Airlines in the Philippines

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
Locked 2000 messages Options
1 ... 80818283848586 ... 100
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

idp5601
Solblanc wrote
That being said, there hasn't been any fanfare about the interiors. There would clearly be press if they started offering premium economy on 777 routes.
This is just a hypothesis, but what if PAL doesn't feel like they need to hype it up? Like, they can just mention 'hey we already have premium economy on our 777s' and not make it as big of a deal because it's not debuting on that particular aircraft type. If PR introduced W and all aisle-access J on the 77Ws first then they would understandably try to hype it up before the first plane rolls off the MRO facility. I also wouldn't expect them to hype up their new products on the A359 a lot and just mention it in passing because people already know it's available on some of their planes.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

Solblanc
idp5601 wrote

This is just a hypothesis, but what if PAL doesn't feel like they need to hype it up? Like, they can just mention 'hey we already have premium economy on our 777s' and not make it as big of a deal because it's not debuting on that particular aircraft type. If PR introduced W and all aisle-access J on the 77Ws first then they would understandably try to hype it up before the first plane rolls off the MRO facility. I also wouldn't expect them to hype up their new products on the A359 a lot and just mention it in passing because people already know it's available on some of their planes.
Considering how they hyped up the A330 reconfiguration around four months before the first plane was actually reconfigured, and even gave a schedule of the deployment of the new products to their regional routes, that's pretty unlikely.

Besides, W transpac is a big deal. And marketing a W fare takes quite a bit of work.

My hunch is that, if there was a reconfig, they probably just put zodiac aura lite seats there, or at most, regular vantage, which won't have much fanfare indeed.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

idp5601
Would be very disappointing if they did go with regular Vantage/Aura lite. I thought they were trying to go for a 5-star rating?

Anyways, we will see pretty soon if -67776 does have a new interior.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

Unbreakable
In reply to this post by Arianespace
Heard it was just a heavy check, and not a reconfig.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

Unbreakable
In reply to this post by idp5601
Highly unlikely for the PR77w's to have Y+/Premium eco. It will mess up their ability to easily swap around aircraft due to different seating configurations of the old and new.

Besides the 4 newest 777s have confirmed that PR has no plans to introduce Y+ on their longhaul routes...at least not yet..until the A359s arrive.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

idp5601
Fair enough, but I don't think the 777s will never ever have an updated J or Y+. I believe it's only a matter of time before they retrofit it, but I think PR would be better off re-configuring the 77Ws after all the A359s arrive.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PAL B77W

Arianespace
Administrator
More like standardizing the old one to the new one.
Making Sense
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

Solblanc

So... did they manage to install Aura Lite? Or, was Recaro able to modify the current seats to make them full-flat?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

seastwofly
This post was updated on .
Just a query, anyone can comment...
What is deference between the SEAT of an airplane and BUS a Recaro Brand??
Sa tingin ko parehas/same lang...
Here in Italy normal ko lang nakikita yung "RECARO" na marka...
Most sa work area ko, a recycling plant...

Kasi, minsan kung ayos pa, pwede pa, save for our equipmentps... mga truck, payloader, etc...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PAL B77W

Arianespace
Administrator
It's the same. It's just a seat. Recaro has been known as a premium car seat maker courtesy of Porsche before jumping to airline seat business. Porsche's affiliation made the former famous.
Making Sense
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PAL B77W

Unbreakable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ecQlPXXu_0

Sam Chui's PAL A330 Review (not the new triclass)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

787 and A350

Travelbug_89
I guess this should put to bed any doubts of 787-9's capabilities? https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2018/03/25/17-hours-qantas-makes-history-australia-europe-flight/456796002/

It makes one wonder if PAL will switch to the 787 when the A330s are due for retirement or will they stick with Airbus with the neos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

maortega15
Travelbug_89 wrote
I guess this should put to bed any doubts of 787-9's capabilities? https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2018/03/25/17-hours-qantas-makes-history-australia-europe-flight/456796002/

It makes one wonder if PAL will switch to the 787 when the A330s are due for retirement or will they stick with Airbus with the neos
Well, PAL already has the A359 for longhaul missions like MNL-YYZ and JFK.

Just because one aircraft type works for one airline, doesn't mean it will work for another. They each have their own requirements and business model.

Their A330's are used on at most 11 hour flights to HNL.

The A330's are still relatively new and just been refurbished, but when the time comes for replacement, they can always go for the A330neo to keep costs down and to have crew commonality.

