Airlines In The Philippines IV

[seven13]

Arianespace wrote

seven13 wrote

How many A35K would be operating by June 2026?
It’s surprising that RUH will see the 777 and not DXB nor DOH

Two. Not a surprise. RUH is under capacity for a long time. Its got more OFW than both UAE and Qatar combined.

328 ecy on 777 vs 345 on the a330 biclass. That’s 17 less ecy seats. Bcl does not get even half-full most of the time. Is PR planning to add a second rotation to RUH?

[Arianespace]

Solblanc wrote

Didn’t you mention before that the A35K was coming in two layouts? 9ab for East Coast and 10ab for west coast?

Now that they’re sending the planes to JFK, are they blocking seats, or has performance really improved that they can carry 382 pax to JFK nonstop?

I said I would have preferred them to have the standard configuration instead of the high density ones. In fairness, PAL do have a habit of maintaining 2 fleet configurations, ie A330,A321,A320s and more often than not announcing only the initial fleet configuration. Even the 77w has two configurations now. There is always possibility of that happening soon. Even if they don't announced it initially. Just watch.

PAL can technically carry 382 passengers to JFK as the 35ks they have is the second generation 316t jet as distinguished from the earlier generation 308t version which can service only the west coast.

seven13 wrote

328 ecy on 777 vs 345 on the a330 biclass. That’s 17 less ecy seats. Bcl does not get even half-full most of the time. Is PR planning to add a second rotation to RUH?

Nope. CEB will do that for them. Some seats to JED and RUH are blocked due to range issues. Few people know that. So don't be confused with how many seats the A330 have. Its the same reason why CEB left earlier. They just came back because they already have a better plane for that kind of mission. But even then I seriously doubt if CEB can fill it to the brim at 440.

Fun fact, do you know EK, EY, KU and SV employs the heaviest 77w to MNL? Because they fill it to the brim all the time.

[seven13]

Arianespace wrote

seven13 wrote

328 ecy on 777 vs 345 on the a330 biclass. That’s 17 less ecy seats. Bcl does not get even half-full most of the time. Is PR planning to add a second rotation to RUH?

Nope. CEB will do that for them. Some seats to JED and RUH are blocked due to range issues. Few people know that. So don't be confused with how many seats the A330 have. Its the same reason why CEB left earlier. They just came back because they already have a better plane for that kind of mission. But even then I seriously doubt if CEB can fill it to the brim at 440.

Fun fact, do you know EK, EY, KU and SV employs the heaviest 77w to MNL? Because they fill it to the brim all the time.

So it's more of an eqpt limitation. With 77W to RUH, PR can oversell its ecy and max out its capacity.

[filipinoavgeek]

Is PR even close to the A330 replacement decision? Having just 11 A330s seems really few considering they could easily have at least a few more to relaunch services such as AKL, as well as to upgauge existing routes. 5J is already having success with the latter strategy.

[ewh1]

Arianespace wrote

ewh1 wrote

seven13 wrote

Seatmap is now up on the website
16.49” seat width at 32” pitch!! Extremely tight for longhaul!

Here's another thought that randomly occured to me on the whole 10 abreast A350 issue.  Could it be, they decided on the high density seatmap to attract more of the connecting traffic to Asia in addition to VFR traffic?  I know it could be contradictory with the premium aspiration but could it be as a strategy to undercut the Northern Asia/US carriers and be more of a dominant player? Almost playing the Emirates/Qatar strategy albeit, in a smaller way.

PAL is already a lower cost carrier compared to their competitors so as long as the soft product and other aspects of the hard product like IFE are competitive, maybe it could work? PAL will (hopefully) be at NAIA 3 next year so thats even more of an advantage. With CEB out, there will be more of a chance to grow that market now.

PAL President has been quoted as saying they are "an airline that just doesn't know how good they are" so maybe with that in mind and more agressive marketing, that could happen? As you may recall, Qatar Airways didn't even really have the hub they have now when they grew to become the carrier today as the old airport was severely overutilized. If I recall, it was literally run all on bus gates and remote stands, and at its peak, had separate Departure and Arrival terminals (reminiscent of Caticlan)

In any case, this was an interesting video to watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZTQIBtL4d4&t=235s

Its more on the capacity issue addressing both. Brought by capacity constraint at its home port. At least that was what was explained to me. Coupled with the fact that it main target market generally isn't as big as their north american brethren.

PAL is already recognized around the world as the lowest tier of full service carrier. In fact, what is not showed by them is that they are the first FSC airline to introduce 10 abreast seating on the A350 designed to seat "comfortably" 9 abreast economy configuration according to Airbus mouth.

What PAL is mentioning right now is they are the first A35k operator in SEA, not the first FSC operator to fly @10 abreast. Why is that? Shame of their heritage as FSC? Because this doesn't sound great for passenger experience. No matter how you state and coat it in marketing strategy, which by the way is a hype.

New York should be fun. I'll wait for the vendication of my statement.

By the way, PAL did not also mentioned that the ratio of passengers to lavatories will get worse. So good luck on your que to the toilets after eating 3 meals on long haul.

And if you want window seats, prepare to be seated without. As the current 3-3-3 layout, 67% of passengers get an aisle or window seat, while with a 3-4-3 layout, 60% of passengers get an aisle or window seat, so the ratio of people in non-middle seats gets worse. Its good for BKK, HKG and SIN though.

What can I say? PAL is good at marketing. Their product is bad. Coating it with good publicity and nice FAs would probably lessen your discomfort. But I will always vote for my comfort and my wallet. Taiwan carriers are smiling at me.

Fair enough, since this was a previous regime decision, let’s hope this isn’t standard on future configs and limited to this set of aircraft. I’ll carry hope that the next orders will have a more conventional layout, especially if we happen to get more A350-1000s

PAL’s B77W’s have always been comfortable to me,  but I guess the baseline with the new jets will be something like Air Canada’s 450 seat B77Ws. For me, it wasn’t so much the width that bothered me (17 in), but the pitch. Pure torture at 31” for someone who’s 180cm tall! Still having 32” of pitch on PAL is a bit more comfortable, but yes, It’s not a comfy jet at all. It would have been nice to see PAL have a few rows of more extra space economy.

I totally forgot about the lavatories…. Yikes.

[Arianespace]

Nope. It's just been kicked further down the road before the end of the decade.

The reason, PAL BOD finally decided to extend the life of its Boeing 777 and Airbus A330 jets for another 6 years more instead of fleet replacement in 2032, by upgrading their ageing planes beginning 2027 for fleet standardisation. It has nothing to do with supply chain issues as Nuttall stated in the interviews. It has more to do with cash flows. Possibly, PAL intends to fully pay first half of its 35k obligations before embarking into another major investments comprising 20 jets.

Don't you worry, with 5 new widebodies entering next year, 5 widebodies will need redeployment elsewhere, one route was already announced, and one of them will certainly go back to the land of the Kiwis.