RoyalBrunei757 wrote:

Seems like the aircraft offloading has started, GA has returned two B737-8U3 to Pembroke.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 021-06-07/

PK-GMZ Boeing 737-8U3(WL) 7.8 years old Stored at KUL 20 May 2021 re-registered as VQ-BXZ
PK-GMS Boeing 737-8U3(WL) 9.6 years old Stored at KUL 6 June 2021 re-registered as VQ-???

There is a photo floating on Facebook for PK-GMZ being re-registered. I am afraid I am unable to share here. PK-GMZ was recently painted in "72nd Anniversary (1949-2021)" special colours

Who be interested in these aircraft?

Also PK-GEM, GEN and GEP are all leased and I believe these aircraft are leased and will be returned once leased expired and they will be converted to Freighter.

I can't understand why GA would ditch the order for the A338 and keep the 77W unless the answer is they own the latter and can't sell them. Far too much plane for GA given the routes they operate and uncertainty in the market. Frankly, a simplified fleet of 1 narrowbody type (737 or A320 family), 1 link type (ATR if needed), and 1 widebody - A330-800 and -900 -would work well. That gives them all the range they need and is right sized for the foreseeable future.

hannah9898 wrote:

RoyalBrunei757 wrote:

Seems like the aircraft offloading has started, GA has returned two B737-8U3 to Pembroke.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 021-06-07/

PK-GMZ Boeing 737-8U3(WL) 7.8 years old Stored at KUL 20 May 2021 re-registered as VQ-BXZ
PK-GMS Boeing 737-8U3(WL) 9.6 years old Stored at KUL 6 June 2021 re-registered as VQ-???

There is a photo floating on Facebook for PK-GMZ being re-registered. I am afraid I am unable to share here. PK-GMZ was recently painted in "72nd Anniversary (1949-2021)" special colours

Who be interested in these aircraft?

Also PK-GEM, GEN and GEP are all leased and I believe these aircraft are leased and will be returned once leased expired and they will be converted to Freighter.

GA does not own any of its B737NG fleet, as per planespotters.net record is. Hence will all be returned once lease expires. There are a long queue for conversion though, won't be surprised if some of them get converted some time in near future.

filipinoavgeek wrote:

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Garuda owns Sriwijaya

Their partnership with Sriwijaya ended a while back over safety concerns, though I can't remember if it was before or after the crash.

The relationship ended in November 2019. The working relationship first broke down in Sept 2019, kissed and made up less than a week later then finally broke off for good in November 2019.
https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/201 ... spute.html
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... y-concerns
https://jakartaglobe.id/news/garuda-ind ... ijaya-air/

NZ321 wrote:

I can't understand why GA would ditch the order for the A338 and keep the 77W unless the answer is they own the latter and can't sell them. Far too much plane for GA given the routes they operate and uncertainty in the market. Frankly, a simplified fleet of 1 narrowbody type (737 or A320 family), 1 link type (ATR if needed), and 1 widebody - A330-800 and -900 -would work well. That gives them all the range they need and is right sized for the foreseeable future.

I imagine the A338 being somewhat unpopular could be a factor. Perhaps they really just need the A339 and see no need for the A338?

NZ321 wrote:

I can't understand why GA would ditch the order for the A338 and keep the 77W unless the answer is they own the latter and can't sell them. Far too much plane for GA given the routes they operate and uncertainty in the market. Frankly, a simplified fleet of 1 narrowbody type (737 or A320 family), 1 link type (ATR if needed), and 1 widebody - A330-800 and -900 -would work well. That gives them all the range they need and is right sized for the foreseeable future.

The B77W fleet is fully leased including the one they lease out to Indonesia Government. They may attempt to return them, but may incur a big penalty. I agree with you, they can do ATR-72 for outskirt area, B737NG/MAX for short to medium haul, A330ceo/neo for medium to long haul. Most of these three fleet types are pretty new except for few older ones which can be sold for much needed money. They can take three A330neo which are already built (PK-GHH, -GHI, -GHJ) and cancel the remaining 9 A330neo on order, and move their deposit to Citilink A320neo, and phase out the older A320ceo which are all leased too.

NZ321 wrote:

I can't understand why GA would ditch the order for the A338 and keep the 77W unless the answer is they own the latter and can't sell them. Far too much plane for GA given the routes they operate and uncertainty in the market. Frankly, a simplified fleet of 1 narrowbody type (737 or A320 family), 1 link type (ATR if needed), and 1 widebody - A330-800 and -900 -would work well. That gives them all the range they need and is right sized for the foreseeable future.

The -900 at 251t could do CGK-AMS nonstop. Then GA could harmonize around the A333/A339.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

NZ321 wrote:

I can't understand why GA would ditch the order for the A338 and keep the 77W unless the answer is they own the latter and can't sell them. Far too much plane for GA given the routes they operate and uncertainty in the market. Frankly, a simplified fleet of 1 narrowbody type (737 or A320 family), 1 link type (ATR if needed), and 1 widebody - A330-800 and -900 -would work well. That gives them all the range they need and is right sized for the foreseeable future.

The -900 at 251t could do CGK-AMS nonstop. Then GA could harmonize around the A333/A339.

GA has selected 242t version for its A339neo, not sure if they can be upgraded to 251t as I remember the upgrade requires change to the nose and landing gears.

