Airlines in the Philippines

[seven13]

similar to CX, I think. 13.X inches with usb port.
IFE is Rave btw, not EX3.

[cabinpressure]

Now that's a compelling product. I appreciate how the fabrics on the seats and floor match the new 77Ws.

[Eurest]

Hello guys, I just wanted to share my Y experience on CX lately and how I would no longer recommend CX ex-MNL or CEB

Decided to redeem some CC miles for a CX 902 onto a CX 880 back home and then CX 885 to CX 913 back to work

My 913 was supposed to be their A333, got an email on 4.28 that it'd be a A359 along with my 902
Thought it was a pleasant surprise to try their A359 2x
Got an email on 5.11 my 902 was now a plain ole A333

Took the flight, everyone was practically connecting as no one took HK arrival cards.
The flight would not look like a flight ex-MNL as passenger com was lots of tourists. Good to see the Philippines is getting the attention it deserves.
Oh and props to PIC during landing, so smooth did not realize we were at the gate

The problem was we were docked at 45 and I had to get all the way to the other side to Gate 4 to catch my 880
Good exercise I guess before a long-haul

CX880 is where I've noticed CX's cost cutting
It's a 13hr flight but official catering is only a dinner and a breakfast. You can ask for ramen noodles but really?
I know DL serves a pizza or wrap for NRT-DTW/JFK or ATL
And NH serves a half sandwich in between meals as well, even though it is an egg sandwhich still its better than college ramen noodles w/c they could nto serve as well because the majority of the flight was quite turbulent
My seat was also broken, it auto reclines! Not to mention my audio port, tried both the the supplied earphones and the M50s I use for travel and I had to jimmy the input jack a bit to get sound

Catering was also sparse, you only get a salad, a heated roll and the entree with a bottle of water.
Maybe its the Star Alliance bias, but you get sushi, a salad, cold soba, a miso soup, a cold roll and an entree plus the bottle of water on NH Y
For the ice cream part I was expecting my Haagen Dazs but got a chocolate Movenpick instead?
Again props to the PIC, landing was smooth but we had to wait a long time to get into our gate into LAX. The weird part was we were right there but still took us around 15 mins to get in
Also I never noticed how few lavatories CX had in W and Y, only 1 for PE though I guess they could use the J lavs?

For the CX 885 back it wasn't any better
Flight was delayed 45 mins, typical LAX delay is only around 25 but atleast we got the closest gate so after security it was just right there
Boarding time was not the initial ETA and things did not get any better as to my impressions of CX
My seats entertainment system kept rebooting. The bulkhead seat in front of me had the reverse of my issue on my inbound flight, it auto unreclined when the person would sit forward to grab something
The reboot got bad one point only audio would work, had to manually reboot it myself.
Didn't want to bother the FAs as they were prepping lunch.
Catering was sparse but atleast we were given Haagen Dazs vanillas this time
Surprised flight time was just 13:30 great we had good winds, had better gates this time we docked into 35 and my 913 was at 69

Expected a 359 but got a 772 instead
Are the pitch better on the 772s than the 77Ws? I swear they are
Y was packed and this time fairly sizeable Filipino composition, surprised some were from the Middle East.
I guess the ME3 are focusing on more lucrative transit passengers

I really didn't notice the comfort difference between 17" 3-4-3 on the B77W and CX's 18.5 on their 9 abreast B77W. Shoulders were still touching each other
What I did notice though was your personal space diminishes when the seat in front reclines, as opposed to the Koito seats that slide forward during recline maintaining space.
How are tall passengers expected to watch the screens when the front reclines and now the screen faces downward?

Anyways I came to the conclusion that if you're flying into points PR flies direct or 1 stop, CX Y and W does not hold any real value exMNL or CEB. The 3 to 4 hrs add'l time to transit in HK does not merit the 100-150$ savings. I'd never thought I'd say this but I don't recommend taking CX anymore especially when they move to 10 abreast next year. Though that said I've never flown PR transpacific, only regional Asia and domestic

My recommendations would be for JL, 9 abreast, great catering and Japanese service and quality.
No wonder they always get booked faaaast
NH would be my second. Haven't tried KE though I may soon redeem my Skypesos
SQ if you're flying into Europe
Oh and landings for both 885 and 913 were not as good as inbound flights

[maortega15]

It's common for CX to do aircraft swaps on regional routes. Not unusual.

Pitch is 32" across the fleet regardless of aircraft type. With PR, I think their pitch on the 77W is 34".

