Airlines In The Philippines III

[romantic_guy08]

why is SFO taking most if not all of the brunt of cancelled flights? it almost always SFO that has flights cancelled by PAL... and this is the route they compete with UA against... this week alone, flights to SFO were cancelled twice...

[Arianespace]

And cancelled again yesterday, with 784. Still haven't found answers since asking this question last month. You can't help but nod your head for disappointment with these lackadaisical attitude of the airline amidst competition.

Arianespace wrote

PR104 on October 5 also cancelled.

Or do we see a trend United moving away PAL passengers to SFO?

[xzibit31]

Arianespace wrote

And cancelled again yesterday, with 784. Still haven't found answers since asking this question last month. You can't help but nod your head for disappointment with these lackadaisical attitude of the airline amidst competition.

Arianespace wrote

PR104 on October 5 also cancelled.

Or do we see a trend United moving away PAL passengers to SFO?

Sayang talaga ang PR.

They are like headless individuals running around not knowing what to do.

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

And cancelled again yesterday, with 784. Still haven't found answers since asking this question last month. You can't help but nod your head for disappointment with these lackadaisical attitude of the airline amidst competition.

Arianespace wrote

PR104 on October 5 also cancelled.

Or do we see a trend United moving away PAL passengers to SFO?

Speaking of 784... she flew her, I would assume first rev flight as PR 116 to YVR... delayed by almost 4 hours...

[Arianespace]

83 and 84 was originally meant to service YVR. It was supposed to fly YVR but ended to fly SFO as first rev since 82 which was scheduled to fly that day is AOG in YVR. The reliever flight is still grounded there.

The SFO question seems to be answered by PAL themselves. As it turned out there were more expats on 116 than 104, which when translated into simple words is more passengers to be booked at hotels. Meaning, YVR has booed more passengers than SFO. Which answered my question.

The scenario don't look bright when ACA and DAL begins flight next year. This is going to be exciting to watch.

PAL flight to LAX or SFO is like a box of chocolate. You'll never know what you gonna get.

[Solblanc]

Well, at least there’s an actual solution to the transpac woes on the horizon with the A35Ks coming in. So ideally they should have a more competitive product. Ideally.

[Arianespace]

I don't see cattle class competitive, from the likes of ie CPA, EVA, CAL, etc. with a similar product like this:



particularly when the competition has this to offer



Choice isn't much that difficult I think for almost same set of prices.

[airline_builder]

Arianespace wrote

I don't see cattle class competitive, from the likes of ie CPA, EVA, CAL, etc. with a similar product like this:



particularly when the competition has this to offer



Choice isn't much that difficult I think for almost same set of prices.

PAL want their cake and eat it too. The perfect formula for a spiral when solid patronage is ignored over by the thirst for fast money

[xzibit31]

Arianespace wrote

I don't see cattle class competitive, from the likes of ie CPA, EVA, CAL, etc. with a similar product like this:



particularly when the competition has this to offer



Choice isn't much that difficult I think for almost same set of prices.

3-3-3 is a no brainer.

[airline_builder]

xzibit31 wrote

Arianespace wrote

I don't see cattle class competitive, from the likes of ie CPA, EVA, CAL, etc. with a similar product like this:



particularly when the competition has this to offer



Choice isn't much that difficult I think for almost same set of prices.

3-3-3 is a no brainer.

sorry to rain on your parade but "brain" part is what is missing at the BOD

[xzibit31]

airline_builder wrote

xzibit31 wrote

Arianespace wrote

I don't see cattle class competitive, from the likes of ie CPA, EVA, CAL, etc. with a similar product like this:



particularly when the competition has this to offer



Choice isn't much that difficult I think for almost same set of prices.

3-3-3 is a no brainer.

sorry to rain on your parade but "brain" part is what is missing at the BOD

I think there was a misunderstanding. What I meant to say is that the 3-3-3 configuration is a no-brainer for me if I had to choose which seating arrangement I'd prefer for my flight

[JNC03]

China Southern looks to sell all 10 of its B787-8s, along with 2 spare GEnx engines

All 10 units have a C18Y248 config

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

83 and 84 was originally meant to service YVR. It was supposed to fly YVR but ended to fly SFO as first rev since 82 which was scheduled to fly that day is AOG in YVR. The reliever flight is still grounded there.

The SFO question seems to be answered by PAL themselves. As it turned out there were more expats on 116 than 104, which when translated into simple words is more passengers to be booked at hotels. Meaning, YVR has booed more passengers than SFO. Which answered my question.