Garuda Indonesia to seek suspension of debt payments to avoid bankruptcy

https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/ ... bankruptcy

Salient Points:
1. Seeking a suspension of debt payments to creditors and lessors under a 'standstill agreement'
2. COVID 19 pandemic has resulted in a negative cashflow of about US$100 million a month and ballooning debt
3. The airlines needed a "fundamental restructuring" to reduce its debt to around US$1 billion to US$1.5 billion, from US$4.5 billion currently, to continue as a going concern
4. Appointing legal and financial consultants to begin this process and must immediately conduct a moratorium (of debt repayments) or a standstill in the near term
5.Process will be complicated by having parties within and outside Indonesia, including holders of its US$500 million Islamic bonds (sukuk) in the Middle East, with risks of disagreements leading to legal problems.
6. Finance Ministry has halted payment for convertible bonds of an earlier government bailout of 8.5 trillion rupiah (US$594.41 million) in 2020 because GA did not meet some covenants. Thus far only 1 trillion rupiah has been paid.
7. Finances were already strained before the pandemic, with higher-than-normal leasing costs for a fleet that includes planes made by four different manufacturers.
8. International routes were also unprofitable, and will focus on serving domestic routes during the restructuring process.
9. Developing its cargo business to improve revenue.

RoyalBrunei757 wrote:

Let the guessing game begins:

Current fleet:
Airbus A330-200 - 7
Airbus A330-300 - 15
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 3
ATR 72-600 - 12
Boeing 737-800 - 73
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 1
Boeing 777-300ER - 10
Bombardier CRJ1000 - 18
Total - 141

On order:
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 11
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 49
Total - 97

Simplifying fleet moving forward:
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 14
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 50
Total - 68

1. Eliminate 22 A330-200/300 to move over to A330-800/900 fleet. Those A330-200/300 which are around 5-8 years old maybe retained for Hajj purpose. Older A330-300 all-Y can be offloaded, either way.
2. Eliminate 6 Boeing 777-300ER - Too heavy, too much capacity, international route is not returning anytime soon. Better swallow the bitter pills now than later. This might lead to losing 5-stars airline status....F class will be out too.
3. Planned disposal of Bombardier CRJ1000 - 18. Done deal.
4. Retire 73 B737NG move over to B737 MAX, some domestic trunk routes to be flown by A330-800/900
5. Move 12 ATR 72 to Citilink.

The A330-800's are only on order so far. There are 4 total.

chonetsao wrote:

I think the 6 A333 in all economy class configuration will be gone.

Plus I don't think A330-800 is delivered yet. One article in March 2021 suggests there is no firm delivery date for those aircrafts yet. Those can be cancelled too. Thus it is safe to say if Garuda was to reduce fleet, the lone 4 A330-800 order could be in danger to go.

A330-900 will be coming as planned and may replace the 9 remaining A333 on one-to-one basis.

The A330-800 would allow replacement for the 777-300ER to the EU replacing the 777 as they have better range for those routes vs the A330-900. If they want to keep serving the EU.

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Having only been on the SIN-AMS portion of the CGK-AMS route, what is the purpose of the route? I know colonial ties and all but what remains of those ties now? Are the Dutch investing a lot in the country? Or does the political elite love going to NL?

Garuda owns Citilink and Sriwijaya, theres ample opportunity to use those for the low cost traffic. If even Malindo gets away with a premium cabin than GA should have a premium market for itself especially in such a populous country.

I've been on flights to HKG a few times and I've always been in empty J cabins, I don't know if it's a question of pricing or timing but filling J is essential for all full service airlines to survive. They also need to change their cabins, the last few 330-200 with the reverse herringbone seats are great but much of the fleet still features angled seats.

Full Y flights should probably go to citilink, the cost basis for GA simply doesn't justify it.

And simplifying the fleet will go a long way, A330 or 787 for longer routes, A320/737 for the rest... the region doesn't have many smaller jets zipping so purchasing anything of this size will have the same result as the CRJ...

I'm not sure I'm understanding your points at all. You ask what is the purpose of the route, but if you have flown the portion of SIN-AMS (by fat most of the whole route) what then was your purpose for flying it.....so why are you questioning other people's reasons, and which no doubt would be very similar to your own?
Also, you say people choosing Full Y flights should fly Citilink. Why, and what then do you propose Garuda then fly? Indeed, you state you have frequently flown in empty J cabins, but yet you don't think people should fly Y. Am not being rude but, with all due respect, your post somewhat smacks of you are very happy to fly, but yet you seemingly question others having the same choice.

LifelinerOne wrote:

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

I think they should talk with Boeing and restructure the MAX order for later deliveries. Let the -800NG stick around for another 5-7 years before the MAX8 comes in as a replacement. Conserve that capital!!

Well, the airline has been very clear what they wanted to do with its MAX-order:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/22/busi ... index.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/22/indones ... -jets.html

However, as it's still on the books with Boeing, it seems Garuda hasn't followed through. I do think they can wriggle out of the contract due to the aircraft being very late.

For me it would make sense to just offload all regional and domestic flights to CitiLink and have Garuda be the medium/long-haul airline with A330(neos). Traffic has shrunken anyway, so no need to add additional planes, return current aircraft to their lessors when leases are to expire and have CitiLink standardise on the A320(neo) and ATR72. And then grow from there if the demand returns. If needed, it can keep B737-800s for CitiLink as well and replace them in due time with A320neos to keep the fleet simple.

Then Garuda/CitiLink's set-up would be:

A320(neo)
ATR72
A330(neo)
B737-800

Cheers!

Remember those choices to cancel were fresh in their minds 2 year back. That may have changed. But they would be better off canceling the maxes that are still on order as cash reserves are low.

Vicenza wrote:

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Having only been on the SIN-AMS portion of the CGK-AMS route, what is the purpose of the route? I know colonial ties and all but what remains of those ties now? Are the Dutch investing a lot in the country? Or does the political elite love going to NL?
...

And simplifying the fleet will go a long way, A330 or 787 for longer routes, A320/737 for the rest... the region doesn't have many smaller jets zipping so purchasing anything of this size will have the same result as the CRJ...

