Airlines in the Philippines

[seven13]

Is HAECO the new maintenance partner of PR?

Arianespace, you've been quite positive that SMC will be buying out the remaining 51% shares from LT group. Do you still have the same sentiments with all these news coming out that LTG seems like it has managed to pool enough $$$ to buy back the 49% shares owned by SMC plus the advances it made?

There seems to be a hint of pressure coming from sMC for LTG to buy back its 49% shares or else they'll buy out the remaining 51% from LTG. It shows that SMC is keen on having 100% ownership of PAL.

[Arianespace]

If you know CX then that is the answer.

I am still on the side that SMC will eventually get it. Not that LT group is incapable of paying a billion dollars, but because of their apparent inability to pay what SMC demands to be paid at a stated time frame.

Meanwhile, SMC has $8 billion dollars in cold cash sleeping in the banks.

Its like saying the payment is ready in a months time, while the other says I can pay you tomorrow.

And if indeed the LT group succeed, it will still be a good thing for PAL. At least the synergy with LTP comes back to life. And surely they won't have Petron for gas.

[seven13]

Good thing it's HAECO. So we'll be seeing PR aircraft in HKG for checks.

It seems that way. SMC have the money on hand while LTG is busy pooling in the required funds for buy back.

Shifting away from the current topic,
You've mentioned that 8771 will likewise have the same configuration of 876* series A330s but Eurest from the other side likewise suggest quite differently.

[swahi]

at this stage, who do you think can run PAL better? RSA group or LT group? This assumes that either can buy out the other.

[airboy007]

As an employee who has been there during the LT and RSA eras, I think PAL is at its most dynamic with RSA. Changes are implemented left and right (sometimes, flip flopping on certain things that entails rework, but thats another topic), as opposed to the seemingly stagnant operations that we used to have when we were with LT.

With RSA, employee morale has improved, office infrastructure are being improved (we even have wi-fi and new computers in the offices and the cabin crew check-in areas), operations manuals being revised, and the decades old set-up changed to implement efficiencies. We never had that with LT. I felt that the airline that he bought from the government operated almost the same way as it did under the ideal time when everything was heavily subsidized by the government.

That's from an employee perspective.

[Arianespace]

seven13 wrote

You've mentioned that 8771 will likewise have the same configuration of 876* series A330s but Eurest from the other side likewise suggest quite differently.

I think you misquoted me on that. I still have to find that statement.

swahi wrote

at this stage, who do you think can run PAL better? RSA group or LT group? This assumes that either can buy out the other.

Difficult to tell from outsiders point of view. But if the contract with LTP is any indication, RSA is good at plugging the financial leaks.

From the employees point of view, this should be an indication too;

airboy007 wrote

As an employee who has been there during the LT and RSA eras, I think PAL is at its most dynamic with RSA. Changes are implemented left and right (sometimes, flip flopping on certain things that entails rework, but thats another topic), as opposed to the seemingly stagnant operations that we used to have when we were with LT.

With RSA, employee morale has improved, office infrastructure are being improved (we even have wi-fi and new computers in the offices and the cabin crew check-in areas), operations manuals being revised, and the decades old set-up changed to implement efficiencies. We never had that with LT. I felt that the airline that he bought from the government operated almost the same way as it did under the ideal time when everything was heavily subsidized by the government.

That's from an employee perspective.

[seven13]

airboy007 wrote

As an employee who has been there during the LT and RSA eras, I think PAL is at its most dynamic with RSA. Changes are implemented left and right (sometimes, flip flopping on certain things that entails rework, but thats another topic), as opposed to the seemingly stagnant operations that we used to have when we were with LT.

With RSA, employee morale has improved, office infrastructure are being improved (we even have wi-fi and new computers in the offices and the cabin crew check-in areas), operations manuals being revised, and the decades old set-up changed to implement efficiencies. We never had that with LT. I felt that the airline that he bought from the government operated almost the same way as it did under the ideal time when everything was heavily subsidized by the government.

That's from an employee perspective.

Thanks for this sir! I was always curious how things were during LT time.
I have to give JJB the credits when PAL came out of receivership earlier that what was supposed to be 10 years.

------
Going back to fleets,

PR have 8 monoclass A330 (80-86 and 89), 3 active bi-class (60,62 and 63) with another 3 to be delivered (64-66). A total of 14. Then the 15th will be 8771 with still unknown configuration. Didn't PR originally order 10 A330s plus 10 more and then canceled 5? So that makes it 15. So 8771 will be the last A330 to be delivered? And probably the only A330 with no sister with same configuration (if the registries will give some clues that this aircraft will have a different config from 878* and 876* series).
 

[Arianespace]

JJB did a good job at PAL. No question about that. But his aspirations remained where they are, a good lieutenant for LT. JJB can only desire what powers RSA have.

I was aware that they will have 3 configurations for the A330, and one type was going to have backseat IFE's, more likely installed on the long haulers while the others won't have it. The logic was explained to me. That was when they ordered 20 in 2012 and my knowledge is good at that date. The fleet mix was supposedly 8-6-6.

