Airlines in the Philippines

[tigz]

That's why the Q is a perfect fit for the missionary as these are at most once a day flights and averaging a high of 70pax. The extra seats would give it more leverage on the occassional homecoming months like fiestas, the holidays, and lent. Some of this routes only gets packed on the weekend and with the JetA for jets almost double the price, it will he hard to keep prices competitive with 5js ATR 726. The maneuverability of the Q vs the jet is also a clean advantage with most airports constrained by terrain and lacking PAPIs so the chances of jets aborting and going around is greater, hence fuel to burn. The props can dive lower cloud ceiling and the Q can recover fast.

[Arianespace]

Whats good in the best airplane if you cannot land at the desired airport? Just think about it? Like what I said, we lack adequate airport infrastructure to support the aircraft which will be flown to missionary routes, thus the hit and miss. It cannot even fly to Basco to begin with and Surigao, Coron, Masbate and Catarman will surely be off the grid if you insist and so does Naga. Thats the main consideration why, econimics being second.

[Eurest]

Why would the CS100 not be able to land at BSO? The Q400 and Q400NG have the same field length requirements @ MLW
It's capable of landing at LCY with a glide slope of 5.5/6.0 as it is its intended use with LH. I don't think it would have problems clearing Mt. Iraya in case of a touch and go, something the ATR would be incapable of, or at least the 500

The Dash 8 are already hampered economics wise vs the ATR 72-500 as the BEP for the ATR only required a 35% LF while the Q400 needs 60% LF. The 600 would make things much worse

Fuel cost is on part of the equation when it comes CASM as you'll also have to consider crew cost, insurance & taxes, direct & burden mechanical costs to get you total block hour costs then computing for ownership costs with say lease payments and depreciation costs.

I understand it now, it seems it's not a bias but a lack of understanding with respects to economics but also tech/ops such as glide slopes, max landing weights, payloads, approach speeds based on actual weight et al

My apologies, I have this habit of assuming the information I have is what in others minds as well

[tigz]

Your reasons are all valid but the airlines would want a more versatile aircraft that can be deployed from missionary to high yield routes. First off, the props would have lower minimums correct?, a lot of airports don't have PAPI and even so, some are not calibrated. At any given day, the chances of jets aborting approach any point in the Philippines is far greater than the props. I have noted this pattern in my hometown airport where it is served by the ATR,Q400 and both A320 and A319. We have some obstructions close to the vicinity of the approach and even if CAAP will certify 4% steep approach for the jets its pretty much useless as pilots can not spot the runway above the clouds. For the props in my experience we can dive lower and circle to enter traffic pattern to downwind and baseleg comfortably. There is also pavement conditions to consider from sub base integrity to surface conditions. The jets have theri intake close to the ground whereas the props have their intake and propeller higher. As far as I know, a lot of hard pavememts are deteriorating from loose asphalt to eroding shoulders, not only are the jets prone to debris injgestion( as well as birds) but also incursion to soft spots. Note that most provincial airports have minimal perimiter control. As for operating cost, I believe the CASM for the narrow jets  is only worth if they are loaded consistently and I can't imagine the airline making cash for a single turn around if only 70 can fill the 130. For a turbo with 90 seats, I think that's a no brainer. With the state of airport infra in the Phils moving at a snail pace, it is hard to find a niche so its either a large capacity narrow body on jetports or the prop in small towns. Mind you, Naga is a good example of an urban center with a less capable airport( length and terrain wise), pavement is good and passenger traffic is there so this is one example that the CS or E-jet can probably fit with a steep approach. I don't think however PAL or 5j will find that mid range aircraft just to suit couple of cities, I'm saying couple because Surigao have some traffic numbers to Manila but again is contrained runway wise.

[Eurest]

I was considering PR in its Dash replacements and not a general airlines selecting props vs RJ, especially since DG has already ordered 72-600s

As for versatility, it exists as well with the CS or E2 as you are not only restrained to the current Q400 routes, but smaller regional routes as well, and international will always be higher yielding than domestic.
PR would be able to start routes like MNL-CTS or to secondary ASEAN cities like CNX or develop regional secondary PH cities to capital ASEAN like BCD-SIN.
5J's data for its secondary PH cities to regional Asia indicates that even their A319s are too big on these routes.
The CS100 would even be able to do MPH-PER with the upgrade at Caticlan

The efficiency of the CS, and by affiliation the E2, is nothing to scoff at.
The threat of the CS100 and CS300 were what prompted Airbus to re-engine their A320 family to come close to the economics efficiency of the CS, which then prompted Boeing to delay the NSA
The CS BEP is only at 55% LF, and that's considering purely revenue pax and not revenue cargo
It's not automatic to assume PR would get the 133 config @ 28" seat config as well, especially if it aims to be 5 star where it would be apt to go for the 110pax config at 32" pitch
Or they could go for the smaller E2-E170/175

BSO is a unique case, cloud cover occurs even before the peak of Iraya and even the current flights with the Q has to return to MNL due to visibility issues.
M8 uses an RJ in the PH, and its a very inefficient RJ as it's not only a 4 holer, but a slower one compared to the Q but it seems to be able to make money, as long as they avoid resort island airstrips, as supposedly they now have funds to lease a B738
There is precedent for RJ ops in the PH, and with CAAP improving I prefer to see the potential of the PH airports especially since a good number of these will be privatized and MPH seems to be a good example of a privatized PH secondary airport.