They can opt for the 787-10 to replace their A330ceo's, but Boeing has to give them a deal and concessions that PAL can't refuse. So far, it's Airbus who's been giving PAL deals they can't refuse along with aircraft availability.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

Travelbug_89
This post was updated on .
Yeah I know that they were set on the A359 due to availability and Airbus giving them a good deal. I guess what I'm getting at is had PAL gone with the 789, that plane would've been able to do YYZ and JFK without restrictions on a year round basis but capacity would probably be around 250 seats instead of 295 that's expected for PAL's A359s.
I'm also partially confused cause of freakin Boeing's range chart stating the 789 has a range of 7635 nm (or something around those lines).

The A339 would be the cheapest and quickest to service. Tho a 787-10 wouldn't look bad in PR colors.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

Unbreakable
Travelbug_89 wrote
Yeah I know that they were set on the A359 due to availability and Airbus giving them a good deal. I guess what I'm getting at is had PAL gone with the 789, that plane would've been able to do YYZ and JFK without restrictions on a year round basis but capacity would probably be around 250 seats instead of 295 that's expected for PAL's A359s.
I'm also partially confused cause of freakin Boeing's range chart stating the 789 has a range of 7635 mm (or something around those lines).

The A339 would be the cheapest and quickest to service. Tho a 787-10 wouldn't look bad in PR colors.

Despite the capability, i still think PAL will stick to airbus due to fleet commonality strategy. Boeing lost this fight ever since PAL decided to replace its 737s with a320s. I think that was the turning point and where PR concluded that the a320 will make for a better business case than the 737. From there, all future purchases were due to fleet commonality.

The 777 is the exception since PR needed a 747 replacement but the a340-600 (which was their other option to the 77w) did not meet their requirements. But I'll go on a limb to guess that Airbus was giving a better discount on the A346 if not equal to Boeing given the low sales numbers on the 346.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

Travelbug_89
Yeah, PR is getting very close to going all Airbus. Provided they stick with the A330s when the current ones are due for replacement and A35Js replace the 77Ws when they're due.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

maortega15
The 77W was the best choice at that time as it was more efficient and economical with 2 less engines. CX's 3 A346's were just leased till the 77W's came along.

Now, if PAL needs more capacity from it's current 77W's, they can always acquire the 779 as Airbus doesn't see a market for an A35K stretch, yet.

If they want to replace the 77W's like for like, then they can go A35K. The 77W's are still selling because fuel is cheap at the moment and much faster to acquire.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

Solblanc
Boeing won the 77W order because PAL had deposits with Boeing for the 747s that they ordered but didn't take. If it weren't for those deposits, PAL would be flying the A346. And it might have made things easier for PAL had they done so. The A346 would've been delivered to PAL before the Philippines would be hit by CAT2 by the US. The 77W entered the PAL fleet some five years before they could even fly it to the United States. They should've just spent the deposits on 787s.

Speaking of 787s, they're still pretty weight-restricted when doing ULR ops. Time will tell once PAL starts MNL-JFK nonstop if the A350 can do the route with a full payload.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

Arianespace
Administrator
Correct. But then the cue to the 7E7 is so long, and they are not on the market for a 250 seater transpac jet that should replace the 744.

If I may add, PAL 359 is already weight restricted. And so does SIA at 280t. At maximum payload, it can barely reach 5500nm. That means its payload has to weigh around 57 tons enough to reach HNL. Airlines like PAL usually does it between 30-40 tons, thus providing for more range.

Travelbug_89 wrote
I guess this should put to bed any doubts of 787-9's capabilities? https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2018/03/25/17-hours-qantas-makes-history-australia-europe-flight/456796002/

It makes one wonder if PAL will switch to the 787 when the A330s are due for retirement or will they stick with Airbus with the neos
I would have to agree to maortega15 post.

What capabilities? That is deceptive. At 236 passengers, its too low. Its one reason why PAL did not even bother to consider the 789. At around 300 however for the A359, now we're talking.

Unless you are carrying premium traffic like SIA, this kind of service wont work for PAL. We are mostly VFR traffic with known oversize luggage.

Like what I said previously, Boeing range chart is different from that of airlines.

While B789 is known to be a 8000nm plane with 200 passengers, A359 on the other hand can do the same range at 300 passengers. PAL's math isn't that difficult.
Making Sense
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 787 and A350

Unbreakable
In reply to this post by Solblanc
Solblanc wrote
Boeing won the 77W order because PAL had deposits with Boeing for the 747s that they ordered but didn't take. If it weren't for those deposits, PAL would be flying the A346. And it might have made things easier for PAL had they done so. The A346 would've been delivered to PAL before the Philippines would be hit by CAT2 by the US. The 77W entered the PAL fleet some five years before they could even fly it to the United States. They should've just spent the deposits on 787s.

Speaking of 787s, they're still pretty weight-restricted when doing ULR ops. Time will tell once PAL starts MNL-JFK nonstop if the A350 can do the route with a full payload.
These are some very interesting insights. thanks for this.
1 ... 80818283848586 ... 100