I'm not sure I'm understanding your points at all. You ask what is the purpose of the route, but if you have flown the portion of SIN-AMS (by fat most of the whole route) what then was your purpose for flying it.....so why are you questioning other people's reasons, and which no doubt would be very similar to your own?
Also, you say people choosing Full Y flights should fly Citilink. Why, and what then do you propose Garuda then fly? Indeed, you state you have frequently flown in empty J cabins, but yet you don't think people should fly Y. Am not being rude but, with all due respect, your post somewhat smacks of you are very happy to fly, but yet you seemingly question others having the same choice.

SIN-AMS only is flown by people looking for lowest rock bottom fare. This because the route is (was?) CGK-SIN-AMS-CGK due to the fact that the 77W can (could?) not take off from CGK with enough fuel to reach AMS. If you fly SIN-AMS only you are just an opportunity to make money of unsold seats.
There is a decent demand from AMS-CGK-rest of Indonesia and colonial history has to do with it. Even for SQ on AMS-SIN-AMS, a large proportion of passengers fly AMS-SIN-Indonesia-SIN-AMS. On AMS-SIN I estimate more than 80% of pax don't have SIN as end point but go on, mainly to Indonesia and Australia. Some are Indonesians who go back to see family. Others are Dutch with no family ties but a history in Indonesia. Example of such is my father who was supposed to do his military service in Netherlands New Guinea in the late 50s / early 60s. A point is: the dutch (and dutch-indonesians) are not all going to Bali or Jakarta but many other places and then Garuda is a gateway which gets you to less common places. If they would fly 787-8 or A330-800 on CGK-AMS, they could consistently fill the plane and achieve a high load factor without having to compromise fares (note that SQ fares went up a lot once they went from 77E/77W to A359 on AMS-SIN and that is with just 30 seats less per flight. And the flight is always packed). 787-9 and A330-900 could work, but I believe the A330-900 will need to leave a lot of cargo behind and is not suited for this route.

AngMoh wrote:

Vicenza wrote:

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Having only been on the SIN-AMS portion of the CGK-AMS route, what is the purpose of the route? I know colonial ties and all but what remains of those ties now? Are the Dutch investing a lot in the country? Or does the political elite love going to NL?
...

And simplifying the fleet will go a long way, A330 or 787 for longer routes, A320/737 for the rest... the region doesn't have many smaller jets zipping so purchasing anything of this size will have the same result as the CRJ...

I'm not sure I'm understanding your points at all. You ask what is the purpose of the route, but if you have flown the portion of SIN-AMS (by fat most of the whole route) what then was your purpose for flying it.....so why are you questioning other people's reasons, and which no doubt would be very similar to your own?
Also, you say people choosing Full Y flights should fly Citilink. Why, and what then do you propose Garuda then fly? Indeed, you state you have frequently flown in empty J cabins, but yet you don't think people should fly Y. Am not being rude but, with all due respect, your post somewhat smacks of you are very happy to fly, but yet you seemingly question others having the same choice.

SIN-AMS only is flown by people looking for lowest rock bottom fare. This because the route is (was?) CGK-SIN-AMS-CGK due to the fact that the 77W can (could?) not take off from CGK with enough fuel to reach AMS. If you fly SIN-AMS only you are just an opportunity to make money of unsold seats.
There is a decent demand from AMS-CGK-rest of Indonesia and colonial history has to do with it. Even for SQ on AMS-SIN-AMS, a large proportion of passengers fly AMS-SIN-Indonesia-SIN-AMS. On AMS-SIN I estimate more than 80% of pax don't have SIN as end point but go on, mainly to Indonesia and Australia. Some are Indonesians who go back to see family. Others are Dutch with no family ties but a history in Indonesia. Example of such is my father who was supposed to do his military service in Netherlands New Guinea in the late 50s / early 60s. A point is: the dutch (and dutch-indonesians) are not all going to Bali or Jakarta but many other places and then Garuda is a gateway which gets you to less common places. If they would fly 787-8 or A330-800 on CGK-AMS, they could consistently fill the plane and achieve a high load factor without having to compromise fares (note that SQ fares went up a lot once they went from 77E/77W to A359 on AMS-SIN and that is with just 30 seats less per flight. And the flight is always packed). 787-9 and A330-900 could work, but I believe the A330-900 will need to leave a lot of cargo behind and is not suited for this route.

Its a common misconception that the 77W cannot make it CGK-AMS purely due to range issues. The actual issue is due to the pavement loading at CGK, where the loading on each of 77W's landing gears exceed the pavement strength at CGK. As such the 77W has to take off with less fuel than it can actually hold and thus fly less than it actually can.

rbavfan wrote:

RoyalBrunei757 wrote:

Let the guessing game begins:

Current fleet:
Airbus A330-200 - 7
Airbus A330-300 - 15
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 3
ATR 72-600 - 12
Boeing 737-800 - 73
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 1
Boeing 777-300ER - 10
Bombardier CRJ1000 - 18
Total - 141

On order:
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 11
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 49
Total - 97

Simplifying fleet moving forward:
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 14
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 50
Total - 68

1. Eliminate 22 A330-200/300 to move over to A330-800/900 fleet. Those A330-200/300 which are around 5-8 years old maybe retained for Hajj purpose. Older A330-300 all-Y can be offloaded, either way.
2. Eliminate 6 Boeing 777-300ER - Too heavy, too much capacity, international route is not returning anytime soon. Better swallow the bitter pills now than later. This might lead to losing 5-stars airline status....F class will be out too.
3. Planned disposal of Bombardier CRJ1000 - 18. Done deal.
4. Retire 73 B737NG move over to B737 MAX, some domestic trunk routes to be flown by A330-800/900
5. Move 12 ATR 72 to Citilink.

