Malaysia Airlines to reactivate B747 for London route ?

Back to Forum
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)

  • MarcusGB
    Participant

    KLM are doubling there KUL services in the coming months, with at least 4 days a week 13hrs Ex AMS and returning 08.45hrs. I found this out looking ahead for booking in Sept.
    This is due to LH, and AF discontinuing their flights
    They have Business returns booked 3 months ahead from LHR for £1,630!

    The last time i took an MG 747, its power cut out more than 14 times, with every light and power source going off, not even emergency power, prior to Take off at KUL. Many of us were very on the edge of getting off, it was so shocking, and had to have an external power van to power it up. It was very unsettling, and on getting off in AMS, i looked at the rough outside state of the Aircraft, and said “Never again”.

    A friend took their LHR service with the A380 return in December, and he was 4 hrs late departing and 6 hours late returning, missing connecting flights. he would never take them again either.

    They really have sadly gone downhill, though have good Australian, and Asian new 739’s plying routes for excellent prices and services. Even their A380 is disappointing anyhow, so I would not travel with them, rather take KLM.


    IanFromHKG
    Participant

    Well I hope they don’t change it for my flight at the end of April. I would much rather fly the A380 than a clapped-out 747 with slopey seats…

    I have flown MH HKG-LHR (via KUL) quite a few times in the last few months and apart from the long layover in KUL on the northbound trip have found it very agreeable indeed. Decent service, good food, good seats, and (contrary to what is said above) excellent IFE that has never left me short of something to watch.

    MH get a bad rap but for the price – I am paying less than GBP2,000 return between HKG and London in business class, and get a flexible ticket (in the lowest business bucket, it’s true, but I have had no problem changing flights so far) with changes or cancellations costing GBP30 – it is unbeatable right now. Even Finnair are charging more, and frankly they aren’t as good.

    Happy Easter everyone!


    MarcusGB
    Participant

    KLM have Business returns from AMS (“Book 3 months in advance, save 60%”(, for £1,390.
    You can purchase a return oin KLM Ex LCY or LHR (and regional departures) from £95.

    I recently booked KUL ex LHR with KLM on the new Business Class Cabins, for £1,600 return. They also featured Singapore, and Hong Kong, for the same fares Ex LHR, and AMS. You do not pay any excessive departure taxes from Amsterdam for long haul opposed to LHR.

    Having flown the A380’s of Malaysian as they first started, they do Not have Horizontal flat beds, as the foot support dips downwards leaving your feet hanging over the edge. This was corroborated many times by others, with threads on this forum before.

    They remain however, very reasonable in Malaysia, and Regionally in Asia, but using new 739’s.


    IanFromHKG
    Participant

    I have seen those reports too, but either it was so minimal that I didn’t notice or they have corrected the issue. Both the Memsahib and I found the seats very comfortable, and we would both categorise them as fully flat.


    AMcWhirter
    Participant

    Where that B747 would come in handy is at times of disruption. Yesterday’s A380 KUL-LHR flight was diverted to MAN where it still remains this morning.

    It meant the late Monday morning ex-LHR A380 flight had to be cancelled.


    Nogbad01
    Participant

    Yes, I saw the Malaysia A380, plus a BA 380 and 2 x BA 777 on the tarmac at Manchester. I thought some new routes must have started I didn’t know about, until I realised they were all diversions.
    Must have been frustrating for those stuck on-board whose final destination was Manchester. I assume they had to fly back to Heathrow and then fly back.


    Gin&Tonic
    Participant

    Nogbad01- Indeed this happened to me some year ago and prior to the strict baggage and passenger related security conditions, I was living 10 minutes from Manchester Airport. My BA flight from Montreal to Heathrow was diverted to Manchester, as a regular transatlantic flyer I was always frustrated that in most cases I would descend over my home town to Heathrow only to return hours later, this was before many of the Manchester US direct services had been established.

    So on this occasion I was very pleased to be landing in Manchester, once we had taxied to a halt, we were informed by the crew that we would have to stay on the aircraft until the fog at Heathrow improved and we could get a slot, I grew more frustrated as you can imagine, looking through the windows Manchester was littered with flights that had already been diverted and would have priority over ours.