PR in Singapore talked to ATR, BBD and Embraer.
Embraer doesn't have a 70-90 seat turboprop, but was able to discuss with PR as they have been included in the RFP. If PR was not considering RJs then why bother talking to the Brazilians?

With the A350, PR valued an aircraft that was bigger than what it was replacing (254 growing to 300) but also being able to perform a route the previous aircraft could not do. (MNL-JFK non-stop)
With the Dash 8 replacements, why should we dismiss the chances of the CS100 or E2 as they offer both growth aircraft and increase range to add routes potential.

All I'm saying is let's give the next gen Regionals a chance and not outright dismiss them since M8 chose an RJ and it seems to be paying off for them.

BTW why is there a tigz with 5 posts and another with 69 posts?

[Arianespace]

Eurest wrote

Why would the CS100 not be able to land at BSO?

My apologies, I have this habit of assuming the information I have is what in others minds as well

Geography my friend. Geography!

I don't get that the first time either. Eventually, I understood the moment it was explained to me.

[Arianespace]

Eurest wrote

With the Dash 8 replacements, why should we dismiss the chances of the CS100 or E2 as they offer both growth aircraft and increase range to add routes potential.

All I'm saying is let's give the next gen Regionals a chance and not outright dismiss them since M8 chose an RJ and it seems to be paying off for them.

We are not dismissing the chances of these fine aircraft. Like what I've said, they have been considered by one airline before (E175). At the end of the day, it was decided that it was not economical for them to maintain a sub fleet. On reason cited there is the incapability to operate on some secondary routes due to inadequate airport infrastructure. Tigz just mentioned a few of them. So airlines decided to fly a plane that works both from secondary missionary routes to primary and trunkline routes. For these airlines, the island hopping bodes well for their operational efficiency. If that isn't enough, the A319 and A320 upgauge option will always be there to cover.

[tigz]

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of the CS the moment it was released from the drwaing boards, and was swept away by the smooth ride of the E jets. I'm glad AC went 360 from their statement and now I'm anxious to get into one of them pretty soon. Like what I said, its the Philippines; what works best for some airlines and their geographics doesn't necessarily mean it works just the same; who would not want them in the tropics for the plane spotters! Its just that for Bombardiers sake I would have rather let them slash the price of the QNG for PAL to take the bite as it will have better chances than the CS.  

[tigz]

I've always thought BSO is one way with the exception for the Q

[xzibit31]

CNS/ATM Facility at RPMD (not inside the airport property)
(beside the Kindomdome of Pastor Apollo Quiboloy)

photo by Ryu Guji

[tigz]

Airport vicinity surveillance radar linked to satellite management that sends signals to Dv0 and Macatan Control?, is this active now with the rest or just installed?

[Arianespace]

You have to contend with the weather too even if the sun is bright.

[xzibit31]

tigz wrote

Airport vicinity surveillance radar linked to satellite management that sends signals to Dv0 and Macatan Control?, is this active now with the rest or just installed?

I think its going to be Manila Control.

It was just installed. i dont know if its operating already.

[seven13]

PR starting mid March will consolidate its YVR ops into 7X service with PR116 being axed in lieu of aircraft rotation for CEBLAX service. YVRJFK service will be retimed from overnight flying to mid afternoon dep from YVR and late night arr in JFK. I was checking YVR airport website and was surprised to find out that only CX and PR flies YVR-JFK route, there's none for EWR nor LGA. I was thinking if would it have any impact on load factor on the YVRJFKYVR leg since it'll have a retimed dep and arr from both cities. Do you think?

[tigz]

That all depends on customer satisfaction regardless of timing. Obviously, CX is an airline of first choice!

[seven13]

There should be a % of passengers travelling the YVRJFK sector that would appreciate the choices available for them for a particular time frame. I guess, we can look at the monopoly CX will be having again on its time slot and PR on its new time frame.

-------------------------

Currently PR is celebrating its 75th anniversary and they have a display in SMX the possible choices for ECY and JCL seats for the B777, A350 and A330.

Thompson Vantage (XL), what happened to the Zodiac Cirrus Reverse Herringbone?

Geven Piuma (ECY), Recaro CL3710 (ECY) and BE Pinnacle (ECY)

[Evodesire]

I saw the pictures too in PPSG.







I think the Thomson Vantage XL are going to the A330s. And it seems like they are about to have IFEs also in ECY.

[Solblanc]

We know that Zodiac has production issues, so it may not be an option. But anyway, was only Thomson Vantage XL shown? No other JCL seats?

Another issue is the 77W configuration. The two new 777s coming in this December should have new seats. Question is, which one?

[tigz]

The economy seats are looking thinner and flimsier than before no matter how they pitch ergonomics! Sign of the times, so they can sell special economy. Don't know with PAL.

[seven13]

Yes. Only the Thompson was displayed. I think it's already confirmed with the A330 that it'll be using the Thompson Vantage, but not sure if it's the XL or not. I like the Zodiac Cirrus reverse herringbone, however, as it gives each passenger amore private space. ECY choices seems to be less desirable in terms of looks, but maybe the color could do the trick!

With the impeding reconfig of the monoclass, is PR keeping the configuration of the 876X series to be deployed to the middle east so that a high density seating could provide cheaper fares for our kababayans, who tend to be price sensitive?