Airlines in the Philippines

[Arianespace]

seven13 wrote

Got to read the definition of CASM but I still find it vague. It the total operating cost (is it per flight?) divided by available seat mile. The lower the CASM the efficient ithe airline operates. Does it follow that a fully loaded 777 will have a lower CASM versus a fully loaded quad jet like the A340? Let's say PR102 vs PR112

I'm still looking for the brilliant explanation to this. I read it somewhere (Aspire or A.net?) and I can't seem to remember where to look. Bear with me, I will append it to this post when found.

While it is true that B77W has truly lower CASM than the A340, that advantage is lost when you actually carry the load which is enough for the A340 to fill, i.e 250 seats over 370. That is a whooping 130 empty seats equivalent to 35% foregone revenue. The explanation was put this way, the 777 is heavier than the 340 which requires more power to fly, so even if it is flying empty, it is still a heavy plane and to compensate to its weight it needs to carry a certain number of pax to get even. Then you have to consider their acquisition/lease cost to your projected revenue and of course maintenance and the fuel. Latest estimate run the cost of operating a 10 year old A340 at $250T/mo compared to the similar age 77W at $1.2 million/mo.

So if you have an average of 230 pax, would that CASM benefit you? Definitely not. As suggested, if you can fill the 77W then get the plane. If you can afford its price then get it. Otherwise, if you can't fill it then don't waste money trying to fly it as the A340 will do it better.

[cabinpressure]

SIA cuts A350 order from 70 to 63 per request of Airbus for delivery to another airline. I wonder if this is PAL: seven frames to replace the six (?) A340. Sounds just about right.

http://www.straitstimes.com/business/sia-cuts-a350-orders-from-70-to-63-at-airbus-request

[seven13]

PR to start 3 weekly CEBLAX on A340 starting Mar2016

[Eurest]

Hello, pardon the long absence as I was away from Manila since May for some time back home
It seems a lot of interesting things have happened
I'm just going to give my thoughts on what have been discussed here

The A340-300 is quite capable, especially since the ex-IB ones are post 2003 with the avionics package from the A345/346 and numerous improvements over the 1998 ones PR used to have.
At cruise, it's fuel burn is still quite good and in no ways comes close to the 744's fuel burn, even outperforming the 77E
The lease rates are also ridiculously cheap, in fact I've been told PR pays less on the A343s than the A321s.
But spares are becoming an issue, since not a lot of A343s have been scrapped.
I heard PR borrowed a part from SR last 6.29 for the 11am flight out of LAX that eventually left at 4pm, with that evening's PR102 carrying the replacement to compensate SR

When I heard the SQ A350 order cut down by 7, I too thought of it as AB paving the way for PR to get some early delivery slots. AB is now supposedly guaranteeing a 16hr flight time for the 315 seat bi-class A359 variant, up from the initial 15hr. But I believe JFK-MNL will still need a guaranteed 17hr flight time, something only the 77L with 1 ACT and the 575T MTOW A380 can do

What about B77W replacements? Won't RP-C777 be 12 years old in 2019?

The news that some of the 414 seat A330s getting configured to 311 sounds good.
Especially since converting these to 242T MTOW variants should be easy by just activating the center tanks and applying the software avionics upgrades
But I believe crew rest areas will also need to be added as I don't think these were equipped with them?
LTP should be able to modify the mono A330s having cabin reconfigured A380s

Speaking of LTP, how goes their facility expansion? It will be exciting to see 2 A380s plus 4 B77W in their respective hangars

[romantic_guy08]

Eurest wrote

Hello, pardon the long absence as I was away from Manila since May for some time back home
It seems a lot of interesting things have happened
I'm just going to give my thoughts on what have been discussed here

The A340-300 is quite capable, especially since the ex-IB ones are post 2003 with the avionics package from the A345/346 and numerous improvements over the 1998 ones PR used to have.
At cruise, it's fuel burn is still quite good and in no ways comes close to the 744's fuel burn, even outperforming the 77E
The lease rates are also ridiculously cheap, in fact I've been told PR pays less on the A343s than the A321s.
But spares are becoming an issue, since not a lot of A343s have been scrapped.
I heard PR borrowed a part from SR last 6.29 for the 11am flight out of LAX that eventually left at 4pm, with that evening's PR102 carrying the replacement to compensate SR

When I heard the SQ A350 order cut down by 7, I too thought of it as AB paving the way for PR to get some early delivery slots. AB is now supposedly guaranteeing a 16hr flight time for the 315 seat bi-class A359 variant, up from the initial 15hr. But I believe JFK-MNL will still need a guaranteed 17hr flight time, something only the 77L with 1 ACT and the 575T MTOW A380 can do

What about B77W replacements? Won't RP-C777 be 12 years old in 2019?

The news that some of the 414 seat A330s getting configured to 311 sounds good.
Especially since converting these to 242T MTOW variants should be easy by just activating the center tanks and applying the software avionics upgrades
But I believe crew rest areas will also need to be added as I don't think these were equipped with them?
LTP should be able to modify the mono A330s having cabin reconfigured A380s

Speaking of LTP, how goes their facility expansion? It will be exciting to see 2 A380s plus 4 B77W in their respective hangars

Found this in Anet. Lease rates for as of Spring 2015:

LAXintl wrote

As before, the below list contains estimated current market value (in USD) based on the oldest to newest airframes, along with sample monthly lease rates based also based on oldest to newest airframes for some common models.

A319 – $7.5 - 37.0M, $120-320,000
A320 – $3.5 - 44.0M, $60-390,000
A321 – $8.5 - 52.0M, $100-440,000
A330-200 – $19.0 - 93.5M, $225-820,000
A330-300 - $16.0 - 105.0M, $200-920,000
A340-300 – $5.0 -24.0M, $110-300,000
A340-600 - $18.0 - $42.0M, $225-360,000
A380-800 - $124.0 - 225.0M, $1,150-2,000,000
B737-300 – $1.0 – 3.0M, $40-75,000
B737-700 - $11.0 - 37.0M, $140-330,000
B737-800 - $13.8 - 48.3M, $195-410,000
B747-400 – $7.5 – 27.0M, $170-350,000
B757-200 – $3.5 – 15.0M, $80-200,000
B767-300ER – $5.5 – 65.0M, $150-480,000
B777-200ER – $23.0 – 99.0M, $360-800,000
B777-300ER – $74.0 – 167.0M, $700-1,550,000
B787-8 - $93.0 - 120.0M, $800-1,100,000
MD-11F - $3.7 – 13.9M , $75-155,000
MD-82 - $0.4 - 1.1M, $20-50,000
CRJ200 – $1.0 - 3.8M, $35-55,000
CRJ700 – $7.0 – 20.0M, $80-185,000
CRJ900 - $9.8 – 25.0M, $100-225,000
Q400 – $7.5 – 21.5M, $90-185,000
ERJ145 – $2.0 – 6.5M, $45-70,000
EMB170 – $10.5 – 26.0M, $115-215,000
EMB190 – $16.0 – 33.0M, $165-290,000
ATR-72 – $6.5 – 21.0M, $80-185,000

Discussed this with a journalist who covers aviation and transport, and he said that RSA once said that they got the A343s really cheap it didn't matter if they burned more fuel.

With the cheaper lease rates, it should make its CASM competitive.

I just wonder how the CEB-LAX flight will affect PR 102/112? Any chance this will cannibalize the MNL-LAX route instead of attracting more pax?