    I approached the crew asking to be removed from the aircraft, they said no it could not happen and Manchester as a diversion airport was not willing to accept any passengers. I didn’t make too much noise but this conversation was heard by several other passengers who also made the same request, unfortunately by now some of them were a little more forceful and vocal than I had been.

    Eventually it was announced that we could deplane but our checked luggage would have to go still via Heathrow, they would not offer a delivery service and each passenger would have to collect their own from BA baggage Manchester, result!

    I doubt very much this would happen today and to be honest I probably wouldn’t even ask now..


    EU_Flyer
    Participant

    Diverting to an airport to which you intend to eventually travel to on that trip is frustrating. Seems simple: “let me get off please”.

    It was only once I started to travel more and started to gain exposure to the aviation industry that I came to appreciate the legal and regulatory obligation airlines have these days, not only to their passengers but also to States and governments. These obligations are often the reason why what appears to be a simple solution can’t always be executed as easily as we passengers would expect.

    But try telling that to someone stuck on the ground at Manchester Airport waiting to get to LHR so they can then fly back to Manchester.

    To get back on topic, given that MH are currently transforming their brand and have a few spare A380s for rent/sale – as widely publicised, it’s disappointing they can’t find a way to keep the A380s on the London service.

    I hope they make it clear to each affected customer that it will be a 744 operating the service and not the A380, offering some sort of compensation or discount. Otherwise, there is a chance they’ll annoy a whole lot more people than those stuck on the ground at Manchester the other day!


    AMcWhirter
    Participant

    Nogbad01 – I do know whether or not Manchester-destined passengers were allowed to disembark but the diverted Malaysia A380 was still at Manchester yesterday.

    Unlike the diverted A380s of BA and SIA which flew down to LHR later on Monday, the Malaysian plane was stranded at Manchester until early afternoon on Tuesday. Maybe the crew were “out of hours ?”

    Malaysia Airlines bussed passengers back to LHR.

    The retro B747 has now emerged from the paint shop at Subang (KL’s other airport). Pictures have appeared on social media.

    Alex_Fly – Malaysia Airlines has six A380s. Four of these aircraft are used for the KUL-LHR service. The other two A380s operate pilgrim flights to Saudi Arabia.

    Soon Malaysia will be down to five A380s and that is when the B747 might make an appearance should there be any schedule disruption …as happened on Monday.


    EU_Flyer
    Participant

    AMcWhirter – 30/03/2016 13:25 BST

    Many thanks for the update.

    I guess that MH have probably configured the A380 in such a way that they are so commercially lucrative on the pilgram flights such that it’s not in their interest to use the 747 on those and use the freed up A380s to London. Perhaps they may also face a breach of contract issue if the A380s are leased to a 3rd party for the pilgrim flights where it’s not possible to sub those with a 747.


    Mazin26
    Participant

    Isn’t the disembarkation of passengers on destination other than the intended on ticket covered under the Warsaw Pact (I remembered reading the old 3-ply tickets back in the day and it was on it)


    rferguson
    Participant

    http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/04/137440/malaysia-airlines-recommissions-b747-400-aircraft

    Still nothing confirmed about operating to LHR but the line ‘the retro livery aircraft will be used as an operational spare aircraft to be assigned on an ad hoc basis to destinations, as and when required’ suggests it would be used to replace aircraft going through heavy maintainence as the A380 operating LHR will.

    She looks great though!


    AMcWhirter
    Participant

    MrMichael
    Participant

    Alex, in your article it suggests the 747 could be used in the event an A380 is not available. Surely a problem with that scenario is that for the return leg they would not have a 747 crew available in London. So either the return would have to be delayed for crew rest purposes or The airline would have to keep a 747 crew in London just in case. Either scenario seems expensive.


    AMcWhirter
    Participant

    Good point, MrMichael. It was understood that the 747 was intended to provide cover for the A380s. I and others therefore imagined that the airline had sorted out the crewing arrangements.

    But hopefully the airline won’t need to operate the 747 on the London route.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller December 2022 / January 2023 edition
Business Traveller December 2022 / January 2023 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls