KLM 77Ws
Jan 12, 2008, 2:34 pm
#32
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Netherlands
Programs: FB Platinum, M&M, BA Executive Club, Sofitel Plat, Priority Club, Starwood Preferred Guest
Posts: 1,447
Some gossip from insiders...
I was speaking with someone who is quite well connected at KL.
J-configuration:
PH-BVA and BVB will be delivered with 35J in a 2-3-2 layout with latest generation of AF Pod seats, albeit in KL colors. However, KL is studying possibility of 49 or 42J on future frames. If certification is obtained they may change BVA and BVB too as we know how KL wants their aircraft seating to be identical across one type of plane so that they can exchange more easily (this explains why 74E all have 42 J whilst on routes like IAH much more is warranted and say routes like SEL or HKG a bit less).
Apparently AF will also reduce their 67 J on 77W (see next section).
Premium Economy Class:
AF and KL are studying introduction of this product which is rumored to have 38 inch pitch and wider, better seats with more recline than Y. AF will have less J-class most probably and retain their (limited) P-class of 8 on the 77W. AF currently has 235 Y-class but with 10-abreast (see below) this may increase.
10-abreast:
77W WILL have 3-4-3 seating in Y. AF will also install 3-4-3 on their 77W. On KL more pitch in the first section of Y and apparently it will get progressively less but not sure if last rows will only have standard 31 inch or an inch more...
77W deployment:
Far from final. Apparently a big competitor of AFKL is withdrawing from a route currently operated by KL in the Far East and they will consider 77W for this route as well. He did not want to tell me which route and which competitor yet though. Any guesses........
J-configuration:
PH-BVA and BVB will be delivered with 35J in a 2-3-2 layout with latest generation of AF Pod seats, albeit in KL colors. However, KL is studying possibility of 49 or 42J on future frames. If certification is obtained they may change BVA and BVB too as we know how KL wants their aircraft seating to be identical across one type of plane so that they can exchange more easily (this explains why 74E all have 42 J whilst on routes like IAH much more is warranted and say routes like SEL or HKG a bit less).
Apparently AF will also reduce their 67 J on 77W (see next section).
Premium Economy Class:
AF and KL are studying introduction of this product which is rumored to have 38 inch pitch and wider, better seats with more recline than Y. AF will have less J-class most probably and retain their (limited) P-class of 8 on the 77W. AF currently has 235 Y-class but with 10-abreast (see below) this may increase.
10-abreast:
77W WILL have 3-4-3 seating in Y. AF will also install 3-4-3 on their 77W. On KL more pitch in the first section of Y and apparently it will get progressively less but not sure if last rows will only have standard 31 inch or an inch more...
77W deployment:
Far from final. Apparently a big competitor of AFKL is withdrawing from a route currently operated by KL in the Far East and they will consider 77W for this route as well. He did not want to tell me which route and which competitor yet though. Any guesses........
Jan 12, 2008, 5:19 pm
#33
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home for the terminally bewildered.
Posts: 1,621
77W deployment:
Far from final. Apparently a big competitor of AFKL is withdrawing from a route currently operated by KL in the Far East and they will consider 77W for this route as well. He did not want to tell me which route and which competitor yet though. Any guesses........
Far from final. Apparently a big competitor of AFKL is withdrawing from a route currently operated by KL in the Far East and they will consider 77W for this route as well. He did not want to tell me which route and which competitor yet though. Any guesses........
Do mean a competitor out of Amsterdam to the far east?
Is it JAL to Tokyo?
Cathay to Hong Kong?
Jan 12, 2008, 8:18 pm
#34
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,953
Load wise, the B77W would indeed be much more warranted at MNL - even before the withdrawal of LH from the route - than at GRU, but the problem is that the MNL roundtrip takes close to 29 hours, and with the current schedule, that would allow KLM to operate only a short overnight trip, which could really only be CAI, as even the evening rotation to DXB would be too tight to turn the aircraft back to MNL.
Jan 12, 2008, 8:44 pm
#35
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ZRH, MNL
Programs: FB Gold
Posts: 981
It's Lufthansa at Manila, leaving KLM as the sole European carrier there.
Load wise, the B77W would indeed be much more warranted at MNL - even before the withdrawal of LH from the route - than at GRU, but the problem is that the MNL roundtrip takes close to 29 hours, and with the current schedule, that would allow KLM to operate only a short overnight trip, which could really only be CAI, as even the evening rotation to DXB would be too tight to turn the aircraft back to MNL.
Load wise, the B77W would indeed be much more warranted at MNL - even before the withdrawal of LH from the route - than at GRU, but the problem is that the MNL roundtrip takes close to 29 hours, and with the current schedule, that would allow KLM to operate only a short overnight trip, which could really only be CAI, as even the evening rotation to DXB would be too tight to turn the aircraft back to MNL.
My guess for the AMS-MNL route would be that
KLM may well interchange B772 and B77W capacity regularly based on expected loads in Y-class. WBC seat count will be the same for both aircraft anyway.