[Eurest]

CASM and RASM are just tools for rating efficiency, as mentioned by Arianespace, it does not take into account other pertinent factors like capital expenditures.
Even more in the case of PR, as its belly cargo revenue makes its' longhaul ops quite profitable with the rise of freight forwarders to the PH like JAC, LBC, Fritz Logistics, POBox, etc
And cargo does not take up seats

A certain SouthEastAsian operator is paying USD 756,000 monthly for its B787-9, if PR were to lease a 787-9 in lieu of the A343, then it would really need the newer planes better efficiency to make up for the more than half a million in monthly lease payments
Sure you would at the very least, spend 3,000 gallons of fuel per sector, but with the current cheapness of JetA

As for CEB-LAX, based on Amadeus MIDT the new flight should not be cannibalizing MNL-LAX
There's a steadily growing J class demand for CEB from the US, which I assume is because of the BPO's in Cebu like JP Morgan. There's a reason why PR returned J to MNL-CEB flights, and it wasn't pure vanity or because they did not have anywhere to put their new A321s. There really is business demand for business class.
PR really wants to expand US ops but JFK can't be expanded because of the Canada ASA, and PR does not have any AC that can do the westbound leg non stop without a profit crippling weight penalty.
So CEB was the most likely expansion option as MNL is greatly limited by infrastructure.
LAS is no longer the draw for most Asian whales and LAX already has almost a secondary hub presence for PR
Sales have been good though, in fact GDS now says that CEB-LAX will become 4x weekly by 4.2016 based on initial sales
Speaking of US expansion, heard a wild rumor through the grapevine that the PH side requested to 5th freedom rights out of VVO, similar to how SQ62 is SIN-DME-IAH
If this is true, really out of the box thinking as VVO has just enough of a runway to support an A330 at MTOW and VVO is within the A333's range to places like ORD and is perfect great circle wise
There is also no longhaul ops from VVO, so local officials would definitely support it, though with the current state of the Ruble the economic add-ons may not be as fruitful. Though that may incentivize SU to codeshare as it is very very expensive for SU nowadays to fly longhaul ops
Again, let me iterate the rumor part, though it does make sense

[seven13]

I have to agree with the UAE bilateral. 5J has been pretty vocal about the demand on MNLDXBMNL, Lance said they can mount more flights if there is demand, we have to take cue from 5J. Since they started their no-frills model, 5J only flies where it sees it has demands. They match demand with appropriate supply. When Pr started its own Dxb, CX had to reduce its frequency and news sprung left and right how there was an over supply of seats, mismatching with the demand.

IMO, EK is trying to kill KL and CX just as how they  had affected SQ in SIN. I also agree that ET, TK, WY can pick up the slacks to bring tourists to PH. TK is going daily starting October, ET has intentions to increse frequency if I remeber correctly as well as WY. I just hope the PH panel will think sensibly on this matter.

[seven13]

Capacity wise, it's still the same (bi-class A330 vs. 777) unless there's an increase demand on the front section of the aircraft.

[Eurest]

Decided to ask around regarding the 2 B777-300ERs for PR plus the Anet rumor from airlinebuilder that there are 2 more

People from the leasing world said there are only the 2 coming from Intrepid and no idea where the rumored add'l 2

In 7.2014, Intrepid signs for a 6+4 order of B777-300ERs from Boeing, and 6 GE90-115BL
Of the 6 firm, only 2 have been placed, the ones to PR

Here are the delivery schedules for Intrepid B77W

10.2016 I assume this is the 7th PR B77W
12.2016 8th PR B77W
01.2017 Unplaced
03.2017 Unplaced
10.2017 Unplaced
02.2018 Unplaced

PR already has 1 B77W leased from Intrepid
Acquired 9.27.2013 Remaining Lease as of 6.30.2015 is 80 months

Other B77W customers from Intrepid are TG, ET and AF for 1 each

5J's leased A330 from Intrepid are on 12 year leases

Intrepid also has 2 brand new 242T A330 (with option to downgrade to A332) that are to be delivered 11.2015

Of course there are the ex-Skymark A330s, I believe some of these have been reconfigured and are already placed

[Evodesire]

Aren't 5J's 330s from CIT? Or are CIT and Intrepid just one company?

