become some sort of indictment of Virgin's A340 'problems' out of NRT to London (which had nothing to do with this whatsoever) and then (Gasp) became quite condescending and insulting. (Grin) Oh well, too bad, it happened, sources out there prove it, find them and you'll see. No point continuing.

Anyhow, I left out several Malaysia destinations that had mostly 737 routes with EQV notations listed, so there could be many more destinations served within Malaysia using the A330.

You can add Europe to their service area when you look at their IST service. (G) So they serve MAS far and wide. I've seen them at Taipei, Taiwan parked next to us after we arrived from LAX. Their 737-400s serve Kaohsiung to Kota Kinabalu-KUL. I've heard the 734s used on many of these regional routes arent that well liked by the passengers for various reasons. If this is the case then there may be impetus for a narrowbody fleet replacement. It would be interesting to see that happen.

Regards
MAC




User currently offlineMas777 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 1999, 2935 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (14 years 7 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 725 times:

Kaitak,

Drove into Manchester a few weeks ago and what a lovely sight of that MAS 777 on finals into Manchester Ringway I caught sight of...you may already know that MAS will turn its highly succesful Manchester service non-stop from this Summer.


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...
Union Pressures Malaysian Airlines To Defer A380 posted Mon Jun 19 2006 10:56:31 by AerospaceFan
Malaysian Airlines And Skyteam posted Tue Mar 15 2005 10:29:47 by Star_member
Malaysian Airlines Painting A Colorful Plane? posted Sat Feb 26 2005 14:38:41 by Andrewtang
Malaysian Airlines To ARN. posted Sun Jun 13 2004 20:32:11 by Pera
Malaysian Airlines, On It's Way To Scandinavia? posted Sun May 9 2004 14:32:03 by Pera
Malaysian Airlines To Kuala Lumpur posted Wed May 15 2002 17:47:06 by Luxair
Malaysian Airlines Posts Losses Of $350 Million posted Wed May 30 2001 09:30:09 by Singapore_Air
Underrated Malaysian Airlines posted Sun Feb 4 2001 23:48:50 by Jinah77
Malaysian Airlines Livery posted Sat Aug 19 2000 09:53:46 by Bzclass
I Love Malaysian Airlines posted Fri Jul 7 2000 16:01:04 by Swiss-airplane