Jan 13, 2008, 3:59 am
#37
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,953
The withdrawal of LH to MNL has been discussed in a Travel Forum for quite a while, and that would indeed put even more load on KL. Me and my wife are quite frequent on that route and the plane is almost always full, so the 77W could really improve things. But from the KL point of view with maximising fleet-ops, it's probably not a good thing as HB-IWC posted.
My guess for the AMS-MNL route would be that will apply maybe during December/January, when lot of Filipinos return home from overseas to celebrate.
My guess for the AMS-MNL route would be that will apply maybe during December/January, when lot of Filipinos return home from overseas to celebrate.
Jan 13, 2008, 4:00 am
#38
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 76
Are there any chances that the KL 77W will already feature a premium economy section?
If yes how many seats will the cabin approximately have??
If No when is it due to be introduced?
Kl is introducing the 77W on GRU, DXB and KIX. This will free up 2 772's. Where will they deploy these planes? I heard a rumour that KL will replace the m11 on the DEL route with a 772 is this right?
klm312
If yes how many seats will the cabin approximately have??
If No when is it due to be introduced?
Kl is introducing the 77W on GRU, DXB and KIX. This will free up 2 772's. Where will they deploy these planes? I heard a rumour that KL will replace the m11 on the DEL route with a 772 is this right?
klm312
Jan 13, 2008, 5:24 am
#39
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,953
KL567/569/571 AMS JRO DAR AMS will be upgraded to B772 for the summer, as will KL691/YYZ. KL871/DEL will remain MD11 until further notice. There are also a number of frequency reinforcements when compared with last summer: KL598/CPT (+1), KL695/YYZ (+2) although KL603/LAX will only operate twice weekly (-3). Next winter KL617/DTW is supposed to go to B772, and this aircraft is coming from KL695/YYZ, which will not operate.
Jan 13, 2008, 7:48 am
#40
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 76
As an illustration, here are the passenger numbers for a couple of recent B744 flights. The B744 full passenger has 428 seats:
Saturday, December 29
KL565 AMS NBO - 386
KL871 AMS DEL - 362
KL713 AMS PBM - 419
Friday, December 28
KL871 AMS DEL - 359
KL691 AMS YYZ - 378
KL809 AMS CGK - 424
Thursday, December 27
KL565 AMS NBO - 408
KL871 AMS DEL - 396
KL713 AMS PBM - 420
Wednesday, December 26
KL871 AMS DEL - 360
KL691 AMS YYZ - 353
Jan 13, 2008, 8:55 am
#41
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Netherlands
Programs: FB Platinum, M&M, BA Executive Club, Sofitel Plat, Priority Club, Starwood Preferred Guest
Posts: 1,447
You can get the passenger numbers in Amadeus using the Flight Operational entry for some airlines and some stretches (not sure if kvs tool shows this too).
But we all know that the level of detail shown here must mean access to KLM's systems in some way or form.
But we all know that the level of detail shown here must mean access to KLM's systems in some way or form.
Jan 14, 2008, 7:34 am
#42
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ZRH, MNL
Programs: FB Gold
Posts: 981
I still believe that with only 2 aircraft in the fleet, the AMS MNL rotation will be hard to fit into the 77W schedule, at least on a daily basis. It would be much easier to put the B744 from the SFO route to MNL and put the B77W to SFO. The arriving B744 could then be used as KL809/CGK, KL553/CAI or as an operational spare.
Jan 14, 2008, 8:19 am
#43
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,953
I'm pretty sure the B744 could take care of that job nonstop without much hassle. There is no way that KLM will go back to a one stop operation to MNL.
Jan 15, 2008, 1:00 pm
#44
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 76
HB-IWC
You stated in an other thread that an possible non-stop flight to TPE would be restricted. But if a 744 could make it whitout severe restrictions to MNL which is almost 500nm further and also suffering from strong headwinds westbound, then a non stop service to TPE has to be possible?
klm312
You stated in an other thread that an possible non-stop flight to TPE would be restricted. But if a 744 could make it whitout severe restrictions to MNL which is almost 500nm further and also suffering from strong headwinds westbound, then a non stop service to TPE has to be possible?
klm312
Jan 15, 2008, 1:15 pm
#45
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home for the terminally bewildered.
Posts: 1,621
HB-IWC
You stated in an other thread that an possible non-stop flight to TPE would be restricted. But if a 744 could make it whitout severe restrictions to MNL which is almost 500nm further and also suffering from strong headwinds westbound, then a non stop service to TPE has to be possible?
klm312
You stated in an other thread that an possible non-stop flight to TPE would be restricted. But if a 744 could make it whitout severe restrictions to MNL which is almost 500nm further and also suffering from strong headwinds westbound, then a non stop service to TPE has to be possible?
klm312
1) The runway at TPE might be shorter than MNL, therefore restricting fuel uplift. (This is unlikely however at TPE which has long haul flights to west coast of USA).
2) The political situation may preclude a direct flight from TPE over mainland China.