Airlines in the Philippines

[Eurest]

Well, PR does not have to choose engine suppliers as the Trent XWB is the only currently available engine for the A350
GECAS even leased the first A350s to QR

As for going with the B787, PR will most likely opt for the RR engines, as the GENx has an FAA AD to stay away from 50mi of storm concentrations to avoid an in flight shut down due to ice crystal ingestion
Something which resulted in JL removing the B788 from BKK, DEL and SIN, while NH's is free to deploy its Dreamliners with their T1000

[Evodesire]

Thanks! Cebu Pacific's ME long haul routes seem very profitable. Load factor is up, and I heard cargo is up too due to the numerous balikbayan boxes going back from the ME. What happened to their DMM flights though?

I think it is just right that they concentrate their long haul project on ME routes. Sometimes, having Filipinos or OFWs in a certain place does not equate to a route being profitable.

Another question. Why did PAL opt to use the 77W to some of its BKK flights instead of the bi-class A330s which can carry more PAX? Is this because of the surge in passengers who opt to fly legacy like businessmen?

[Eurest]

I suspect its 6th freedom traffic from the US, and even Japan to other ASEAN cities like BKK and CGK that has been getting better for PR
The 376seat A333s only have 18 J seats, it's safe to assume demand has outgrown this capacity.
The A343s used to serve BKK but there seems to have been a shift to prioritize thier utilization on ULH flights

Having the B77W on certain days for BKK also helps in their utilization rates

I suspect cargo is also involved, as their is increasing trade between TH and PH over the automotive industry where TH has a larger, more established spare parts industry compared to the increasing automotive market of the PH
I was told this was the reason TG kept the 77A to MNL instead of the planned 788 EIS familiarization runs

[jetsetex]

Thoughts?

http://manilastandardtoday.com/mobile/2015/08/23/pal-airlines-may-cease-dubai-manila-flights/

On Aug 25, 2015 10:57 AM, "Evodesire [via Philippine Aviation Forum]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks! Cebu Pacific's ME long haul routes seem very profitable. Load factor is up, and I heard cargo is up too due to the numerous balikbayan boxes going back from the ME. What happened to their DMM flights though?

I think it is just right that they concentrate their long haul project on ME routes. Sometimes, having Filipinos or OFWs in a certain place does not equate to a route being profitable.

Another question. Why did PAL opt to use the 77W to some of its BKK flights instead of the bi-class A330s which can carry more PAX? Is this because of the surge in passengers who opt to fly legacy like businessmen?

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://philippine-aviation-forum.29460.n7.nabble.com/Airlines-in-the-Philippines-tp2p854.html

To unsubscribe from Airlines in the Philippines, click here.
NAML

[seven13]

Interesting. I for one would always go for the latest technology and which manufacturer will give me the most savings in terms of fuel burns. Several years ago, we saw Jet A1 fuels at high levels. Almost all new A330 currently in service uses the RR Trent engines.

There were days when PR had to delay PR103/PR105 from LAX/SFO by 2 hours when loads were light and is able to skip the GUM techstop on the B744. I wonder if it weren't for the downgrade to CATII, would the deployment of the B777 to transpac missions be nonstop both ways even if SMC didn't come into the picture?
-----------

When RSA took over PAL, he rationalised fleet deployment basing on market demand. B744 were pulled out from DVO, CEB, HKG and NRT and was solely used for LAX and SFO. A330 replaced PR300 and PR306 and to a point PR310, A320 did the domestic flights until the delivery of A321s. GES remained a wide-body aircraft due to its precious tuna cargo that would be carried the same day to NRT via PR432. SIN was downgraded to A320 aircraft with increase frequency (as much as 5X daily during RSA but was immediately reduced  to 4X soon after.) PVG was downgraded from A330/A340 mix to daily A320. ICN remained a wide body destination until several months ago where it was downgraded to A321, same goes to KIX and NGO.  

[Eurest]

If PR and 5J pull out of DXB, that will be a huge loss to OFWs and their friends & families for the access to the regular PHP20k+ fares to Dubai
If the DoT wants to improve tourism numbers, it needs to attract new carriers.
But how can new carriers like Jet Airways operate to MNL if NAIA is slot restricted and the new carriers can't get the slots they want?
Incentives for ULH operators, from say Europe or even the US mainland, would also be beneficial to improve tourism numbers.
It's expensive to fly to MNL for these guys because it becomes a 14hr mission, why not offer those operating on 12 hour or longer flights lower or waived landing, navigation & parking fees to attract carriers MNL has lost like LH or AF for a certain time period
It might even incentivize UA to start that much rumored SFO-MNL flight or have KLM restore the direct AMS flight

That said, the UAE is highly influential to this gov't, so EK will probably get back its 3rd MNL flight and DoT will bend backwards to find EK a slot at NAIA

[Arianespace]

Here is a quote of this story I made a month earlier.