The A330-800's are only on order so far. There are 4 total.

Yes, I did a mistake earlier on the fleet count, here is the current fleet count as of 8th June 2021:

Current fleet:
Airbus A330-200 - 7
Airbus A330-300 - 15
Airbus A330-900 - 3
ATR 72-600 - 12
Boeing 737-800 - 71
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 1
Boeing 777-300ER - 10
Bombardier CRJ1000 - 18
Total - 139

Leaving fleet (confirmed):
Bombardier CRJ1000 - 18

On order:
Airbus A330-800 - 4
Airbus A330-900 - 11
Boeing 737 MAX 8 - 49
Total - 97

jeffrey0032j wrote:

AngMoh wrote:

Vicenza wrote:

I'm not sure I'm understanding your points at all. You ask what is the purpose of the route, but if you have flown the portion of SIN-AMS (by fat most of the whole route) what then was your purpose for flying it.....so why are you questioning other people's reasons, and which no doubt would be very similar to your own?
Also, you say people choosing Full Y flights should fly Citilink. Why, and what then do you propose Garuda then fly? Indeed, you state you have frequently flown in empty J cabins, but yet you don't think people should fly Y. Am not being rude but, with all due respect, your post somewhat smacks of you are very happy to fly, but yet you seemingly question others having the same choice.

SIN-AMS only is flown by people looking for lowest rock bottom fare. This because the route is (was?) CGK-SIN-AMS-CGK due to the fact that the 77W can (could?) not take off from CGK with enough fuel to reach AMS. If you fly SIN-AMS only you are just an opportunity to make money of unsold seats.
There is a decent demand from AMS-CGK-rest of Indonesia and colonial history has to do with it. Even for SQ on AMS-SIN-AMS, a large proportion of passengers fly AMS-SIN-Indonesia-SIN-AMS. On AMS-SIN I estimate more than 80% of pax don't have SIN as end point but go on, mainly to Indonesia and Australia. Some are Indonesians who go back to see family. Others are Dutch with no family ties but a history in Indonesia. Example of such is my father who was supposed to do his military service in Netherlands New Guinea in the late 50s / early 60s. A point is: the dutch (and dutch-indonesians) are not all going to Bali or Jakarta but many other places and then Garuda is a gateway which gets you to less common places. If they would fly 787-8 or A330-800 on CGK-AMS, they could consistently fill the plane and achieve a high load factor without having to compromise fares (note that SQ fares went up a lot once they went from 77E/77W to A359 on AMS-SIN and that is with just 30 seats less per flight. And the flight is always packed). 787-9 and A330-900 could work, but I believe the A330-900 will need to leave a lot of cargo behind and is not suited for this route.

Its a common misconception that the 77W cannot make it CGK-AMS purely due to range issues. The actual issue is due to the pavement loading at CGK, where the loading on each of 77W's landing gears exceed the pavement strength at CGK. As such the 77W has to take off with less fuel than it can actually hold and thus fly less than it actually can.

What's the reason for the runway issues at CGK and why haven't they been addressed? Also, didn't they use to have 747s and yet they were able to operate those just fine?

filipinoavgeek wrote:

jeffrey0032j wrote:

AngMoh wrote:

SIN-AMS only is flown by people looking for lowest rock bottom fare. This because the route is (was?) CGK-SIN-AMS-CGK due to the fact that the 77W can (could?) not take off from CGK with enough fuel to reach AMS. If you fly SIN-AMS only you are just an opportunity to make money of unsold seats.
There is a decent demand from AMS-CGK-rest of Indonesia and colonial history has to do with it. Even for SQ on AMS-SIN-AMS, a large proportion of passengers fly AMS-SIN-Indonesia-SIN-AMS. On AMS-SIN I estimate more than 80% of pax don't have SIN as end point but go on, mainly to Indonesia and Australia. Some are Indonesians who go back to see family. Others are Dutch with no family ties but a history in Indonesia. Example of such is my father who was supposed to do his military service in Netherlands New Guinea in the late 50s / early 60s. A point is: the dutch (and dutch-indonesians) are not all going to Bali or Jakarta but many other places and then Garuda is a gateway which gets you to less common places. If they would fly 787-8 or A330-800 on CGK-AMS, they could consistently fill the plane and achieve a high load factor without having to compromise fares (note that SQ fares went up a lot once they went from 77E/77W to A359 on AMS-SIN and that is with just 30 seats less per flight. And the flight is always packed). 787-9 and A330-900 could work, but I believe the A330-900 will need to leave a lot of cargo behind and is not suited for this route.

Its a common misconception that the 77W cannot make it CGK-AMS purely due to range issues. The actual issue is due to the pavement loading at CGK, where the loading on each of 77W's landing gears exceed the pavement strength at CGK. As such the 77W has to take off with less fuel than it can actually hold and thus fly less than it actually can.

What's the reason for the runway issues at CGK and why haven't they been addressed? Also, didn't they use to have 747s and yet they were able to operate those just fine?

The 747 has more landing gears to spread out the weight of the aircraft.

Vicenza wrote:

I'm not sure I'm understanding your points at all. You ask what is the purpose of the route, but if you have flown the portion of SIN-AMS (by fat most of the whole route) what then was your purpose for flying it.....so why are you questioning other people's reasons, and which no doubt would be very similar to your own?
Also, you say people choosing Full Y flights should fly Citilink. Why, and what then do you propose Garuda then fly? Indeed, you state you have frequently flown in empty J cabins, but yet you don't think people should fly Y. Am not being rude but, with all due respect, your post somewhat smacks of you are very happy to fly, but yet you seemingly question others having the same choice.

I think you completely misunderstood me.