The scenario don't look bright when ACA and DAL begins flight next year. This is going to be exciting to watch.

PAL flight to LAX or SFO is like a box of chocolate. You'll never know what you gonna get.

DAL starting LAX-MNL next year?

[Solblanc]

JNC03 wrote

China Southern looks to sell all 10 of its B787-8s, along with 2 spare GEnx engines

All 10 units have a C18Y248 config

788s don’t have transpac range though at that config. It can perhaps do SEA or FCO. Unless PAL wishes to reconfigure the aircraft and make it less dense.

That being said, political relations with China might make PAL a less desirable client for CZ.

[airline_builder]

if am not mistaken the 788 with a capacity of 289 has a range of 13,5++km, and MNL-LAX is 11,756km
even MNL-LHR at 10,781km (the farthest European destination that PAL directly flew)

I hope they do really give it a check and a go - at the rate aircraft orders and delivery delays are at a current state, a bridge-gap fleet is of immediate need.

Besides the 788 is an ideal size and the range to tap on not established markets and routes yet.

B788 13,529
B789 14,010

MNL - LAX 11,756
MNL - SFO 11,224
MNL - LAS 11,885
MNL - SEA 10.720
MNL - YVR 10,568
MNL - YYC 11,002

MNL - CDG 10,747
MNL - LHR 10,781
MNL - FCO 10,437
MNL - AMS 10,428
MNL - MAD 11,668

They can do the additional A.M. flights for the US mainland bread and butter LAX and SFO

[Solblanc]

Boeing has the same published range for the 777-300ER, but PAL has reduced seats because the 777-300ER can't do LAX-MNL year-round on a full payload, especially in the wintertime.

At the end of the day, full pax on a 788 + cargo would have a little less range, especially if you take CZ's older 787s, which aren't quite up to spec. These aren't brand new.

In any case, CZ has said that buyers have to take all or nothing. Can PAL buy them all? We'll see if there are any takers.

[airline_builder]

Solblanc wrote

Boeing has the same published range for the 777-300ER, but PAL has reduced seats because the 777-300ER can't do LAX-MNL year-round on a full payload, especially in the wintertime.

At the end of the day, full pax on a 788 + cargo would have a little less range, especially if you take CZ's older 787s, which aren't quite up to spec. These aren't brand new.

In any case, CZ has said that buyers have to take all or nothing. Can PAL buy them all? We'll see if there are any takers.

B788 264,500 lb  Empty Weight
B77W 370,000 lb Empty Weight

this is why the B788 is ideal to establish new routes when L/F is quite volatile still, and as for the TransPac, as mentioned they can serve as the supplementary capacity as opposed to the "main" capacity carrier, the B788 can be the extra sector capacity flights

Likewise, it can do the regional and Australia flights and new Zealand and yes, the 10 count is ideal to replace the worn out A330s

[Solblanc]

The A330s are practically the same age as the 787s. It's not a good replacement, as you lose at least 40 pax vs the triclass and 100 pax vs the hi-density. So there isn't as much revenue generation potential, plus the A333s have more cargo space. That alone trumps the fuel savings from the GEnX engines.

PAL is about to send their triclass back to Australia. If you send the CZ planes as is, there is no premium economy, and the business class seats are the same as in the 77Ws. Would PAL be willing to spend even more to reconfigure said aircraft? They might as well just get them brand-new and linefit the products.

If you keep the product as is, they can probably comfortably do the following:

1) Upgauge BNE, and free up the NEOs to add PER and India flights
2) Restart AKL
3) Restart DMM and other Mideast Ports
4) Start FCO and maybe LGW
5) Fly to SEA and increase frequency.

Ultimately, the best replacement for a 360-seater A330 is a 360-seater 787-10. 788s can serve as a stopgap for expansion, but I definitely wouldn't replace the A330s with them, especially since, at the end of the day, PAL still manages to be profitable.

[Solblanc]

Looks like PR may take some CZ planes… but it’s their 77W that they’re getting instead.

Config is 28 J (1-2-1), 28 W and 305 Y

[seven13]

Solblanc wrote

Looks like PR may take some CZ planes… but it’s their 77W that they’re getting instead.

Config is 28 J (1-2-1), 28 W and 305 Y

This is a welcome news if indeed it's happening. ECY is in 3-3-3. CZ websites displayes 31-33 seat pitch for ECY. PR has a consistent 33in legroom. Fairly comfortable for longhaul flights.