Pakistan Civil Aviation | Information & News.

[imiakhtar]

Consider this: With a functional fleet of only 25 planes, PIA has nearly 600 pilots. Other sections are similarly overstaffed.

On the whole, a good article Fatman.

However, this point re pilot staffing levels is off the mark. Airlines typically have 20-25 pilots per aircraft. PIA pilot numbers aren't too far from the norm.

If I was the PIA MD, I would close down PIA engineering and contract out engineering services to other centres (HAECO, Lufthansa Technik, AF/KLM who cares).

PIA flight training school would be closed and assets sold off.

Secondly, I would implement the previously suggested code share arrangement with Turkish Airlines for destinations in the EU and North America.

Following the code share arrangement I would pull and cancel PIA services to Paris, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Leeds Bradford, Copenhagen, Oslo, Barcelona, Rome, Moscow, Beijing, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo and New York. If the numbers aren't favourable, I would cancel Toronto too.

The UK-Pak services from Manchester, Birmingham and London would have their frequency increased to at least daily and would be operated to Islamabad only (Lahore, Karachi-UK cancelled).

On the domestic and Mid-East route network, I would withdraw International flights from secondary airports (Peshawar, Faisalabad, Quetta. Sialkot, Multan etc). Anyone traveling to the Mid East from these cities would have to take a feeder flight to Lahore, Karachi or Islamabad.

The only region I would expand the PIA network would be into India and Bangladesh where PIA could compete by targeting Indian and Bengali expats in the Mid-east and UK.

The fleet would consist of the following:

ATR42/72
Boeing 737 or Airbus A32x - preferably the A320 family due to the larger A321 with a view of operating the 737max or A320neo.
B777 - to be replaced by B787-9/10 or the A350-900/1000 depending on availability.

If the situation improves down the line with regards to economy and security, the airline could look at the Bombardier C series for thinner routes in the Mid-East and Asia as well as the reopening of nonstop daily flights to North America.

 

[janu.bravo]

B777 to be replaced? LOL... we are not going to replace any 777 before 2030(like 747). also we are going to induct 5 more 777 in 2015. and 777-300er is still better thn 787 9/10 and A-350 (because they are still not tested) and when they are near to retire 777-9x will replace them.

On the whole, a good article Fatman.

However, this point re pilot staffing levels is off the mark. Airlines typically have 20-25 pilots per aircraft. PIA pilot numbers aren't too far from the norm.

If I was the PIA MD, I would close down PIA engineering and contract out engineering services to other centres (HAECO, Lufthansa Technik, AF/KLM who cares).

PIA flight training school would be closed and assets sold off.

Secondly, I would implement the previously suggested code share arrangement with Turkish Airlines for destinations in the EU and North America.

Following the code share arrangement I would pull and cancel PIA services to Paris, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Leeds Bradford, Copenhagen, Oslo, Barcelona, Rome, Moscow, Beijing, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo and New York. If the numbers aren't favourable, I would cancel Toronto too.

The UK-Pak services from Manchester, Birmingham and London would have their frequency increased to at least daily and would be operated to Islamabad only (Lahore, Karachi-UK cancelled).

On the domestic and Mid-East route network, I would withdraw International flights from secondary airports (Peshawar, Faisalabad, Quetta. Sialkot, Multan etc). Anyone traveling to the Mid East from these cities would have to take a feeder flight to Lahore, Karachi or Islamabad.

The only region I would expand the PIA network would be into India and Bangladesh where PIA could compete by targeting Indian and Bengali expats in the Mid-east and UK.

The fleet would consist of the following:

ATR42/72
Boeing 737 or Airbus A32x - preferably the A320 family due to the larger A321 with a view of operating the 737max or A320neo.
B777 - to be replaced by B787-9/10 or the A350-900/1000 depending on availability.

If the situation improves down the line with regards to economy and security, the airline could look at the Bombardier C series for thinner routes in the Mid-East and Asia as well as the reopening of nonstop daily flights to North America.

 

[imiakhtar]

and 777-300er is still better thn 787 9/10 and A-350

777=300ER Still better?

Then why are airline buying more 787s and A350s - aircraft that DO and WILL have fuel consumption roughly 15% than current models on a per seat basis (A330 and 777 respectively)?

Just so that it illustrates my point, here are the cruise fuel burn figures (bear in mind airlines look at fuel burn per seat):

I've got a 787 QRH to hand which shows it burning fuel 4.5-5.5 tons/hour. The A350 will be 5-6 tons/hour (and according to Rolls-Royce and Airbus, the A350XWB is achieving fuel burn targets). As a comparison, the A330 burns 5-6 tons/hour and the 77W 7-8 tons/hour.