What I meant is that since someone higher up posted that GA will never ever drop AMS so I was questioning who this flight was for exactly, what the profile of the typical passenger was, if it was Indonesians going to NL or Dutch going to Indonesia etc. SIN-AMS is very different, especially since I only took the flight because the KL flight was cancelled and the AF one had already departed. Far from a normal occurence.

When I said Y flights I was referring to the A330 subfleet that only features economy class. I believe they are used for piligrimage flights and I think those should go to citilink unless there is a specific reason for them to be under GA, maybe there is a certain prestige associated with flying GA during Hajj, I don't know.

For J, I'm just saying that GA would gain a lot by at least having the same product throughout their fleet. My flights with them in Y have always been excellent and I highly encourage people to give them a try.

AngMoh wrote:

SIN-AMS only is flown by people looking for lowest rock bottom fare. This because the route is (was?) CGK-SIN-AMS-CGK due to the fact that the 77W can (could?) not take off from CGK with enough fuel to reach AMS. If you fly SIN-AMS only you are just an opportunity to make money of unsold seats.
There is a decent demand from AMS-CGK-rest of Indonesia and colonial history has to do with it. Even for SQ on AMS-SIN-AMS, a large proportion of passengers fly AMS-SIN-Indonesia-SIN-AMS. On AMS-SIN I estimate more than 80% of pax don't have SIN as end point but go on, mainly to Indonesia and Australia. Some are Indonesians who go back to see family. Others are Dutch with no family ties but a history in Indonesia. Example of such is my father who was supposed to do his military service in Netherlands New Guinea in the late 50s / early 60s. A point is: the dutch (and dutch-indonesians) are not all going to Bali or Jakarta but many other places and then Garuda is a gateway which gets you to less common places. If they would fly 787-8 or A330-800 on CGK-AMS, they could consistently fill the plane and achieve a high load factor without having to compromise fares (note that SQ fares went up a lot once they went from 77E/77W to A359 on AMS-SIN and that is with just 30 seats less per flight. And the flight is always packed). 787-9 and A330-900 could work, but I believe the A330-900 will need to leave a lot of cargo behind and is not suited for this route.

Thank you! I see, very interesting to hear such insights. Indeed many people seem to forget that Indonesia is more then just Jakarta and Bali. 270 million people simply cannot be reduced to 2 cities.

The 77W problems were a bit elusive as the LHR flights were leaving from CGK when AMS still had a stopover in SIN. I do believe the runways were repaved eventually which led to the end of the SIN stopover but I'm not 100% sure.

Some people seem to think the 251T A339 could make it without any problem? That would negate the need for the A338.

What they need to do is to order A321LR/XLR and use it to replace all their widebody operations.
And start doing partnership with Emirates for their European network and shelved the Amsterdam route.

ewt340 wrote:

What they need to do is to order A321LR/XLR and use it to replace all their widebody operations.
And start doing partnership with Emirates for their European network and shelved the Amsterdam route.

Good idea. GA needs to look for additional airline partner and now Etihad is also nearing bankrupt too.

Garuda says its returning pair of 737s to lessor early.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 021-06-07/

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Having only been on the SIN-AMS portion of the CGK-AMS route, what is the purpose of the route? I know colonial ties and all but what remains of those ties now? Are the Dutch investing a lot in the country? Or does the political elite love going to NL?

- The Netherlands is the fifth largest foreign investor in Indonesia, after Singapore, China, Japan and Hong Kong.
- For Indonesia, the Netherlands is the gateway to the EU (trade), and Indonesia (ASEAN region) is that for the Netherlands.
- The Indonesian diaspora in the Netherlands consists of approximately two million people. (After Indonesian independence, some 330,000 people emigrated to the Netherlands.)
- Before the pandemic, more than 220,000 Dutch tourists traveled to Indonesia every year.
- KLM flies to Denpasar because it is a popular holiday destination.
- For the Indonesian diaspora, Jakarta is an important destination for family visits. Most families are originally from the former Batavia (Jakarta) region and Bandung.
- Jakarta is an important transfer airport for the diaspora from the Moluccas and Papua region.
- For Dutch backpackers or traveling around Java, Jakarta is an important starting point. A popular rail journey is Jakarta-Bandung-Yokyakarta-Malang-Surabaya and ends in Bali.
- A popular route is (KLM) inbound to Jakarta, then sightseeing in Java, and then an outbound Denpasar (KLM) flight to Amsterdam.
- The fifth freedom flights CGK-KUL and DEN-SIN are very competitive. KLM tickets are cheaper than, for example, AirAsia. Plus KLM flies with a widebody, in-flight entertainment and free snacks and drinks. The disadvantage is that there is only one flight per day.
- And Garuda Indonesia is more highly regarded in the Netherlands than KLM. Garuda is often more expensive than KLM.

hannah9898 wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

What they need to do is to order A321LR/XLR and use it to replace all their widebody operations.
And start doing partnership with Emirates for their European network and shelved the Amsterdam route.

Good idea. GA needs to look for additional airline partner and now Etihad is also nearing bankrupt too.

Don't ever bring up the past Etihad agreement in a meeting with GA management. The GA team that signed it didn't know what they were doing- it was so bad and one sided (all in EY's favour) that even the GA outstation staff openly criticized it in quarterly meetings in JKT ("What the f*** did we sign?!?") This agreement was also why the CGK-DXB-AMS A330 flight was re-routed via AUH before it eventually went nonstop with the 777. The EY agreement later went down in GA Commercial Dept. history as the perfect example of what NOT to do in future negotiations.

hannah9898 wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

What they need to do is to order A321LR/XLR and use it to replace all their widebody operations.
And start doing partnership with Emirates for their European network and shelved the Amsterdam route.

Good idea. GA needs to look for additional airline partner and now Etihad is also nearing bankrupt too.

Truthfully, all GA needs to do is negotiate a better SPA agreement with KLM: more destinations and slightly lower rates. The AF side of the agreement only contains a few sectors- but as GA doesn't serve CDG it really doesn't matter.

NLDru wrote:

- The Netherlands is the fifth largest foreign investor in Indonesia, after Singapore, China, Japan and Hong Kong.
- For Indonesia, the Netherlands is the gateway to the EU (trade), and Indonesia (ASEAN region) is that for the Netherlands.
- The Indonesian diaspora in the Netherlands consists of approximately two million people. (After Indonesian independence, some 330,000 people emigrated to the Netherlands.)
- Before the pandemic, more than 220,000 Dutch tourists traveled to Indonesia every year.
- KLM flies to Denpasar because it is a popular holiday destination.
- For the Indonesian diaspora, Jakarta is an important destination for family visits. Most families are originally from the former Batavia (Jakarta) region and Bandung.
- Jakarta is an important transfer airport for the diaspora from the Moluccas and Papua region.
- For Dutch backpackers or traveling around Java, Jakarta is an important starting point. A popular rail journey is Jakarta-Bandung-Yokyakarta-Malang-Surabaya and ends in Bali.
- A popular route is (KLM) inbound to Jakarta, then sightseeing in Java, and then an outbound Denpasar (KLM) flight to Amsterdam.
- The fifth freedom flights CGK-KUL and DEN-SIN are very competitive. KLM tickets are cheaper than, for example, AirAsia. Plus KLM flies with a widebody, in-flight entertainment and free snacks and drinks. The disadvantage is that there is only one flight per day.
- And Garuda Indonesia is more highly regarded in the Netherlands than KLM. Garuda is often more expensive than KLM.

Great stuff! Thanks so much for the insights. It makes the ties between the two countries all the more obvious now.

I've been on the SIN-DPS flight a few times and its always been a pleasure, KL prices in J were often very affordable and the comfort of a widebody cannot be understated. Full meal and even a small delft house! Timings were relatively good too, leave work early on Friday and come back late Sunday after a good dinner by the beach. Can't wait for it to come back.

I hope GA can make the route work, inevitably as the country's economy develops so with its ability to sustain long haul routes.

NLDru wrote:

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

Having only been on the SIN-AMS portion of the CGK-AMS route, what is the purpose of the route? I know colonial ties and all but what remains of those ties now? Are the Dutch investing a lot in the country? Or does the political elite love going to NL?

- The Netherlands is the fifth largest foreign investor in Indonesia, after Singapore, China, Japan and Hong Kong.
- For Indonesia, the Netherlands is the gateway to the EU (trade), and Indonesia (ASEAN region) is that for the Netherlands.
- The Indonesian diaspora in the Netherlands consists of approximately two million people. (After Indonesian independence, some 330,000 people emigrated to the Netherlands.)
- Before the pandemic, more than 220,000 Dutch tourists traveled to Indonesia every year.
- KLM flies to Denpasar because it is a popular holiday destination.
- For the Indonesian diaspora, Jakarta is an important destination for family visits. Most families are originally from the former Batavia (Jakarta) region and Bandung.
- Jakarta is an important transfer airport for the diaspora from the Moluccas and Papua region.
- For Dutch backpackers or traveling around Java, Jakarta is an important starting point. A popular rail journey is Jakarta-Bandung-Yokyakarta-Malang-Surabaya and ends in Bali.
- A popular route is (KLM) inbound to Jakarta, then sightseeing in Java, and then an outbound Denpasar (KLM) flight to Amsterdam.
- The fifth freedom flights CGK-KUL and DEN-SIN are very competitive. KLM tickets are cheaper than, for example, AirAsia. Plus KLM flies with a widebody, in-flight entertainment and free snacks and drinks. The disadvantage is that there is only one flight per day.
- And Garuda Indonesia is more highly regarded in the Netherlands than KLM. Garuda is often more expensive than KLM.

That's kind of the problem. Big percentages of passengers traveling between the Netherlands and Indonesia are tourists. Sure they are some business travelers who would spend some money on premium classes. But it wouldn't be enough for 2 airlines to compete over them.

In terms of tourists, most of them would be flying on the cheaper option, which would be KLM, Qatar or Emirates.

This is one of my main problem with GA. They know that majority of Indonesians can't afford their ticket prices. But they still keeping those ticket prices high for no reason. Hence why they got destroyed on the domestic market.

In my opinion it’s a systematic cost problem, government meddling and corruption that has them yet again facing bankruptcy. Just like Malaysian and Thai, forget about yet another rescue plan. Nothing will change until they are run properly without the shadow of government hanging over (and making) every small decision. The airports themselves don’t help Garuda. Just look at the mess that is Jakarta Terminal 3.

I wish them well. They are a great airline to fly with, as are citilink. The Garuda onboard product is fantastic, and it’s fleet modern. Contrary to popular belief, there are yields to be earned in Indonesian domestic routes and the economy is growing. Jakarta flying 5hr+ isn’t easy and low yield - perhaps Garuda should abandon this in favour of Bali hub, where there is a good mix of higher yielding inbound traffic?

My opinion. Jakarta & Bali = Garuda.
Regional hubs = ‘Garuda’ Citilink.
Fleet consolidated to A330, 320 and ATR flying for both airlines. The 320 allows for flexibility on operating longer haul flights that the 737 lacks.

BestWestern wrote:

In my opinion it’s a systematic cost problem, government meddling and corruption that has them yet again facing bankruptcy. Just like Malaysian and Thai, forget about yet another rescue plan. Nothing will change until they are run properly without the shadow of government hanging over (and making) every small decision. The airports themselves don’t help Garuda. Just look at the mess that is Jakarta Terminal 3.