Remember our conversation with Elmer on the new A321 without IFE's, and the trust of SMC following QF? Well that was it.

As to the specific configuration, I don't know exactly.

From SMC agenda, the 8 monoclass A330 were meant for the middle east market, following RSA's desire to go back there, mostly to Saudi Arabia as they plan to operate three destinations, the others being Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Doha, Bahrain, and Kuwait, which they are doing right now and plan to do in the near future.

Mind you, its ME operation was profitable 6 months later, a feat which JJB failed to do. Of course his hands were tied and RSA weren't.  

There was no bi-class plan to ME then like what is now being deployed in Abu Dhabi. But that was after the Etihad deal. Before that time RSA already has the battle plan all laid out.

Another six bi-class are meant for Asia Pacific, i.e. Japan (3), Korea (1), and Australia (2). I think one is already doing Tokyo rotation. The high density configuration makes sense because bulk of their passengers crisscross this area.

This is also the reason why I can't understand the logic of the B757 to Australia when they have two A330 earmarked there.

The other final six bi-class are long-haulers meant for Europe, probably to cover three routes, Israel, Italy and Germany.  

Knowing now that they amend plans midway (flip flopping) according to Airboy is a testament that management also listens and is flexible with its flight plans.

When SMC cancelled the 5 long haulers I thought they cancelled the 3rd sub-type, and this was going to be 301's, more like 2-4-2 config since the other two sub-type came out already. It was stated to me then that it would look like the old one with 777 feature. Your guess to that statement is good as mine.

Of course, they still have 3 configurations for the A330, when you put the old frames in the mix.

In this analysis, I forgot along the way that there is still one remaining on the 8-6-6 mix as there were 15 of them. The 80 series has come out and they were indeed 8, while the bi-class 60 series while still incomplete is going to be 6, just like the plan.

Honestly, I don't know how 8771 would become. Its kinda odd having the sole configuration on the fleet. But if indeed there will still be 301's left then I'm pretty sure they are heading to Honolulu rotation (long haul). Of course they can also do Vancouver and Rome.

[Evodesire]

I read today that the LT group announced that they will buy back their shares from SMC soon and they will sell 40% of it to EY.

I remember though during the LT group, PAL was quite passive on many things. Their expansion was slow. My fear is if the LT group wins this, there may be labor problems and they may be back in the red.

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

JJB did a good job at PAL. No question about that. But his aspirations remained where they are, a good lieutenant for LT. JJB can only desire what powers RSA have.

I was aware that they will have 3 configurations for the A330, and one type was going to have backseat IFE's, more likely installed on the long haulers while the others won't have it. The logic was explained to me. That was when they ordered 20 in 2012 and my knowledge is good at that date. The fleet mix was supposedly 8-6-6.

Remember our conversation with Elmer on the new A321 without IFE's, and the trust of SMC following QF? Well that was it.

As to the specific configuration, I don't know exactly.

From SMC agenda, the 8 monoclass A330 were meant for the middle east market, following RSA's desire to go back there, mostly to Saudi Arabia as they plan to operate three destinations, the others being Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Doha, Bahrain, and Kuwait, which they are doing right now and plan to do in the near future.

Mind you, its ME operation was profitable 6 months later, a feat which JJB failed to do. Of course his hands were tied and RSA weren't.  

There was no bi-class plan to ME then like what is now being deployed in Abu Dhabi. But that was after the Etihad deal. Before that time RSA already has the battle plan all laid out.

Another six bi-class are meant for Asia Pacific, i.e. Japan (3), Korea (1), and Australia (2). I think one is already doing Tokyo rotation. The high density configuration makes sense because bulk of their passengers crisscross this area.

This is also the reason why I can't understand the logic of the B757 to Australia when they have two A330 earmarked there.

The other final six bi-class are long-haulers meant for Europe, probably to cover three routes, Israel, Italy and Germany.  

Knowing now that they amend plans midway (flip flopping) according to Airboy is a testament that management also listens and is flexible with its flight plans.

When SMC cancelled the 5 long haulers I thought they cancelled the 3rd sub-type, and this was going to be 301's, more like 2-4-2 config since the other two sub-type came out already. It was stated to me then that it would look like the old one with 777 feature. Your guess to that statement is good as mine.

Of course, they still have 3 configurations for the A330, when you put the old frames in the mix.

In this analysis, I forgot along the way that there is still one remaining on the 8-6-6 mix as there were 15 of them. The 80 series has come out and they were indeed 8, while the bi-class 60 series while still incomplete is going to be 6, just like the plan.

Honestly, I don't know how 8771 would become. Its kinda odd having the sole configuration on the fleet. But if indeed there will still be 301's left then I'm pretty sure they are heading to Honolulu rotation (long haul). Of course they can also do Vancouver and Rome.

From the 301s, its only 3337 that remains to be utilized... 3331 and 3332 have been ferried to Greenwood... 3336 is stored after fired damaged its cargo hold....while the rest are awaiting their schedule to be ferried..

and from what I heard, 3337 will only operate until September(?)... so all 301s will be gone by then...