This is what Boeing says:

The airplane uses 20 percent less fuel than today’s similarly sized airplanes.

Given that current models are still overweight and engines 1-2% off fuel burn spec, they're closer to 15% at the moment.

Boeing: About the 787 Family

The Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner burns 27% less than the A340-300.

http://www.virgin-atlantic.com/tridion/images/787nov_tcm4-523607.pdf

The Trent 1000 powered Boeing 787 Dreamliner is 20% more efficient than the Boeing 767 aircraft it replaces.

Courtesy of AirInsight:

You are being redirected...

Given that the 777X will be seating more than the A350 and 77W, it is a capacity increase PIA does not need, and is a constraint that won't allow the 777X to be as flexible on PIA's route network as a 787/A350 or current 77W.

 

[janu.bravo]

You are taking me wrong, I said its better because they are still not tested. 777 is still better because it is tested and it will not give you headache like 787 is currently giving to every airline who are operating it....around 2-3 wks before i saw a news something like boeing persons found wing cracks in 787-9....Also A-350 is in testing stage....if you are really pushing for new technology then why not for 777-9x? its more better thn 787 or A-350? i i don't know how you calculated the 777-9 facts but you can still compare the fuel vs seat ratio of 777-9 with A-350.

and its just our debate....because we all knw that we are not going to order any 777-9x or A-350.

777=300ER Still better?

Then why are airline buying more 787s and A350s - aircraft that DO and WILL have fuel consumption roughly 15% than current models on a per seat basis (A330 and 777 respectively)?

Just so that it illustrates my point, here are the cruise fuel burn figures (bear in mind airlines look at fuel burn per seat):

I've got a 787 QRH to hand which shows it burning fuel 4.5-5.5 tons/hour. The A350 will be 5-6 tons/hour (and according to Rolls-Royce and Airbus, the A350XWB is achieving fuel burn targets). As a comparison, the A330 burns 5-6 tons/hour and the 77W 7-8 tons/hour.

This is what Boeing says:

The airplane uses 20 percent less fuel than today’s similarly sized airplanes.

Given that current models are still overweight and engines 1-2% off fuel burn spec, they're closer to 15% at the moment.



The Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner burns 27% less than the A340-300.


The Trent 1000 powered Boeing 787 Dreamliner is 20% more efficient than the Boeing 767 aircraft it replaces.

Courtesy of AirInsight:

Given that the 777X will be seating more than the A350 and 77W, it is a capacity increase PIA does not need, and is a constraint that won't allow the 777X to be as flexible on PIA's route network as a 787/A350 or current 77W.

 

[imiakhtar]

I said its better because they are still not tested.

The platforms, 787 and A350 are tested. The engines, Trent 1000, GenX and TrentXWB are tested and their fuel burn figures are known.

777 is still better because it is tested and it will not give you headache like 787 is currently giving to every airline who are operating it.

When the 777 entered service, it had many teething issues as do all aircraft. The GE90 engines were unreliable and required frequent changing. There were issues (and occasionally still are) with the honeywell FMC.

i saw a news something like boeing persons found wing cracks in 787-9

Which aircraft in service doesn't have directives concerning cracks? Even your beloved 77W has directives issued:

This proposed AD results from reports of cracks emanating from the keyway of the fuel tank access door cutout of the lower wing skin between wing rib numbers 8 and 9. We are proposing this AD to prevent loss of the lower wing skin load path, which could cause catastrophic structural failure of the wing.

Federal Register | Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 777-200LR and -300ER Series Airplanes

Also A-350 is in testing stage

As I said and posted relevant links, the A350 fuel burn is ON TARGET. Airbus have completed almost 1000 hours of flight testing on the A350, they've flown longhaul flights over 10+ hours from France-Bolivia and Singapore-France and the telemetry has been measured. If you don't believe me, why don't you listen or read the words of Al Baker of Qatar Airways. Given the arguments and bad press he gave boeing over the 787 missing targets, he would definitely have done the same for airbus.

if you are really pushing for new technology then why not for 777-9x?

As I said, the 777-9X is significantly larger than the A350-1000 and B77W given that it will seat over 400 in standard config. PIA does not need this capacity and the frame would not give the flexibility of a lower capacity aircraft. Also, if PIA were to order the 777X today, they wouldn't receive it until after 2022 (by which time the 777s will be approaching 20yrs old) and the 787/A350 can be had earlier.

i i don't know how you calculated the 777-9 facts but you can still compare the fuel vs seat ratio of 777-9 with A-350

Whilst the 777X will have better fuel burn per seat compared to the A350, 1- the delta is small and 2 - the A380 has the best fuel burn per seat, but that doesn't mean it's a good fit for PIA or most airlines does it?

i i don't know how you calculated the 777-9 facts

Those aren't my facts, the numbers given are by Air Insight, one of the most highly regarded consultancy firms in the aviation industry.