I wish them well. They are a great airline to fly with, as are citilink. The Garuda onboard product is fantastic, and it’s fleet modern. Contrary to popular belief, there are yields to be earned in Indonesian domestic routes and the economy is growing. Jakarta flying 5hr+ isn’t easy and low yield - perhaps Garuda should abandon this in favour of Bali hub, where there is a good mix of higher yielding inbound traffic?

My opinion. Jakarta & Bali = Garuda.
Regional hubs = ‘Garuda’ Citilink.
Fleet consolidated to A330, 320 and ATR flying for both airlines. The 320 allows for flexibility on operating longer haul flights that the 737 lacks.

I agree with the comments in your first paragraph. I beg to differ on the second - I'd say, they are sometimes a great airline to fly but quite often, indeed in 2019 more often than not, inconsistent. Same problem with MH and somewhat less so, TG. CGK has a tonne of wealthy people who travel - and who don't fly Garuda. That is a significant problem IMHO. At DPS less so as more of a tourist market. KUL has a similar problem to CGK. The business is going to other carriers. It's not that there's not demand or that there's insufficient numbers of population to sustain a reasonable and diverse long-haul premium travel offering to Europe, Middle East, Australasia, East and South Asia. The question is - who has been taking this business for quite some time and how to win it back? No prizes for guessing....

The big challenge with DPS is 95% of the traffic is not originating in DPS so you have these wildly seasonal flights (ex Australia, Japan, for example) where the aircraft can operate completely full one way and completely empty the other. Then in very low demand periods (February ex Australia, just after the long Christmas break and school has returned) you can't give it away. and you do ad hoc flight cancellations to minimize the loss. FYI you also can't trans-ship cargo in DPS- only CGK, so that's another revenue stream that's not available.

During my time there, the AMS-CGK business class load was fairly decent and the onboard product much better than KLM (via KUL).

I am not sure DPS especially medium/long-haul is the market GA as a full-service legacy carrier should be fighting for. Its virtually entirely a seasonal leisure market.

In that case GA would probably be better off getting narrowbodies capable of reaching SYD/MEL/BNE/TYO from DPS and cycle in wide bodies those during peak seasons?

What is the trans shipment issue due to? Will the new terminal solve this?

I'm sure GA can negotiate a good deal with KL, both probably have a lot to gain from it. Didn't AF serve CGK as a tag on from SIN at some point? Or was it KUL I can't remember.

Indo law stipulates cargo can only be trans-shipped in CGK and only from GA to GA.
If the cargo's final destination is actually DPS, people with local knowledge always ship this cargo via CGK instead of direct to DPS as that airport is known for high, extra "unofficial" custom fees payable on the spot in DPS.

eta unknown wrote:

Indo law stipulates cargo can only be trans-shipped in CGK and only from GA to GA.
If the cargo's final destination is actually DPS, people with local knowledge always ship this cargo via CGK instead of direct to DPS as that airport is known for high, extra "unofficial" custom fees payable on the spot in DPS.

We Always found Surabaya (port) to have the least amount of customs related theft, with Jakarta (airport) being the biggest problem. Everything with that airport is a disaster. Just look at T3. For about a year, CX had their own additional security checks in Jakarta, and far less in Bali.

In the Space of three years I flew HKG DPS about thirty times for work. By far the best service was on Garuda. Hong Kong Airlines was the pits. As was mentioned above, DPS is 95% inbound, which meant it was great for using FFP’s for redemption from HK. I’m a big CX fan, but to DPS they operated clapped out 777s and the service was so degraded in composing to equal length flights.

Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) suspend GA stock today as the company missed the 14-day grace period on a bond payment.

https://kumparan.com/kumparanbisnis/bre ... rce=kumApp

From reading this thread and links, Garuda sounds like a disaster. How in the world did a tiny airline end up with such a motley fleet, they are (probably soon to be were) the anti-Southwest. Liquidation seems like the best option. Let someone else start a new airline, Garuda needs to be euthanized.

Jetport wrote:

From reading this thread and links, Garuda sounds like a disaster. How in the world did a tiny airline end up with such a motley fleet, they are (probably soon to be were) the anti-Southwest. Liquidation seems like the best option. Let someone else start a new airline, Garuda needs to be euthanized.

Just curious, on what metric is Garuda a "tiny" airline ?

LTEN11 wrote:

Jetport wrote:

From reading this thread and links, Garuda sounds like a disaster. How in the world did a tiny airline end up with such a motley fleet, they are (probably soon to be were) the anti-Southwest. Liquidation seems like the best option. Let someone else start a new airline, Garuda needs to be euthanized.

Just curious, on what metric is Garuda a "tiny" airline ?

Further how is it a “motley” fleet? 737s, A330s, 77W, CRJ-1000, and ATR. In fact, I’d argue that provide a lot of coverage with little overlap. Sure, it doesn’t account for what Garuda needs, but it’s hardly motley.

Jetport wrote:

From reading this thread and links, Garuda sounds like a disaster. How in the world did a tiny airline end up with such a motley fleet, they are (probably soon to be were) the anti-Southwest. Liquidation seems like the best option. Let someone else start a new airline, Garuda needs to be euthanized.

Not tiny, just losing market share to its main competitor.

As poorly as Garuda is doing these days, it's sad to see just how much some users in this site appear to be so biased against Asian carriers. Calling Garuda a "tiny" airline despite being the flag carrier of the world's fourth most populous nation at least to me feels like ignorance, among other things. Plus all the calls to liquidate flag carriers in the region, something I can't imagine them thinking of had these airlines been based in the Americas or Europe instead.

mercure1 wrote:

I am not sure DPS especially medium/long-haul is the market GA as a full-service legacy carrier should be fighting for. Its virtually entirely a seasonal leisure market.