I think CX has switched to Movenpick at least on longhaul flights. I'm not sure.

10 abreast will be on the 77W, 773 and 773's coming from EK. The 772's will not get them as CX is planning on getting rid of them next year.

Now I'm reading SQ plans to go 10 abreast on their 77W's too.

CX is going down the loo.

[Redmarsh]

Is there really hope with this administration?

http://www.philstar.com/business/2017/06/19/1711277/govt-shelves-private-bids-new-airports

“It’s still there. It’s still being considered. But it’s not immediate. It’s more of medium term. What we need now is the short term. We need to immediately decongest Manila,”

This DOTr doesn't know how to plan anything which makes me so angry.

[Unbreakable]

Summarizing PAL aircraft deliveries:

- Q400NG deliveries start July-Nov 2017 for PR's Ceb hub
- A321 Neo pushed back from November 2017 to Jan 2018 due to P&W engine production/teething issues
- A321 Neos will be tri-class and have seatback IFE
- A330 tri-class reconfiguration is ongoing with one plane completed every month until all 8 of the 15 are ready.
- 2x 77Ws incoming Dec'2017/Jan'2018
- A350-900 first delivery June 2018

Source: PhilAirspace

[Eurest]

The writing was on the wall when they announced the MRT5/MNL subway and one of the stations was at the current NAIA

This administration seems to now also follow the Mega Manila decentralization started during the GMA administration.
With Mactan Cebu already developing, the focus seems to now be on Davao getting its own Airport Authority to gain more autonomy over its ops and future expansion/improvements, and of course developing CRK.
Paving the way for the 3 or 4 Federal "states" to have functional int'l gateways

The private sector is well aware that the Japanese is as of yet unwilling to finance the new MNL airport (blame the funding requirements of the new Vietnam airport), thus why you had 2 firms soliciting proposals.
The opportunity was there to get the financing once Duterte was seen shifting to China, and the Japanese had to scurry mega deals to get the PH back in their favor, however this administration seems to have chosen Japan to finance several infrastructure deals instead of the much needed airport.

That said, the Japanese private sector (i.e. Okada before he had his own company sue him) is willing to finance the airport, but they require the PH make amendments to the constitution to allow at least 49% foreign ownership, as well as longer lease deals on lands they would acquire for their business interests.

China, seems to be the best option for getting financing for the airport, but the administration as well as Xi's gov't, seems to be more keen on developing Mindanao. The Chinese are quite well aware that the Manila elites are still pro-West, and that the Mindanao folk may be more amenable to Chinese economic presence in the island.
The armed elements in Mindanao don't seem to scare the Chinese as much, as they have dealt with similar unknown entities in their development efforts in Africa.

Who knows, maybe Trump will offer up the 15-18B$ for the new airport when he visits for APEC?
I know the administration was hoping to get financing from the Middle East visit, but they seem to be cash strapped with all their financing of certain organizations meant to either trump up the price of oil or of natural gas.

Anyways, commercial aviation is in its downwards cyclical cycle and there is overcapacity all over.
So expanding capacity now isn;t as important, and starting to build one now would mean the new MNL airport would miss the next uptick cycle and open instead in the downfall cycle or near it.

[Eurest]

I believe its only 3437 that's the only remaining leased from AFS, I'm not 100% sure but I know a few are owned already. A320s should be the only ones being returned to lessors in the near future
The wiring for IFE should already be present since IB had them. The main stickler for the A343s are the parts with regards to the hydraulics, as they have been the ones failing quite often.

AFS offered to renegotiate the lease deals for some if not all of the A343s to include them in the 6+6 A350 deal when the A350/787-9 RFP occurred. I was told it was what got Airbus the deal because Boeing was offering earlier delivery dates for the Charleston 787-9s

That said I'm surprised they are spending on the A343s with oil increasing again and their dispatch reliability being a blemish on their aim to get 4 star by next year. If the 2 add'l B77Ws this December are for LHR, then I guess they are serious at CEB-LAX and want to offer a better product once the cabins are refurbished.
We might even see more int'l long haul routes from CEB

[Arianespace]

If you care to read back I explained this in the appropriate thread. And before you lament further, there is such thing as the courts to contend with. But of course you don't read that in the news don't you? So no matter how PAL postures it won't take off because DOTC can't neither at this time.

It's frustrating, yes! Even DU30 says it so.

[Arianespace]

Eurest wrote

The private sector is well aware that the Japanese is as of yet unwilling to finance the new MNL airport (blame the funding requirements of the new Vietnam airport), thus why you had 2 firms soliciting proposals.

