Airlines In The Philippines III

[idp5601]

As much of a sham Skytrax ratings are, the fact that PAL can't even be bothered to keep up appearances anymore says a lot about the the way the company is being run, IMO. Kahit pala sa labanan ng flagship FSCs nagpagiiwanan na rin tayo ng Vietnam.

I'm an optimistic person at heart so I'm really hoping Nuttall can be the shot in the arm that PR desperately needs, but if the same people behind the scenes are still running the show with the same tired and short-sighted mindsets I wouldn't necessarily hold my breath.

[JNC03]

Airbus announced a 2 metric tons increase in the A330neo’s maximum takeoff weight and zero fuel weight.

Plot below the estimated payload-range diagram of the A330-900 with a 253 MTOW vs. the A330-300 at 242, A330-900 at 251, and the 787-9 at 254.


The takeaways are:
- A maximum structural payload (MSP) at 47.8 metric tons (compared with 45.8 on the A330-900 and A330-300) vs. 52.5 for the 787-9, a 4.7 metric tons difference. There is a 1-ton difference in MTOW between the A330-900 HGW and the 787-9.
- Approximately an extra 150 nautical miles of range for a given payload on longer flights, around an extra 20 minutes of flight time. It still puts the A330-900 HGW around 6 tons behind the 787-9 on longer missions.


https://epsilonaviation.wordpress.com/2025/06/14/how-much-does-the-higher-a330neo-mtow-improve-its-range/

[filipinoavgeek]

Even with those improvements, the improved A330neo would still not be ideal for Transpacific routes from MNL?

[Solblanc]

filipinoavgeek wrote

Even with those improvements, the improved A330neo would still not be ideal for Transpacific routes from MNL?

It can do YVR, SEA, and Southern Europe comfortably. LAX/SFO might have some difficulties year-round.

Basically, it has the range of the A343, and that was a workhorse of PAL in the past. Of course, they had 264 passengers in their A343s; PAL’s 18J config of 309 seats might be pushing the limit, but if it were a 30J config of 290 seats (like the ITA A330neo), YVR and SEA should still be okay.

If anything, this aircraft, with the same 309-seat config as the A333 can:

1) grow SEA frequencies to match HNL, or even go daily
2) start routes like FCO
3) take advantage of 5th freedom in YVR to start points like IAD or MIA with lower costs
4) occasionally sub for LAX/SFO with some blocked seats

If less dense, at 280/290 seats, they can also:

1) start LHR/CDG
2) sub for LAX/SFO but not year-round

But the key here is that it can solve both short-haul and medium-haul capacity shortfalls. Currently, if a 309-seater A333 goes tech, MEL/SYD/HNL might get a high-density plane. They need more medium haulers. It just so happens that this medium hauler can also do the above.

That’s why Airbus can tempt PAL with a tiny order. 5 or 6 frames is enough to just act as a top-up for the A333s that PAL was never able to get back. With commonality and an identical config, it’s a conservative expansion, which is very much in line with PAL. Also, 6 frames and below is enough to go under the radar and not ruffle feathers at Boeing in case people are worried about geopolitics; it helps that the 777 isn’t going anywhere so PAL won’t become an all-Airbus airline under Trump’s watch.

[Solblanc]

Just to visualize where the existing PAL A330s are vs what the NEO brings

[Arianespace]

If you take a closer look at my post, Airbus clearly stated an MTOW bump of 257t from 251t, not 253t, which also would clearly abolish, or negate the 5t payload difference provided by B789 at its current form. This 4th generation A330 is not available until 2028 though, and also not available for retrofit to existing 3rd generation aircraft, which suggest that it will have a new wing frame, possibly use of its revised centre tank to accommodate more fuel capacity.

With the graph you have, the 4th generation A330 could theoretically carry 45t of payload for 6500nm, the same structural payload the B789 could carry now. That is good enough for LAX - MNL all year round.

Note, its seat count is not more than 303 passengers which suggest its 2-4-2 seat configuration for bi class and even less for tri-class at 297.

So, if PAL would want a much denser configuration, this is not the plane they are looking for. But of course, they already have the bigger sibling, the A359 for more density. But I guess this is the capacity they want it to be.  

[Arianespace]

Here is the current range of the 253t A339, barely touching MNL at 303 pax with 32t payload.





Simple assumptions of the 251t:
Passengers + baggage = payload
303 passengers @100kg (Airbus assumption is 85kg.)
303 baggage @30kg (int. standard is 23kg+ 7kg cabin)

303 x 130kg  =39,390 or 40t payload

Clearly, the 253t raises allowable payload to 35 tons from 33.1 tons which is still not enough to carry all 303 pax with their baggage. You still have to block 33 seats for your plane to reach MNL.