Seasonal for whom ? What do you mean precisely? what is seasonal / holidays for one in the northern hemisphere is not for southern hemisphere or those on the equator. And there are also differences within regions. Bali itself has only a couple of months in the year where you would - perhaps - choose to avoid due to the high possibility of significant rain. Most countries, however, also fall into that category with some months less desirable than others, depending on your interests. Bali is nicely situated to take advantage of "seasonal" holidays for those on the equator, in the north and in the south. Not a bargain basement destination any more either. There are now many high end resorts that one can fork out an arm and a leg for. And plenty upper middle tier places too. I agree with many comments above, however, that the vast majority of traffic, particularly premium traffic, is inbound rather than originating in Bali itself or in Indonesia. What does this offer us in terms of how GA should reconfigure its rather minimal long haul network? Not a lot really. They have to find a better way - perhaps they should focus GA on Jakarta and set up a separate business unit to focus on Bali?

filipinoavgeek wrote:

As poorly as Garuda is doing these days, it's sad to see just how much some users in this site appear to be so biased against Asian carriers. Calling Garuda a "tiny" airline despite being the flag carrier of the world's fourth most populous nation at least to me feels like ignorance, among other things. Plus all the calls to liquidate flag carriers in the region, something I can't imagine them thinking of had these airlines been based in the Americas or Europe instead.

I don't see this as anti-Asian bias. I've seen similar things posted about failing flag carriers such as South African Airways and Alitalia and lots of negative comments about airlines getting covid relief all around the world.

According to local news, Garuda will drop several international destination. PER, MEL, and KIX confirmed will be dropped while KUL, ICN, and AMS are considered to be axed aswell. Part of restruction i guess and they also planning to offload several widebodies (several 777 and A330) so it make sense.

It surprises me that routes to BKK, HKG, and several China city is profitable right now, i guess it's thanks to cargo demand.

link to the news (Indonesian only)
https://money.kompas.com/read/2021/06/21/203500226/ini-rute-rute-internasional-yang-bakal-ditutup-garuda-indonesia-

TWA767 wrote:

According to local news, Garuda will drop several international destination. PER, MEL, and KIX confirmed will be dropped while KUL, ICN, and AMS are considered to be axed aswell. Part of restruction i guess and they also planning to offload several widebodies (several 777 and A330) so it make sense.

It surprises me that routes to BKK, HKG, and several China city is profitable right now, i guess it's thanks to cargo demand.

link to the news (Indonesian only)
https://money.kompas.com/read/2021/06/21/203500226/ini-rute-rute-internasional-yang-bakal-ditutup-garuda-indonesia-

It's surprising to me how they still have B777-300ER in their fleet after all this time. Even before the pandemic they already have problems with filling them in.

Also, flight to other Southeast Asian and Chinese destinations have always been profitable for Garuda. There's high demand for them from Jakarta and they could use B737-800 for such flights.

TWA767 wrote:

According to local news, Garuda will drop several international destination. PER, MEL, and KIX confirmed will be dropped while KUL, ICN, and AMS are considered to be axed aswell. Part of restruction i guess and they also planning to offload several widebodies (several 777 and A330) so it make sense.

It surprises me that routes to BKK, HKG, and several China city is profitable right now, i guess it's thanks to cargo demand.

link to the news (Indonesian only)
https://money.kompas.com/read/2021/06/21/203500226/ini-rute-rute-internasional-yang-bakal-ditutup-garuda-indonesia-

Not a big surprise really as they need to take some drastic action.

Will be interesting to see if Citilink continue to fly internationally. They had even started flying to Avalon near Melbourne prior to the pandemic from DPS.

With GA looking likely to drop MEL, where they flew from both DPS and CGK, will be interesting to see what occurs there.

Garuda Indonesia suspends flights between Perth and Bali

Garuda is axing flights between Perth and Bali from July 1, marking the first time in two decades the Indonesian carrier will not offer a service to WA.

https://www.perthnow.com.au/travel/garu ... 881908258z

Garuda Indonesia weighs court-led debt restructuring, to shrink fleet

Flag carrier Garuda Indonesia, which last week defaulted on a US$500 million sukuk, is considering a court supervised debt restructuring process and is in talks to slash its fleet size, company executives said on Monday (Jun 21).

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/bu ... t-15066478
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Transp ... 20pandemic.

Salient points:
> Estimated net loss for 2020 is US$2 billion
> Total debt is about US$4.5 billion
> US$100 million negative cashflow a month due to high costs and low revenues during the coronavirus pandemic
> Seeking a suspension on payments for most liabilities, considering whether to negotiate its mounting debt in or out of court
> Dropping unprofitable routes such as Jakarta-Osaka, Melbourne and Perth next month July
> Reviewing Amsterdam, Kuala Lumpur and Sydney
> Reducing Singapore frequency
> Currently only flies 41 planes of the 142 in its fleet
> Has returned 20 planes to lessors and is in negotiation to return seven more
> Renegotiated lease has saved the company US$11 million per month
> Presented to parliament a five-year business plan from 2022, which includes a goal for positive EBITDA and a fleet of 66 planes. The plan assumes a turnaround period starting from the second half of this year
> Terminated 2,300 staff from total of 7,800 before the the pandemic started
> Offer early retirement program, more than 1,000 staff has applied

With the reports that they could be getting rid of at least some A330s, could this be the end of their A330neo order too?

GA Sales & Marketing manager Continental Europe expects AMS route to remain in the network, citing positive outlook for the coming weeks and months.

https://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/nieuws/categorie/2/airlines/garuda-neemt-lijndienst-naar-schiphol-onder-de-loep-maar-vooruitzichten-positief (in Dutch)