[Eurest]

The first 4 A333s of 5J are from CIT, the last 2 are from Intrepid

I think the infamous 8771 for PR is also leased from CIT, along with A320s leased from CIT by PR
Other lessors that lease to Philippine carriers are Avolon, DAE and of course, the most well known amongst the local is GECAS

[Arianespace]

seven13 wrote

PR to start 3 weekly CEBLAX on A340 starting Mar2016

The possibility of this story happening was raised here sometime back and its a reality now. Good news indeed.

I felt then that if they have problems growing MNL-LAX what more CEB? At least they can now take away some traffic from CX, OZ, and KE which has been growing the transpac traffic by leaps and bounds.

Personally, I think PR should fill this plane to be successful and I hope they will. They have been inching to launch this flight since 2005 and it took them 11 years to realize it.

And contrary to posts at A.net, this is the first transpac flight from CEB.

seven13 wrote

Capacity wise, it's still the same (bi-class A330 vs. 777) unless there's an increase demand on the front section of the aircraft.

There are more passengers upfront. Where do you think their huge profit came from? Personally, I like the J in the A333 than the B77W. Newer and better. This really confirms the saying that a better product translate to better profits. PAL is now reaping some rewards.

Eurest wrote

Here are the delivery schedules for Intrepid B77W

10.2016 I assume this is the 7th PR B77W
12.2016 8th PR B77W
01.2017 Unplaced
03.2017 Unplaced
10.2017 Unplaced
02.2018 Unplaced

The 7th PR B77W is arriving in 12-2016, while the 8th is I think 3-2017 if i'm not mistaken. What is interesting is the next plane to arrive after that. The magical year happens to be 2018. With the delivery schedule apparently secured, we should be expecting some PR announcement soon.

[Evodesire]

Delivery date locked in for the A340 replacements? Wow! Can't wait! A350 vs B787, what's it gonna be?

Anyway, it was discussed some time that the 2 new PAL 777s will have updated IFEs. Are we looking into the EX3s? If these will be applied, will the 6 other 777s be updated with newer IFEs too?

Last but not least, it seems that the mono class A330s will be reconfigured to bi-class with a less dense seating the the present bi-class. Does this mean that a 2-4-2 abreast config may be possible? Also, will the seat materials be changed too? I clearly remember JJB reiterate that PAL is a legacy carrier and not an LCC, so it seems his direction is to offer a product above LCC quality but to no painful on the pockets

[Eurest]

JJB wants better differentiation from 5J in markets it both serves, and 8 404 seat A333s are just too many for PR

PR needs more twin aisle configured with 32-36 J seats than the 18 on offer with the 376seats A330s
The A340s are just too inefficient for regional ops despite having 36 J
That's why you see the B77W to BKK as demand for J has really been increasing for PR, also the reason they are investing in a domestic J lounge in T2

The 2 incoming add'l B77W will also most likely feature new J seats as Recaro no longer offers any angled flat seats for long-haul business.
If PR renews its ties with Recaro, its only the herringbone CL6710 that's available for longhaul
If they go with Sogerma seats, the Equinox 3D found on the A330s are not yet at the moment certified for the B777, so it will probably be the Solstys or Solstys III
We could also see Zodiac, as PR does have the Zodiac 6810 on the A321 J seats, but I doubt it will be the Cirrus (the ones on CX, CI, AA, etc) as those are heavily backlogged.
The most likely candidate are the Zodiac Aura lites, found on ET B77W as they closely resemble the old Recaro angle flats but are full 180 and not 156deg seats
B/E Diamond's could also feature, but more of a longshot

Then again, there might be old inventory of those Recaros in a warehouse somewhere

[Evodesire]

Eurest wrote

JJB wants better differentiation from 5J in markets it both serves, and 8 404 seat A333s are just too many for PR

PR needs more twin aisle configured with 32-36 J seats than the 18 on offer with the 376seats A330s
The A340s are just too inefficient for regional ops despite having 36 J
That's why you see the B77W to BKK as demand for J has really been increasing for PR, also the reason they are investing in a domestic J lounge in T2