 

[janu.bravo]

LOL. dude if 787 is that much tested thn why every airline is complaining? i know every plane got some issues but 787 got some extra....even boeing spokesman said that they need to make 787 as safe as 777....and 777 is boeing's benchmark for reliability.

A-350 is still in testing stage even it cross the 1000 hour sorties...A-350 can prove its reliability when it will be delivered to any airline...just like 787, and after that we can see.

777 is not my beloved aircraft mine is A-321

plus 777-9X is in the league of A-350 (wide-body) and with 60 more passengers you cant say PIA does not need that capacity of plane. if PIA doesn't need that much big plane thn PIA also doesn't need A-350.. also i am not in favor of A-380...all we need is A-320's or 737 right now.

The platforms, 787 and A350 are tested. The engines, Trent 1000, GenX and TrentXWB are tested and their fuel burn figures are known.



When the 777 entered service, it had many teething issues as do all aircraft. The GE90 engines were unreliable and required frequent changing. There were issues (and occasionally still are) with the honeywell FMC.



Which aircraft in service doesn't have directives concerning cracks? Even your beloved 77W has directives issued:

This proposed AD results from reports of cracks emanating from the keyway of the fuel tank access door cutout of the lower wing skin between wing rib numbers 8 and 9. We are proposing this AD to prevent loss of the lower wing skin load path, which could cause catastrophic structural failure of the wing.





As I said and posted relevant links, the A350 fuel burn is ON TARGET. Airbus have completed almost 1000 hours of flight testing on the A350, they've flown longhaul flights over 10+ hours from France-Bolivia and Singapore-France and the telemetry has been measured. If you don't believe me, why don't you listen or read the words of Al Baker of Qatar Airways. Given the arguments and bad press he gave boeing over the 787 missing targets, he would definitely have done the same for airbus.



As I said, the 777-9X is significantly larger than the A350-1000 and B77W given that it will seat over 400 in standard config. PIA does not need this capacity and the frame would not give the flexibility of a lower capacity aircraft. Also, if PIA were to order the 777X today, they wouldn't receive it until after 2022 (by which time the 777s will be approaching 20yrs old) and the 787/A350 can be had earlier.



Whilst the 777X will have better fuel burn per seat compared to the A350, 1- the delta is small and 2 - the A380 has the best fuel burn per seat, but that doesn't mean it's a good fit for PIA or most airlines does it?



Those aren't my facts, the numbers given are by Air Insight, one of the most highly regarded consultancy firms in the aviation industry.

 

[imiakhtar]

plus 777-9X is in the league of A-350 (wide-body) and with 60 more passengers you cant say PIA does not need that capacity of plane. if PIA doesn't need that much big plane thn PIA also doesn't need A-350

The A350 is designed to compete with the 77W which PIA operates. As such it would make a good replacement. If PIA ios finding the A350-1000 too big, they can opt for the A350-900.

You keep talking about reliability. This isn't the 1980s anymore with protected skies and nationalised airlines. Airlines have got to move quickly and adapt against competitors and one of the best ways of doing so is with a young, flexible, fuel efficient fleet. PIA's woes at the moment are being caused by 20 year old A310s and 25 year old 737s which they're struggling to maintain. IF PIA were to order the 787/A350 today, they wouldn't be one of the first operators (the early frames tend to be heavy and most unreliable).

The 777-9X is designed to replace the 747-8 which will be likely be cancelled within 10 years.

 

[SHAMK9]

The 777-9X is designed to replace the 747-8 which will be likely be cancelled within 10 years.

I would be surprised if Boeing doesn't cancel 747-8 program in next two years

 

[Thorough Pro]

Close down all international money-making routes, instead just do joy rides around airports!

for the highlighted part, why not just focus on transporting the cattle, that would be a lot better.

If I was the PIA MD, I would close down PIA engineering and contract out engineering services to other centres (HAECO, Lufthansa Technik, AF/KLM who cares).

PIA flight training school would be closed and assets sold off.

Following the code share arrangement I would pull and cancel PIA services to Paris, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Leeds Bradford, Copenhagen, Oslo, Barcelona, Rome, Moscow, Beijing, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo and New York. If the numbers aren't favourable, I would cancel Toronto too.