Airbus, on their assumptions of passenger weight, showed the 253t is capable of reaching MNL at 303 pax as shown on the graph above. We all know most Filipino passengers are more than 85kg., so PAL has to contend with 297 pax or even less to fly to MNL.

But with the 6.9t bump from 251t PAL could now ferry all passengers with their baggage allowances if they were to take the 257 tonner.

[JNC03]

PAL's A350-1000 business class seats will be similar to Qatar Airway's Q-suite business class with a 1-2-1 configuration.

[JNC03]

Philippine Airlines (PAL) held a media presentation for its new Airbus A350-1000 at the Airbus headquarters in Toulouse, France on June 20, 2025 — marking a bold new chapter in the flag carrier’s future. PAL President Richard Nuttall, Executive Vice President and COO Atty. Carlu Fernandez, and Director Sheila Pascual led the event.

The A350-1000 will seat 382 passengers in total: 42 in Business Class, 24 in Premium Economy, and 316 in Economy — offering a new level of comfort for PAL’s long-haul flights. The first aircraft will be delivered in December 2025, with eight more to follow through 2028.

[filipinoavgeek]

Has it been confirmed if Economy will be 3-4-3 or 3-3-3-?

[AB350]

The configuration says it all 316-seats in economy! Their is no way their going to fit that many Y seat unless they adopt a 10-abreast configuration!

[ewh1]

Did you say the business class seats were like Qatar Qsuites? It looks like the VantageNova line.

https://www.thompsonaero.com/seating-range/vantage-nova/

If it is, it seems like a good product that’s efficient, has flexible seating options, and will maximize profit. Fits the Filipino culture especially families and couples travelling business. You could also say PAL would be going back to its skybed era roots a bit with this product.

If true, would PAL be the launch customer? Will be excited to try it out regardless.

[JNC03]

Its looks like Qsuite because it has a door unlike the A359s

I wonder if PAL will refurb the cabin of other aircrafts like the A321neo to have the same color and seats (just a similarity not 1:1) to have seamless product across the fleet

PAL also checked the cabin mockups of A220, A320neo and A330neo during its visit in TLS

[Solblanc]

The biz product looks like Collins Elements. Same as MAS A330neo business class. Vantage Nova is supposed to launch 2026.

As for economy being 3-4-3 or 3-3-3, both are technically possible. They can fit that many economy seats if they reduce the pitch to 31 inches. If they do 3-4-3, it’ll be pitched more generously. So it really depends if they think people are willing to trade width for pitch. But these planes will go to America, and people there are wider…

[N751PR]

Yes this does look like the Collins Elements with the same exact arrangement of the literature storage and lamp as the Etihad version of the seat on their A350s and newer 787s.

The 10-abreast Y layout does sound rough but now it makes PY look like a better value proposition for those looking for extra comfort.

[JNC03]

Photos from AvGeek Philippines

[Solblanc]

N751PR wrote

Yes this does look like the Collins Elements with the same exact arrangement of the literature storage and lamp as the Etihad version of the seat on their A350s and newer 787s.

The 10-abreast Y layout does sound rough but now it makes PY look like a better value proposition for those looking for extra comfort.

The a35k though fits 44-46 biz class seats in 1-2-1 between rows 1 and 2. Reducing it to 42 could mean that:

1) they’re adding a first row first class element, or
2) they reduced their last row to fit galleys and lavs to make more space for PY behind door 2

Ethiopian Air followed the latter and is able to fit 349 Y seats at 3-3-3, albeit at 31” pitch.

The premium economy product looks pretty standard. In the pictures, it’s one contiguous cabin. It isn’t split between the doors, so that definitely means more galleys and lava were moved in front of door 2.

In any case, economy passengers are gonna lose out either in terms of pitch or width.

[xzibit31]

Congratulations to PAL! This has been a long time coming.

For me, real change means making all their long-haul cabins consistent, so passengers know what to expect and aren't caught off guard by different aircraft setups. The same should apply to their regional and domestic aircraft, whether it's PR or PALex.

[JNC03]

Yes PR should have those economy seats on all of their planes minus the advance IFE, they can install less advance ones on narrowbody planes

[N751PR]

I could potentially see 2) bringing that amount if one looks at the LOPA of Etihad's A350-1000 between doors 1 and 2 and imagining removing a couple seats.

FWIW Ethiopian was able to achieve that layout thanks to its selection of the more space efficient Safran Optima seat vs. the reverse herringbone options that allows it to fit 46 of those seats and the galley and lavs in front of door 2.