AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

KarelXWB · Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:12 am

Tony Fernandes says new A330neo will allow AirAsia X to launch KUL-LGW from 2018. Aircraft will have 360 seats, down from 377 seats on the current generation A330s.

http://twitter.com/JamesWorldNews/status/705693007551533056
http://twitter.com/SpaethFlies/status/705691349551439872

BestWestern · Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:29 am

A much more efficient KL hub for Air Asia that allows significant transit flows, a remarkably good 'J' product, a stronger brand in Asia, better product distribution and more efficient aircraft should make this more successful this time, however with X3 daily already to London, there is a lot of direct capacity on the route.

BA is extensively and professionally advertising their 787-9 service in KUL and on the airport express from the airport these days, and showing their first cabin (not mentioning its first though), so they must be somewhat struggling in the market. They are up against a double daily A380 with great MH service too.

With direct CDG, FRA and AMS all well down in capacity or eliminated from the market totally, I'd believe that there are other low hanging fruits that should come first.

I did a domestic day trip with Air Asia from KUL to JHB (in the south of Malaysia, close to Singapore) this week and was the only person in my row not connecting on the return flight. The morning departure ex KL was full of corporate day traffic who would take the evening flight back - I could get the 1pm as my meeting was literally 500metres from the jet bridge in JHB.

behramjee · Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:52 am

I dont see why they would want to venture into London when already MH is double daily + BA daily. Yes demand is higher but the competition level (especially for direct nonstop) is also there to contend with !

They are better off like in any business focusing on markets where they can have a monopoly position hence can get high demand and at times dictate pricing leading to better yield margins. From S16 season, there are no nonstop flights from CDG, FRA and Italy into KUL and all three see good demand + they are shorter flights than LGW hence cheaper to operate.

2015 pax demand stats for KUL-EU was as follows:

CDG - 133K
FRA - 54K
MAN - 40K
MUC - 30K
FCO - 29K
MXP - 28K
ZRH - 25K

If the competitive situation remains as is by S18, then logically, Air Asia X's first EU route should be 4 weekly KUL-CDG nonstop followed by KUL-FRA !

gabrielchew · Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:42 pm

Quoting behramjee (Reply 2):

I agree, since MH have abandoned the rest of the EU, Air Asia would do well to try a different European city rather than just go for London again. Did MH drop CDG/AMS because they couldn't fill the plane (poor customer brand perception) or because they needed to dump the 777 ASAP? I heard the AMS loads were still pretty good when MH dropped it.

mercure1 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:32 pm

Come 2018, MAS will be switching London from A380 to new A350s according to its statements assuming MAS survives in current form.

There likely as result be a good seat gap which AAX can likely exploit. Also remember AAX is simply not about KUL, but offers wide variety of connection markets on sister companies and assume by 2018 these companies will be even bigger with more destinations feed opportunity.

behramjee · Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:46 pm

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 4):
There likely as result be a good seat gap which AAX can likely exploit. Also remember AAX is simply not about KUL, but offers wide variety of connection markets on sister companies and assume by 2018 these companies will be even bigger with more destinations feed opportunity.

the MH capacity downgrade from A380 to A359 will not make a difference like you have suggested. The primary target of AAX is point to point traffic bound to Malaysia and not overly reliant on transfer flow.

directorguy · Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:51 pm

Didn't Air Asia X operate to London, albeit briefly, via DXB during the 2000s?

LAXintl · Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:59 pm

Quoting behramjee (Reply 5):
The primary target of AAX is point to point traffic bound to Malaysia and not overly reliant on transfer flow.

You realize that as of 2015Q3, 56% of passengers on Air Asia X flights are connections right? They operate very much along the lines of tradition carrier in that regard.

Anyhow, come 2018 with growth of consumerism in Asia, the local market should grow also. There should be growing demand to access the UK from Malaysia and other nearby markets hopefully.

Back to the point, I think it would be great to see them in Europe again, and further disrupt the market a bit more for MAS and others.

LondonCity · Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:09 pm

Quoting Directorguy (Reply 6):
Didn't Air Asia X operate to London, albeit briefly, via DXB during the 2000s?

No. D7's flights have always neem non-stop KUL-LON. Initially D7 used AC's second-hand A340-300s (with the same 2-4-2 seating) but later squeezed in more seats to make Y -3-3-3.

D7 started its LON route by arriving at STN. It planned to operate into MAN ...but it never did. Instead D7 started service to Paris ORY.

Towards the end of its time in Europe, D7 switched its LON flights from STN to LGW. At the time D7 claimed LGW offered better connecting opportunities.