The 2 incoming add'l B77W will also most likely feature new J seats as Recaro no longer offers any angled flat seats for long-haul business.
If PR renews its ties with Recaro, its only the herringbone CL6710 that's available for longhaul
If they go with Sogerma seats, the Equinox 3D found on the A330s are not yet at the moment certified for the B777, so it will probably be the Solstys or Solstys III
We could also see Zodiac, as PR does have the Zodiac 6810 on the A321 J seats, but I doubt it will be the Cirrus (the ones on CX, CI, AA, etc) as those are heavily backlogged.
The most likely candidate are the Zodiac Aura lites, found on ET B77W as they closely resemble the old Recaro angle flats but are full 180 and not 156deg seats
B/E Diamond's could also feature, but more of a longshot

Then again, there might be old inventory of those Recaros in a warehouse somewhere

I think those 414 seater A330s will be converted to only 320+ or 340+ something seater. Definitely less dense than the 376. Seems like the direction is to increase business class and offer a more premium product. Though I like those Sogerma seats on the A330s, I don't dig their configuration on Y and Y+, but I guess this seating is more fit for ME routes. I hope they bring back the 2-4-2 configuration.

What seats are on the J-class LH 747-8? Those look very comfortable too.

[Evodesire]

Check this. PAL's 777 has the 2nd to the largest pitch in business class versus majority of the other airlines! 78"! Only beaten by Virgin Atlantic at 79.5"!

http://www.smarttravelasia.com/businessclass.htm

[Eurest]

Those are exclusive to Lufthansa's 748 and refitted 744's but the 744's have an H layout instead of the V of the 748 known as footsies as the pax feet are separated by a small divider.

The Sogerma Equinox 3D in the A330 is similar with a V layout but differs in that instead of the feet side by side, they are over and under

The B/E Aerospace Diamond is similar to the H layout of the 744 retrofit.
Though the Diamond has a bigger clam shell than the LH seats

Here is the Diamond in KLM colors


Coincidentally, I believe KLM also used the same Recaro angle flats in its previous J seats for their B777 found in PR's B77W

I think PR can still maintain 42 J seats in the new B77w with a 2-2-2 config with way less pitch than the 78" you mention. 2-3-2 is becoming the norm for premium economy

[Arianespace]

I was really wondering what destination will lose A340 as they start CEB-LAX in March next year? They may have 6 frames but all is posted for long haul flying LAX,SFO,YVR,JFK, and LHR that adding CEB in the equation is simply not possible because it takes more than a day for them to come back.

I thought leasing another A340 would not be an option for PAL considering that another wide-body is joining their fleet by the end of next year.

Well, the answer to this question is just posted at airline route. Coincidentally, PR116/117 which is being served by B777s at T-Th-S is being axed. That means it will fly LAX while the A340 that makes port of call goes CEB. And when the new B77W arrives at the end of next year we could be seeing double daily for MNL-LAX already. The other one would most likely end up flying PR126/127, and the freed up A340 do daily rotations to SFO and possibly additional flights to CEB and LHR.

Philippine Airlines from 16MAR16 is adjusting operational frequencies to Vancouver, as a result of fleet redeployment.

From this date, overall service will be reduced from 11 to 8 weekly, including 4 weekly each on Manila – Vancouver – Toronto and Manila – Vancouver – New York JFK route.

Manila – Vancouver – New York JFK
PR126 MNL2350 – 2050YVR2250 – 0700+1JFK 343 x135
PR127 JFK1100 – 1350YVR1520 – 2035+1MNL 343 x246

Manila – Vancouver – Toronto
PR118 MNL1500 – 1200YVR1330 – 2110YYZ 77W x246
PR119 YYZ2240 – 0105+1YVR0220+1 – 0735+2MNL 77W x246

http://airlineroute.net/2015/08/17/pr-yvr-s16/

[seven13]

Oh, I was thinking the freed up B777 from 116/117 will do 126/127 thus YVR still receives the B777 meanwhile the freed up A340 from 126/127 will do 122/123. Do you guys think?

[Arianespace]

That is not what the timetable is showing.