On the domestic and Mid-East route network, I would withdraw International flights from secondary airports (Peshawar, Faisalabad, Quetta. Sialkot, Multan etc). Anyone traveling to the Mid East from these cities would have to take a feeder flight to Lahore, Karachi or Islamabad.

The only region I would expand the PIA network would be into India and Bangladesh where PIA could compete by targeting Indian and Bengali expats in the Mid-east and UK.

 

[imiakhtar]

international money-making routes,

Where did I say close them all down?

Why did PIA MD try to arrange codeshares via Turkish Airlines to all those EU and North America cities - it was so PIA could withdraw from those silly "community service" routes and focus on an area where they can actually compete in the Gulf.

Pakistanis need to get it in their head that PIA is a business and not a taxi service!

Oh and have a look at Behtamjee's blog here. He's uses Sabre and Amadeus booking numbers to look at passenger flows.

Behramjee's Airline News

The routes I mentioned above for the chop don't make 70% LF in high season and most carry very little cargo (I've posted the flight plans before).

for the highlighted part, why not just focus on transporting the cattle, that would be a lot better.

Like it or not, the truth is PIA has been a VFR or "cattle" carrier since the 1980s. This is reflected in the aircraft configurations operated by PIA with the huge Y class.

 

[Asian.Century]

Plan to induct 28 newest top-line Aircraft to revamp PIA

Under 'Revival of PIA plan'.

Tariq Butt -Wednesday, April 05, 2014

ISLAMABAD: The crisis-ridden Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) plans to induct 28 aircraft as part of its revival strategy to bring itself to a breakeven level with increased revenue and cost cutting measures by the end of the current year.

The planes will be 20 new generation A-320, B-737, and four Boeing 777 and ATR 72-500 aircraft each.“The only option is to turn around the national flag carrier through different steps,” Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Aviation Shujaat Azim told The News.

He said the planes would be immediately taken on dry lease (on rent without fuel, pilots or general flight expenses, having operational control of the flights). “Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif wants that the planes not older than 2010 should be taken.”

According to a presentation titled “revival of PIA”, given to top authorities, a copy of which is available with The News, the current fleet of 777 aircraft would be refurbished to the highest level, which would be used only on long haul flights to Britain, the US, Canada and Saudi Arabia.

The PIA would be restructured with creation of Strategic Business Units (SBUs), starting with SPEEDEX and followed by kitchen and MRO (Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul). Non-core activities would be separated from core to ensure profitability and efficiency.

It is projected that the total fleet including the new inductions will generate annual revenue of Rs72 billion at 85% seat factor and 12.5 hours fleet utilization/day. The additional revenue will offset losses, it is hoped.

It has been expected that positive impact of modern fleet will raise the passenger confidence, and enhance revenue, schedule reliability and route rationalization and reduce fuel cost by 38% and maintenance cost. The overall operating expenses will come down by 30%.

At present, the PIA has a fleet of 34 aircrafts out of which only 25 are serviceable. They operate on 23 domestic and 30 foreign destinations. The airline has the market share of 60.2% (domestic) and 26.8% (international). It overall share comes to 34.4%.

The presentation said that the average age of the existing fleet is nearly 17 years. The PIA has 19,418 employees (inclusive of 3,188 personnel through service providers).

Employee-to-aircraft ratio is 776, which is almost four times higher than the worldwide ratio. The airline owns assets (aircrafts, properties etc.) worth 128,211,290 billion as against liabilities (loans, Civil Aviation Authority, Original Equipment Manufacturers or OEMs etc.) of 262,549,613 billion. This presents a highly dismal financial condition.

The presentation said that business class seats will be upgraded to full flat beds; in-flight entertainment will be improved and cabin ambiance will be changed with placing of carpets, seat covers, curtains, side trims, panels, and gallery equipment.

Of the existing PIA fleet, two of four Boeing 747 aircrafts (26-year old) are serviceable. Similarly, six out of twelve Airbus A310 (20-year old) are operational. Two of three Boeing 737 planes (26-year old) are serviceable. All the six ATR 42 (7-year old) planes are in service.

Likewise, all the nine Boeing 777 aircrafts are operational. With the exception of one Boeing 777, which is on lease, all the planes are owned by the PIA. Technical reasons have been cited for the nine planes being out of operation. Except Boeing 777 and ATR aircrafts, the average age of the fleet is 18 years.