Arianespace wrote

In another noteworthy news, the UAE successfully convinced the Philippine government upon the strong lobby of DOT to sit down with them for additional seven slots over the protests of Philippine carriers. Talks are supposed to be held next month but the taste is so bitter to the local airlines that they seek postponement till November. The slots demanded were accordingly 14. Sobra naman. PAL isn't even flying the entire 7 slots they have.

What I don't understand about this deal is that it is supposedly intended to boost tourism traffic between the two countries. However, If you look at DOT data, there are more Filipinos going to Dubai than Emirite going to the Philippines. I don't know about Mr. Jimenez, but something isn't right here. His argument that the Philippines is restricting tourism traffic is not right. For one, we have WY, TK and ET to take the slack of the tourism traffic from elsewhere. Isn't it right to make them grow too?

I am not favoring the local airlines but their argument is right. I would have agreed if it were KSA. It is also easier to agree if PAL used its 7 slots. But no, this is UAE were talking.

And my story was recently confirmed in the broadsheet a month after discussing these things. Its hot now all over the press. Here is a twist on this story, apparently, DOT got sponsorship for its "Its More Fun In the Philippines" campaign not only in the Middle East but also in Europe. You just have to wonder what is the catch for the approval of this predatory tactics?  I would not be surprised showing the DOT ad in London's Arsenal stadium. Tasty indeed. Now lets wait for reports in Dubai.

More Fun While It Blasted

By: Conrado R. Banal III

Those UAE airlines flying to Manila–but not to any of other international airports in country such as Clark or Cebu or Davao—must be having a lot more fun in the Philippines.

Those airlines simply demanded that the Philippine government should give them 26 additional flights per week right smack in the middle of the air traffic-infested Manila airport, which would really be a blast to them, because these would be on top of the 28 flights per week that they have already been enjoying for the longest time.

Read more: http://business.inquirer.net/197946/more-fun-while-it-blasted#ixzz3jzNEfaKy

[Eurest]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/27/philippines-pal-hldgs-idUSP9N0Z200S20150827

it was considering whether to purchase or lease eight Boeing 787 or Airbus A350 XWB planes
...
buying or leasing nine Q300 or Q400 Bombardier turboprops to replace ageing similar models in its fleet

So now its 8 widebody frames, a recent fleet planning consultant I talked to suggested PR may be in line for both 787 and A350 with the 787-9 and A350-1000
The B789 lower MTOW would be beneficial for even the short regional routes that would need a widebody service, as well as the relatively thinner ultra long-haul routes like LHR and even YYZ, as well as the 200-300 seat demand medium to long-haul routes like SYD, MEL, YVR
While the A35J would replace the B77W, as RP-C7777 (is this the one in 2009?) would be 12 years old and its lease would be ending.
He sees PR opening CEB-LAX as meaning PR would not have any route that would need a 400 seater and that the A35J at 2 class with 369 seats would be a perfect B77W replacement and could even make JFK non stop both ways as the XWB97 seems to be achieving specs for mach 0.89 at FL43
I wonder if the Canadian authorities maybe enticed to expand the 5th freedom flights further after BBD gets more orders from PR
The 8 frame Bell 412EP surely helped with the recent Canada ASA's better terms

[Evodesire]

I read the article and it says deliveries of the new widebody will begin 2017. That is 2 years from now. With the book order of 787-9s and A350-900s, do you think 2017 will be realized?

When is the 787-10 coming out?

[jetsetex]

It's done

On Aug 28, 2015 5:03 PM, "Eurest [via Philippine Aviation Forum]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/27/philippines-pal-hldgs-idUSP9N0Z200S20150827

it was considering whether to purchase or lease eight Boeing 787 or Airbus A350 XWB planes
...
buying or leasing nine Q300 or Q400 Bombardier turboprops to replace ageing similar models in its fleet

So now its 8 widebody frames, a recent fleet planning consultant I talked to suggested PR may be in line for both 787 and A350 with the 787-9 and A350-1000
The B789 lower MTOW would be beneficial for even the short regional routes that would need a widebody service, as well as the relatively thinner ultra long-haul routes like LHR and even YYZ, as well as the 200-300 seat demand medium to long-haul routes like SYD, MEL, YVR
While the A35J would replace the B77W, as RP-C7777 (is this the one in 2009?) would be 12 years old and its lease would be ending.
He sees PR opening CEB-LAX as meaning PR would not have any route that would need a 400 seater and that the A35J at 2 class with 369 seats would be a perfect B77W replacement and could even make JFK non stop both ways as the XWB97 seems to be achieving specs for mach 0.89 at FL43
I wonder if the Canadian authorities maybe enticed to expand the 5th freedom flights further after BBD gets more orders from PR
The 8 frame Bell 412EP surely helped with the recent Canada ASA's better terms

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://philippine-aviation-forum.29460.n7.nabble.com/Airlines-in-the-Philippines-tp2p864.html

To unsubscribe from Airlines in the Philippines, click here.
NAML

[Evodesire]

jetsetex wrote

It's done

All it needs is approval from the board and then an announcement will be made. Just a clue who won?

[Eurest]

The 10 is scheduled for EIS in 2018, exclusively built by the Charleston plant

All I know is the reduced SQ A350 order from 70 to 63 was for Airbus to be able to accomodate DL in 2017
And QF's 5 789's in 2017 are by the last 3 months

How reliable is PH local media?

http://business.inquirer.net/198050/pal-boosts-fleet-to-cater-to-nonstop-us-routes

PAL expects the delivery of two Boeing 777-300 ERs before the end of the year, bringing to eight its fleet of large double-aisle aircraft. These 370-seater planes will be mainly assigned to US destinations like San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York City.

Perhaps they were not paying attention when PR was in fact saying 2016 as per the Intrepid delivery dates?
Or is this the rumored additional 2? The only possible new ones by end of year are the one from ICBC supposed to be placed with GA. GA offered their existing ones for sublease, could PR have entered into a swapped sublease with GA for 3-4 monoclass A330s (for Hajj ops or to counter AirAsiaX Indonesia) for GA and then PR takes the incoming B77Ws?
There are of course the ones from Kenya or JET

[Evodesire]

Armchair CEO is at it again.

Nevertheless, there are posts that PAL is going more for the A350 and some are showing pictures of a 787-9 demo manual. Regardless of which, if 2017 or 2018 will be the start of the delivery of any of these two, it seems like the first few units will be leased just like with the 77W. And the rest be purchased?

So if they will go for a lease for the first few units, I guess it seems possible that they can get the units by 2018

[seven13]

Your thoughts on the new bilateral?
Key points:
1. EK needs to fly to CEB/CRK in a year to utilize the additional 7 slots
2. 5th freedom to Saudi Arabia, US and UK
3. Co-terminalisation (is it the same as how MI flies KLO/CEB/DVO?)

[Eurest]

Instead of giving incentives to attract new flights, I like how both QR and EK are now required to fly to either CRK or CEB to keep their add'l allotments

The 5th freedom rights given to the PH carriers makes it more attractive for 2P to finally use their 7 allotments and shows how desperate EK were to get their 3rd flight back. It's interesting that even the US was included, as no US point is w/in range of the A333s but it does expand the codeshare options with EY
The most likely scenario is to use the 376 seat A333s to attract the EU backpacking crowd that seems to be ever increasing.
With FRA secured from IST, PR now has flexibility to add something like MNL-DXB/DWC-LGW/MAN
It would help with the A333 utilization rates, and with fuel so cheap, it might not be very financially constraining to do so.
The other forums must be like "PR should buy the ex-BC A380s, put suites like the EY ones and fly MNL-DXB-LHR" . It's the only way for PR to become a world-class airline

As for co-terminalization, yes the PH-SG ASA does include CEB, DVO, PPS, ILO, BCD as identified co-terminal points for SG carriers in the PH and it is how MI operates a triangular flight to PH points
I believe airlines from the BIMP-EAGA can also use CEB as a co-terminal point

[Solblanc]

Can EK co-terminalize its third flight? Or does it have to fly separately to CRK or CEB?

I like the idea of EK flying into CEB. EK surely has some spare A332 capacity lying around to be able to start the route.

Now that we've negotiated a new wave of fifth freedom points, the question is, will we ever use them? I have no doubt that 5J and PR will be able to fill a MNL-DXB-FCO/MXP flight, but I'd like to know what the numbers are like and what's stopping our carriers from utilizing them.

Another fifth freedom point that hasn't been utilized much is BKK. With TG cutting down to Europe, the high-density A333s are perfect to capture the backpacker market that isn't too fazed by the political situation in Thailand.

[Arianespace]

The biggest story there is the opening of LHR and KSA traffic from the UAE and requiring EK/EY to either fly CEB or CRK via "co-termination". EK actually beg for this as a win-win situation for them because the route is "difficult", whatever that word is meant for them.