[email protected] · Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:53 pm

I flew on one of D7's early STN-KUL-STN and paid £198 return.

behramjee · Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:06 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7):

Quoting behramjee (Reply 5):
The primary target of AAX is point to point traffic bound to Malaysia and not overly reliant on transfer flow.

You realize that as of 2015Q3, 56% of passengers on Air Asia X flights are connections right? They operate very much along the lines of tradition carrier in that regard.

Anyhow, come 2018 with growth of consumerism in Asia, the local market should grow also. There should be growing demand to access the UK from Malaysia and other nearby markets hopefully.

Back to the point, I think it would be great to see them in Europe again, and further disrupt the market a bit more for MAS and others.

The 56pct transit number you are mentioning herewith is it via KUL to Asia ie international to international or does it include transit via KUL to Malaysia domestic too? Because the stat that I had when they operated Paris and London in the past on the ex AC A343s was that Malaysia being the final destination constituted 76% of the flight load.

LAXintl · Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:23 pm

Quoting behramjee (Reply 10):
The 56pct transit number you are mentioning herewith is it via KUL to Asia ie international to international or does it include transit via KUL to Malaysia domestic too? Because the stat that I had when they operated Paris and London in the past on the ex AC A343s was that Malaysia being the final destination constituted 76% of the flight load.

You'd have to ask AAX. Per their investor update they stated 56% of passengers as of Q3 2015 that flew on AAX were transfers across the broader Air Asia network with most popular markets such as Australia–Thailand and Indonesia-China.

The point is AAX would not be solely reliant on the point-to-point game if it ventures back to London. It would have ability to sell London from across its network and draw people far and wide. It has much more than simply reliant or battling it out on KUL-LON.

PatrickZ80 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:23 pm

I'm afraid it won't work for them again since they got a lot of competition on flights to London. It's just not the right destination for them.

Some plan that might work out for them is to fly KUL-BUD and use W6 as a feeder airline. That way they can still offer London as a destination, altough it would be LTN since that's the London airport for W6. Passengers would then transfer at BUD. And not only London, but many more places in Europe.

LondonCity · Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):
It would have ability to sell London from across its network and draw people far and wide. It has much more than simply reliant or battling it out on KUL-LON.

But as the Gulf carriers expand in SE Asia/Australasia they too can offer UK passengers one-stop flights, often at keen fares which include extras (catering/drinks/checked bags/IFE) for which D7 charges extra, to points throughout that region.

D7 started flyingex-STN with return fares from £198. But in its final days of operation that price had increased subststantially.

The point is that not all UK travellers live in the London area. A good number come from the N of England and Scotland from where the Gulf carriers are active.

So if I live in Edinburgh and I want to fly D7 then it's going to cost me roughly £100 extra (return) to join a D7 flight ex-LGW to KUL or elsewhere on the network.

spud757 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:43 pm

In Europe, and especially at LGW, it would be good if D7 could work out a connection deal with U2. Yes, I appreciate U2 do not offer connections but this could present a unique opportunity for two carriers with a common business model to link their LON and KUL hubs.

An alternative LCC to work with out of LGW would be DY.

mercure1 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:58 pm

Quoting PatrickZ80 (Reply 12):
It's just not the right destination for them.

As a Malaysian carrier it is. Like MAS CEO Mueller said just last week in interview about Europe routes.

"London has never been questioned as a destination in our network. London is basically so big, so important to Malaysia, for a variety of reasons, that we would never have contemplated touching that route"

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 13):

The market place is neither owned by anyone be it ME3 or anyone else, and nor is the market a fixed in size.

Certainly nothing wrong with AAX jumping back in. They very well can stir things up, they offer a massive network on the Asia end and combined with their low cost base have a good opportunity to give consumers another option.

[Edited 2016-03-04 15:04:07]

AirbusA6 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:16 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
BA is extensively and professionally advertising their 787-9 service in KUL and on the airport express from the airport these days, and showing their first cabin (not mentioning its first though), so they must be somewhat struggling in the market. They are up against a double daily A380 with great MH service too.

If BA are flying the 9Y 787 against the MH A380, I know which airline I'd choose

The ME3 are stiff competition for any operators operating between Europe and SE Asia, as with one stop they can serve so many secondary airports. The A330neo may be more efficient than the A340 and A330ceo, but it's not THAT much more efficient

PatrickZ80 · Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:33 pm

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 13):
But as the Gulf carriers expand in SE Asia/Australasia they too can offer UK passengers one-stop flights, often at keen fares which include extras (catering/drinks/checked bags/IFE) for which D7 charges extra, to points throughout that region.