[Arianespace]

Evodesire wrote

I read today that the LT group announced that they will buy back their shares from SMC soon and they will sell 40% of it to EY.

I remember though during the LT group, PAL was quite passive on many things. Their expansion was slow. My fear is if the LT group wins this, there may be labor problems and they may be back in the red.

If they weren't able to convinced Hogan to buy their shares then, there is no reason why they should be buying now. Particularly with what happen to their relationship with SMC, I doubt such deal would ever come. I'm sure though they will be honoring their deal with Etihad, and that was what the story is all about.

[seven13]

Should the credit go to SMC here having EY as partner?
--------

Can the current 301s make HNL nonstop both segments? Mqybe it could be utilised alongside with 8771 in serving HNL since it'll go daily within the year.

I think 757 will be doing the smaller Aussie cities (PER/DRW/BNE) nonstop from MNL. Seems like A330 will be doing SYD and MEL. Will 2 A330s be enough to serve SYD/MEL on daily rotation? AUH will now be served using the A340 since PR struck a deal with EY.

[Arianespace]

SMC reached their hand to EY for cooperative agreement with PAL. I think that is fair credit.  

The 235T version can fly for 13 hours heavy at standard configuration, meaning 301's. If it can reach YVR and FCO then there is no reason it can't fly Hawaii.

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

SMC reached their hand to EY for cooperative agreement with PAL. I think that is fair credit.  

The 235T version can fly for 13 hours heavy at standard configuration, meaning 301's. If it can reach YVR and FCO then there is no reason it can't fly Hawaii.

The 301s are the old CFM powered A330s... the 235T version are the 343s..

[Arianespace]

301s refers the seating capacity of the A330

235T refers to the tonnage of PAL and CEB A330. The old GE powered A330 are 212Ts.

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

301s refers the seating capacity of the A330

235T refers to the tonnage of PAL and CEB A330. The old GE powered A330 are 212Ts.

I know...

but the old A330s designation are actually A330-301...where the 3=model series, 0=engine maker, 1= engine type... so I thought you were referring to the old A333s when you said 301s... if not, then my mistake...

its similar the Boeing customer code: 6N=GECAS, F6=PR

Here's the table:

[Arianespace]

You are correct. Although there is something wrong with the X designation as the most appropriate extension by Airbus labels them "E" for enhanced engine. The argument was you cannot extend the range of the engine. The real reason however was that when the engine supplier developed improvements they just put a code X as the unknown, like the A3XX. When they were done and tested, the E was officially adopted.

I would like also to add before anything gets more confusing that the 343X extension from Airbus refers to the heavier variant aircraft which has extended range, as distinguished from the E which refers to the engine with more thrust. The most appropriate extension is the 343E because that refers to the engine and not the aircraft.

I kinda remember the code on the last number referring to the engine manufacturer when I was at Farnborough years ago.

While at it this is how Airbus engine codes go:

First Digit      - Aircraft series
A330-2
A330-3

Second Digit  - Engine Manufacturer
0: General Electric
1: CFM
2: Pratt&Whitney
3: IAE
4: Rolls Royce
6: Engine Alliance

Third Digit    - Engine version
1: first prototype
2: second prototype
3: third prototype
4: fourth prototype

Fourth Digit  - Prototype Improvements
E - Enhanced version
X - Experimental version

You can see the version development of Rolls Royce engine here

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

As to the specific configuration, I don't know exactly.

From SMC agenda, the 8 monoclass A330 were meant for the middle east market, following RSA's desire to go back there, mostly to Saudi Arabia as they plan to operate three destinations, the others being Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Doha, Bahrain, and Kuwait, which they are doing right now and plan to do in the near future.

Mind you, its ME operation was profitable 6 months later, a feat which JJB failed to do. Of course his hands were tied and RSA weren't.

Digressing from our topic this afternoon, any idea when PR can launch flights to the rest of the ME (i.e. JED, DOH)?

It seems these monoclass A333s are severely under utilized...

[seven13]

Same query here. 5J has announced its KWI operations this September. When can/will PR be allowed to fly to DOH, JED and KWI?

-----
When I wrote 301, I was referring to the 212T version, not the 235T version A330. I think with its current configuration at 42J260Y, it can fly direct to HNL nonstop. Maybe it can be utilized alongside with 8771 (if it'll have a loner configuration among the rest of its sister).

[romantic_guy08]

seven13 wrote

Same query here. 5J has announced its KWI operations this September. When can/will PR be allowed to fly to DOH, JED and KWI?

-----
When I wrote 301, I was referring to the 212T version, not the 235T version A330. I think with its current configuration at 42J260Y, it can fly direct to HNL nonstop. Maybe it can be utilized alongside with 8771 (if it'll have a loner configuration among the rest of its sister).

Only RP-C3337 remains as active and will also be stored/retired by September... it can and it has done HNL but it was weight restricted if I'm not mistaken...

Anyways, you can book KWI via the PR website... connects at DXB with Flydubai... and just today, you can also book Ottawa (YOW) connecting in YYZ with Westjet...