As part of the revival strategy, the PIA has stopped all perks and privileges of present and previous members of its board and chairman. The procurement of aircraft parts will only be from the OEMs. All off-line stations are being closed to save cost. The performance of all the General Sales Agents (GSAs) is being reviewed. Free seat up-gradation or excess baggage has been stopped, the presentation said.

Plan to induct 28 new aircraft to revamp PIA - thenews.com.pk

 

[imiakhtar]

The planes will be 20 new generation A-320, B-737, and four Boeing 777 and ATR 72-500 aircraft each.

That's all good and well but why the split 737 and A320 family fleet. For a small airlines like PIA, that means separate flight training, spares and maintenance which equal additional expense.

“Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif wants that the planes not older than 2010 should be taken.”

PIA rejected the last tender offers for 4 widebody aircraft as they were all pre 2010 aircraft. Where are PIA going to get post 2010 built 777s from?

The News, the current fleet of 777 aircraft would be refurbished to the highest level, which would be used only on long haul flights to Britain, the US, Canada and Saudi Arabia.

Since when is a Saudi-Pak flight long haul? I've mentioned it before but with PIAs small fleet, they can not afford to use the 777 on short-haul flights as a norm.

will generate annual revenue of Rs72 billion at 85% seat factor and 12.5 hours fleet utilization/day.

PIA load factor was 70% in 2012. They are dreaming if they think they can get it up to 85% in a few years.

The airline owns assets (aircrafts, properties etc.) worth 128,211,290 billion as against liabilities (loans, Civil Aviation Authority, Original Equipment Manufacturers or OEMs etc.) of 262,549,613 billion.

Ie, they're bankrupt.

This presents a highly dismal financial condition.

Understatement of the year.

I just picked this little gem from their corporate reports. Funny percentages:

 

[Edevelop]

Two weekly flights from Lahore to Kyrgyzstan in August

LAHORE: Two flights in a week from Lahore to Kyrgyzstan will be launched in August and delegations will be exchanged for promotion of trade between the two countries.

These views were expressed by Kyrgyzstan Ambassador in Pakistan Kubanchybek and Chairman (Partner) Air Kyrgyzstan Pakistan Aamir Ghafoor while talking to media people on Friday. On this occasion, President Chamber of Commerce S. M. Naseer was also present.

Kyrgyzstan Ambassador Kubanchybek said that soon after Ramzanul Mubarik, two direct flights from Lahore to Kyrgyzstan would be started. Religion and culture of both countries are same and as such we will have to make progress and development together. He further said his country had a big market of textile and furniture, and we wanted that businessmen of Pakistan should also have access to the markets of Russia and Kyrgyzstan after China. He added that Kyrgyzstan also enjoyed status of wholesale dealer in the world market.

Chairman (Partner) Air Kyrgyzstan Pakistan Aamir Ghafoor said that in order to provide better opportunities to Pakistani businessmen in the world market, we had started the process of man to man contacts for access to the markets of China, Russia and Kyrgyzstan in collaboration with the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI). He informed the businessmen that Pakistani businessmen had to travel through China for going to Kyrgyzstan. For saving time of businessmen and other people, we have prepared a schedule for direct flights from Lahore, he said.


Two weekly flights from Lahore to Kyrgyzstan in August - thenews.com.pk

 

[khanboy007]

Pakistani plane accidently lands at wrong airport in Saudi Arabia | GulfNews.com

Pakistani plane accidently lands at wrong airport in Saudi Arabia

Manama: Passengers have asked for financial compensation after a Pakistani International Airlines (PIA) plane flying them from Karachi to Riyadh landed at King Abdul Aziz International Airport in Jeddah.

The passengers were deeply shocked when they found themselves at the airport in the Red Sea city instead of the international airport in the Saudi capital, Saudi news site Sabq reported on Sunday.

No explanation was given how Flight 731 with more than 200 passengers on board ended up almost 1,000km west of the announced destination.

The Pakistani company provided buses to transport the passengers to the capital and offered them food and drinks, Sabq said.

Some of the passengers speculated that the plane was originally scheduled to fly to Jeddah, but accepted to take people who had booked to go to Riyadh without informing them they would be flying to Jeddah.

Other passengers called for stringent action against the pilot in case he is found to have committed the mistake of landing at the wrong airport, the news site said.

Readers’ comments were mainly sympathetic with the passengers and expressed their support as they had to be driven overland for almost 1,000km.

--------------------------------------------

ganda hay par dhanda hay

 

[imiakhtar]

Pakistani plane accidently lands at wrong airport in Saudi Arabia

JED is over 1 hour flying time from Riyadh. This flight was obviously intended for Jeddah from the offset given the additional fuel considerations.