There goes the answer to some questions.

PR as usual lobbied for the ever evasive traffic rights to KSA as a concession. Of course we know why? They had been wanting to fly KSA from the UAE since 2002 and all their request to the panel were denied by UAE government until last week. They opened EU though except LHR in exchange for additional 14 in 2012. Now they added USA as if to slap our faces.

They must be desperate.

Possibilities just went endless when the Arabs finally said yes. This must be RSA's wildest dream if he ever saw the day coming but SMC is out now. Lets see how JJB does his thing.

As for 5J, the best thing that ever happen to them.

[seven13]

What's with KSA that PR wanted to route it via UAE? Aren't they interested to fly direct or want to codeshare the flight to KSA from UAE? Or is the pHL and KSA ASA very limited as of the moment?

What do you mean by "they opened eu though except LHR in exchange for additional 14 in 2012?" You mean we got to fly to EU through 5th freedom from UAE except to UK (during the 2012 ASA?)

[Eurest]

UAE, in regaining seven weekly flights to the Philippines, also get fifth freedom rights for destinations outside Manila (that means Clark, Cebu, Davao, and other international airports) except to major markets such as Japan, the United States and Canada.

The requirement to fly to CRK and CEB has a loophole though that if they can provide a substantial reason, they can get out of the added provision.

It will be interesting to see how the UAE will split the add'l 7 weekly allotments, especially since EY walked out because the PH side "seemed" to favor EK.
I don't think it's wise to anger the far richer Abu Dhabi side.

It will be exciting to see CX and either EK or EY compete on CEB-HKG or see a possible A380 operating CEB-SIN as EK already uses an A380 to operate BKK-HKG

It's amazing what a 95% load factor does to ASAs

[Arianespace]

seven13 wrote

What's with KSA that PR wanted to route it via UAE? Aren't they interested to fly direct or want to codeshare the flight to KSA from UAE? Or is the pHL and KSA ASA very limited as of the moment?

What do you mean by "they opened eu though except LHR in exchange for additional 14 in 2012?" You mean we got to fly to EU through 5th freedom from UAE except to UK (during the 2012 ASA?)

Payloads and range issues, generally. But I will tell the reason after few paragraphs. KSA is where the OFW market is. Its more like GUM tech stops with the B744 in the olden days with fifth freedom rights. Filipino habits in the Gulf and the USA happens to be similar, cargo wise.

And if you take a closer look, MNL is the only place where SVA sent 2 B744s with almost all passengers disembarking in the KSA, unlike the ME3 where majority of their traffic goes elsewhere. KSA is one huge O&D. Now they are sending the long range B77W. Even CX benefited from PR's absence due to fleet issues.

Its a good thing now that RSA ordered those monoclass A330's. They were really meant to service the Gulf region, particularly KSA.  There is more legroom to maneuver with eight A330 registered to fly the route. That was a problem before with their old fleet.

Unfortunately, the higher the payload in the belly, the faster the range drops and with it the proportionate reduction of passengers. Sometimes you wonder why the plane is full when there is plenty of seats unoccupied. Look beneath your feet.

The 2002 ASA has no associated beyond rights. It all terminates in the UAE. The entitlement also was just about right at 14, seven each for EK and EY. The problem with the UAE route is that it is just one way traffic, meaning it is full outward MNL and basically empty inward. That is the reason why PAL wanted to tag it to KSA, to fill the plane going back. That is also where the 30% cap was coming from, basically to fill the plane. Clever as they are, UAE blocked it. PAL did not flew. When they finally outgrew the seven mostly 6th freedom traffic going back, PAL won't budge any deal which forced them to enter into code shares thus benefiting PR by just sitting down. Comes Cebu Pacific which objected to the concession and the rest is history.  

The 2012 ASA changed that because UAE wanted to fly more. The deal, you can now fly anywhere ex UAE except KSA, Kuwait, and UK. Of course they knew that PAL was planning to fly LHR via Abu Dhabi and the ever lucrative fishing ground of KSA. Really smart move.

Eurest wrote

UAE, in regaining seven weekly flights to the Philippines, also get fifth freedom rights for destinations outside Manila (that means Clark, Cebu, Davao, and other international airports) except to major markets such as Japan, the United States and Canada.

The requirement to fly to CRK and CEB has a loophole though that if they can provide a substantial reason, they can get out of the added provision.

And that "substantial reason" happens to have a word. They call it in english as "Acts of God." Good luck to them finding that hole.