Are you sure about this statement or just following Boo Chanco's lament?

Don't you know Japan has so many funding offers the government cannot even absorb to implement?

There are lots of things brewing inside DOTC that is off the press. And some good things were already leaked out by this forum but i guess nobody bothered to read for being way ahead of its time.

[meronbopis]

The June 20 PAL timetable on the PAL website no longer has MNL-AUH terminating in July (was there on the previous June 15 version).  Could it be a reversal on the decision to discontinue Abu Dhabi?

Flight No Frequency Depart Arrive Flight No Frequency Depart Arrive
MANILA to ABU DHABI ABU DHABI to MANILA
PR 656 Tu-Th-Sa 11:45 17:45 PR 657 Tu-Th-Sa 19:30 08:50 +

Great to see the MH codeshare flights within Malaysia finally showing up on the timetable.

[Arianespace]

meronbopis wrote

The June 20 PAL timetable on the PAL website no longer has MNL-AUH terminating in July (was there on the previous June 15 version).  Could it be a reversal on the decision to discontinue Abu Dhabi?

Or could be because they were denied by the regulator. Its either fly or don't fly, than earn from it by not flying. That is when the airline statement becomes inconsistent with what the are actually promoting. Nice try PAL. You must be pissed with CEB now?

Not the first time either. I think objections were raised for the third time. Almost same reason for DXB.

[Travelbug_89]

Would a 787-9 be able to do JFK direct from MNL all year round had PR gone that route? I know United is doing SIN from SFO and LAX with 787-9s but from what I hear those flights sometimes leave with seats blocked.

[maortega15]

Travelbug_89 wrote

Would a 787-9 be able to do JFK direct from MNL all year round had PR gone that route? I know United is doing SIN from SFO and LAX with 787-9s but from what I hear those flights sometimes leave with seats blocked.

Should actually be able to do it comfortably. JFK-MNL is more of a polar route so winds wouldn't be much of a factor.

[Travelbug_89]

Ah ok. I was under the impression that it wouldn't be able to due to lack of range versus the high gross weight version of the A350-900. Though I imagine the A350-900 is still the better all-arounder especially since the majority of the PAL fleet is Airbus.
 I bet a 787-9 would make for a good plane to do transpacific from CEB too:D provided they get the domestic flights from elsewhere in Visayas and Mindanao to time well with the transpacific departures/arrivals.

[Arianespace]

Travelbug_89 wrote

Would a 787-9 be able to do JFK direct from MNL all year round had PR gone that route? I know United is doing SIN from SFO and LAX with 787-9s but from what I hear those flights sometimes leave with seats blocked.

The B77W can so there is no reason why B789 couldn't. I do agree that they will still have block seats. The better question is what aircraft would accommodate more seats as compared to PAL A359 for the same route?
The answer should be interesting.

 Even SQs A359URL SIN-JFK has fewer seats than standard 300+ of PR.

[Travelbug_89]

That's definitely an interesting question. the 789 is a smidge smaller and with 300 passengers its probably not going to make it without a payload hit. Maybe with 254 seats like the current A343 that would be possible but that could mean pricier tickets. The A359 still looks like the better choice and it does help that the majority of PR's fleet is Airbus.

With regards to the 77W, I didn't know it had the legs for year round MNL-JFK. CX does run HKG-JFK with them year round but I'd imagine the the extra flight time to MNL would make it harder for the 77W to make it and possibly take a payload hit if PR decided to do non-stops with their 77W.

[Arianespace]

This should be a good read for you

http://philippine-aviation-forum.29460.n7.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=reply&node=813

The rest of discussions is here

http://philippine-aviation-forum.29460.n7.nabble.com/Airlines-in-the-Philippines-td2i740.html

[seven13]

Mind you, CX 77W have a sizeable J class. Fewer total seats than PR.

[Unbreakable]

Just noticed something. TURKISH air is regarded as one of the better/best EU airlines. Their main fleet composition is similar to PR. A320/321, A330/340, 777s, the only difference is the presence of 737s.

First time flying in one next year and looking forward, so i did a quick research and their hard product on their 777s is almost exactly the same as PR's 777s (both old and new) - the only difference being the TK has a 3-3-3 eco layout, but still managing to cram 349 or 400 seats depending on the configuration.


Here's the thing though:
PAL 77w 3-4-3
Pitch 33
Width 18.5

TK 77W 3-3-3
Pitch 31-32
Width 18

Weird?

Just found it interesting.