D7 started flyingex-STN with return fares from £198. But in its final days of operation that price had increased subststantially.

The point is that not all UK travellers live in the London area. A good number come from the N of England and Scotland from where the Gulf carriers are active.

So if I live in Edinburgh and I want to fly D7 then it's going to cost me roughly £100 extra (return) to join a D7 flight ex-LGW to KUL or elsewhere on the network.

Good point indeed.

Quoting spud757 (Reply 14):
In Europe, and especially at LGW, it would be good if D7 could work out a connection deal with U2. Yes, I appreciate U2 do not offer connections but this could present a unique opportunity for two carriers with a common business model to link their LON and KUL hubs.

An alternative LCC to work with out of LGW would be DY.

U2 indeed has a large base at LGW and therefor is in the position to offer feeder flights, but they're relatively expensive for a low-cost airline. DY wouldn't really be an option since they got their own flights into their territory. I think the DY flights to BKK are serious competition for D7 and they won't get along very well.

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 15):
As a Malaysian carrier it is. Like MAS CEO Mueller said just last week in interview about Europe routes.

"London has never been questioned as a destination in our network. London is basically so big, so important to Malaysia, for a variety of reasons, that we would never have contemplated touching that route"

That's what he says indeed, but I say he's wrong. London alone is not enough to make these flights profitable. Nothing wrong at the Malaysian end of the line, they got a good solid network over there. Feeder flights to all over Asia. But the problem lies at the European end of the line. It's not just London connecting to Asia, it's Europe connecting to Asia. If they want to make these flights profitable they need a larger catchment area in Europe. Not just London, not even just Britain, but all of Europe.

I remember when I went to Thailand a few years back, i flew DY because that was the cheapest airline connecting Europe to Asia. That flight happened to go from ARN, so I flew to ARN first. No big deal. Therefor D7 can pick any European airport as their destination as long as there are good feeder flights available. That way they can make all of Europe (including London) their catchment area.

col · Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:11 am

BA are a rip off airline on the KUL route. You fly on their Economy plus product and if you want to book your seats in advance it is 160 GBP. Unfortunately my in laws fell foul of this. They saved up to come to visit us in Economy plus rather than BA cramped Economy, then at the end of the booking they had to pay the extra for booking seats. If I would have known I would have advised CX/SQ, but my 87 year old Father in law used to be a big user of BA and my mother in law wanted to ensure they sat together. I tried to get their money back saying that no other carrier does this, but the Indian Call centre just kept reading the BA seat policy. They should have the policy at the pre booking phase, so that it is known. I and they did not realise BA is run as an LCC. As far as I understand they are the only airline coming to Asia that rips older people off this way.

So anyone flying LHR to KUL, use MH, better plane, better crews and they don't rip you off.

IndianicWorld · Sat Mar 05, 2016 2:28 am

Quoting col (Reply 18):
BA are a rip off airline on the KUL route.

The situation you describe may appear a rip off but at the end of the day their T&C's would clearly state their policy.

It is the purchasers responsibility to check these things whether we like it or not.

BlueShamu330s · Sat Mar 05, 2016 5:18 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
BA is extensively and professionally advertising their 787-9 service in KUL and on the airport express from the airport these days, and showing their first cabin (not mentioning its first though), so they must be somewhat struggling in the market. They are up against a double daily A380 with great MH service too.

KUL has turned into something of a success for BA this time round. No doubt, MH's woes have helped; that and the fact BA and MH still do not code share.

Try getting a J or F redemption a month out is nigh impossible and POUGs are extremely rare.

Anecdotally, I've done the return 3 times in the last 5 weeks. every sector has been overbooked, one had J overbooked by 8, and February is hardly high season. Ticket prices were £1190 for a W class return, £2700 for a J return and £3800 for an F/J combo. Every flight went out full.

Quoting col (Reply 18):
So anyone flying LHR to KUL, use MH, better plane, better crews and they don't rip you off.

Can't agree. Whilst I love the A380, the B787-9 beats it hands down for long hauling. It's the only aircraft I get off after a 13 hour flight feeling refreshed and not jet lagged. I got off the HKG-LHR A380 yesterday and felt dreadful by comparison; and at the moment, the state of the MH A380s interiors are not their best, whilst the BA B787-9s still have that new car smell.

On the subject of paying for seats, you don't have to pay. BA give you the choice. The seating matrix will seat couples and families together for those choosing not to pay (acknowledging sometimes it does go awry). However, I regard it as a useful benefit and reward for status passengers to be able to select their seats at time of booking free of charge over non-status passengers; and when frequent flyer programs are constantly being downwardly "enhanced," any little perk is welcome.

Rgds

BestWestern · Sat Mar 05, 2016 8:34 am

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 20):
and February is hardly high season.

February is Chinese New Year month - only December is higher season in Malaysia.

If everything is so rosy and all flights are full, why is the airport express and arrivals hall plastered with adverts?

LJ · Sat Mar 05, 2016 9:43 am

Quoting gabrielchew (Reply 3):
I heard the AMS loads were still pretty good when MH dropped it.

However, MH was always one of the cheapest options to fly to SE Asia and Australia. Moreover a lot of touroperators used MH. Loads and profit are not always the same.

Moreover, AF handed the extra 3 weekly flights over to KL, thus we'll have 10 weekly nonstops between AMS and KUL (though 7 continue to CGK) in S16. Therefore, I doubt AMS is interesting for AirAsia X

PatrickZ80 · Sat Mar 05, 2016 10:38 am

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 20):
and February is hardly high season

It is in Asia since that's the dry season. Most people prefer Asia in the dry season when there's more chance of sunshine and less chance of rain. Summer is low season in Asia because that's the rain season.

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 19):
Anecdotally, I've done the return 3 times in the last 5 weeks. every sector has been overbooked, one had J overbooked by 8, and February is hardly high season. Ticket prices were £1190 for a W class return, £2700 for a J return and £3800 for an F/J combo. Every flight went out full.

Then it's time to look for other options, perhaps make a transfer somewhere instead of a direct flight. EK mostly has some good deals. DY might also be an option, despite the fact that you need feeder flights at both end of the line. Mostly you can get a far better deal if you consider options like these.

When I went to Thailand a few years ago there were also quite some British on board, eventough I flew out of ARN. But DY has a good number of feeder flights from ARN to all over Britain so their coverage is quite good. I sat next to a girl from London and she flew LGW-ARN-BKK because for her that was the cheapest option to get from LGW to BKK.

BlueShamu330s · Sun Mar 06, 2016 7:36 am

Quoting PatrickZ80 (Reply 23):
Then it's time to look for other options, perhaps make a transfer somewhere instead of a direct flight. EK mostly has some good deals. DY might also be an option, despite the fact that you need feeder flights at both end of the line. Mostly you can get a far better deal if you consider options like these.

Why? What I get from the BAEC via status turns into value in the ticket price I pay. I dislike EK, its brassy brashness and the fact I can't get a decent sleep if the journey is broken up into two mid-haul 6 hour sectors. I loathe bottom feeder DY and its trading ethics. When you make >12 hour trips son a regular basis, other factors become more important than simple cost; convenience, speed of transit and loyalty rewards factor more for me, so BA and One World beat the two you mention every time; plus, with MH being a fellow OneWorld carrier, I can through check my baggage to my local Malaysian destination at point of origin, even if my MH domestics are on a separate PNR.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 21):
If everything is so rosy and all flights are full, why is the airport express and arrivals hall plastered with adverts?

Virgin is meant to be doing great to the USA again, but it doesn't stop them from slapping adverts all over T5 at LHR...

Marketing101

Rgds

LJ · Sun Mar 06, 2016 7:53 am

Quoting PatrickZ80 (Reply 23):

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 19):
Anecdotally, I've done the return 3 times in the last 5 weeks. every sector has been overbooked, one had J overbooked by 8, and February is hardly high season. Ticket prices were £1190 for a W class return, £2700 for a J return and £3800 for an F/J combo. Every flight went out full.

Then it's time to look for other options,

Why? GBP 2,700 for a return LHR-KUL-LHR in J is very cheap.

BestWestern · Sun Mar 06, 2016 10:07 am

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 24):
but it doesn't stop them from slapping adverts all over T5 at LHR...

Advertising a x9 daily service in Heathrow home base makes sense. BA wouldn't advertise in KUL if the flights were full.

One of the big issues in Malaysia at the moment is that local yields are depressed due to the collapse in the MYR.

LondonCity · Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:12 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 26):
One of the big issues in Malaysia at the moment is that local yields are depressed due to the collapse in the MYR.

More European airlines than today used to fly to KUL many years ago. But during the last Asian economic downturn some years ago, they withdrew their flights because of the plunging value of the Malaysian dollar. Indeed at one time, BA used to route some its kangaroo route flights via KUL in addition to BKK/SIN.

Hopefully, this time, BA will maintain its KUL service.

readytotaxi · Sun Mar 06, 2016 1:01 pm

Air AsiaX J product on the A330, is that the old lay flat on a slant type seat?

PatrickZ80 · Sun Mar 06, 2016 2:17 pm

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 24):
Why? What I get from the BAEC via status turns into value in the ticket price I pay. I dislike EK, its brassy brashness and the fact I can't get a decent sleep if the journey is broken up into two mid-haul 6 hour sectors. I loathe bottom feeder DY and its trading ethics. When you make >12 hour trips son a regular basis, other factors become more important than simple cost; convenience, speed of transit and loyalty rewards factor more for me, so BA and One World beat the two you mention every time; plus, with MH being a fellow OneWorld carrier, I can through check my baggage to my local Malaysian destination at point of origin, even if my MH domestics are on a separate PNR.

It depends on what you're looking for, and clearly some passengers got other demands than others. Indeed you get value for the ticket price you pay, but not everyone is looking for value. Some just want the best price. And let's not forget, D7 and DY are low-cost carriers. They're aiming at people who want the best price and are willing to give up convenience for that. Clearly that's not the case with you, but that's just you and not everybody. Besides, not everybody travels on a regular basis. Most people, specially those who D7 and DY are aiming at, travel distances like this only once or twice in a lifetime.

Quoting LJ (Reply 25):
Why? GBP 2,700 for a return LHR-KUL-LHR in J is very cheap.

Maybe, but not everyone wants to fly J-class. Most people are satisfied with Y-class and just want the best price.

A few years ago I made a trip AMS-ARN-BKK and back BKK-OSL-AMS. What did the whole trip (forth and back) cost me in total? Less than 500 euros. That's less than 250 euros one way. That's what I call cheap and that's the reason I was able to make that trip. If it would have been more expensive I would not have gone at all.

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 27):
More European airlines than today used to fly to KUL many years ago. But during the last Asian economic downturn some years ago, they withdrew their flights because of the plunging value of the Malaysian dollar. Indeed at one time, BA used to route some its kangaroo route flights via KUL in addition to BKK/SIN.

Who cares if you fly to KUL, BKK or SIN. All of them are large hubs with good connecting flights to all over southeast Asia, so it doesn't really matter much where your flight lands. You may need a feeder flight, but those are dirt cheap. If I need to go to KUL and I can get a good deal by flying to BKK and then on a feeder further to KUL I'll do that.

LJ · Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:13 pm

Quoting PatrickZ80 (Reply 29):
Maybe, but not everyone wants to fly J-class. Most people are satisfied with Y-class and just want the best price.

Yet the discussion was about how succesfull BA is on LHR-KUL. It's easy to fill your flight with low yield Y pax. However, they can only make a profit on these routes if there are ample of people who pay (substantial) more. Given these low fares for a very good product (MH charges similar fares), it will be difficult for AirAsia X to get its premium cabin filled against a decent yield.

PatrickZ80 · Sun Mar 06, 2016 7:57 pm

Quoting LJ (Reply 30):
Yet the discussion was about how succesfull BA is on LHR-KUL.

That's where it went along the way, but originally it was about D7 starting KUL-LGW. BA is a different kind of airline, or at least they're supposed to be. The only airline you can compare D7 to is DY, they're both in the same market.

DY is succesful in connecting BKK to OSL, ARN and CPH. These countries do not have any historical bounds with Thailand, but that doesn't matter to them. Most passengers on these flights do not have Oslo, Stockholm or Copenhagen as their origin or destination. They're just transit hubs, their origin or destination lies all over Europe. I think D7 can learn from that formula. They too can attract passengers from all over Europe, all they need are feeder flights at the European end of the line.

My idea is that D7 enters some kind of agreement with W6, making Wizzair some kind of "Air Asia Europe". They can then fly to the larger W6 hubs like BUD and WAW. From there on W6 can provide the connecting feeder flights just like the Air Asia airlines do at the Asian end of the line.

BestWestern · Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:14 pm

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 28):
Air AsiaX J product on the A330, is that the old lay flat on a slant type seat?

They are the exact same as the AF business seat on the majority to aircraft.

I understand that they are the same seat with equal recline as the MH seat.

nimool · Mon Mar 07, 2016 12:32 pm

Yaay!
And how much would it cost to fly AirAsiaX from LGW to KUL?

Would it be a big difference than BA or MH?

LondonCity · Mon Mar 07, 2016 1:41 pm

Quoting nimool (Reply 33):
Yaay!
And how much would it cost to fly AirAsiaX from LGW to KUL?
Would it be a big difference than BA or MH?

But nothing is definite so far. And remember ... one month is a long time in aviation, let alone a couple of years.

AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

RE: AirAsia X Mulls KUL-LGW In 2018

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net