• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Malaysia Airlines

Status
Not open for further replies.

KopRed

Well-Known
Member
Our new sponsors apparently. It was announced few days ago, surprised no one posted on this. Anyone knows the economical details?

Can't say I'm too thrilled about this. As an airline they are as unreliable as they come, good thing we won't be flying much this season..

They are bankrolled by the state, and the state is as corrupted as they come. I'm not too sure why we have decided to associate ourselves with them. Hopefully it's for alot of £££..
 
Really unreliable? Barring the two incidents (one obviously not their fault) i've heard nothing but praise within the industry and customers. They were a 5* airline not sure if they still are.

I'm not too bothered who we are sponsored by as long as they stump up the cash.
 
Malaysian Airlines have a pretty good safety record actually. They have have about 4 fatal accidents since 1972. 2 were caused by pilot error, 1 was shot down and 1 hasn't been determined yet.
 
Always had a soft spot for them.

But yeah they've been in really bad shape recently. Can't think of anyone in Singapore who would want to fly with them now (their fault or not)
 
Malaysian Airlines have a pretty good safety record actually. They have have about 4 fatal accidents since 1972. 2 were caused by pilot error, 1 was shot down and 1 hasn't been determined yet.

That's quite a lot if you ask me. Besides, if I get splattered across the mountainside or end up on the ocean floor, I would tend not to give a shit about the cause of this most unfortunate event.
 
That's quite a lot if you ask me. Besides, if I get splattered across the mountainside or end up on the ocean floor, I would tend not to give a shit about the cause of this most unfortunate event.
Is it really? For such a large carrier 4 accidents (only 2 which have been proven to have been preventable on the carrier's part) is nothing. If you look at American Airlines for example, how many accidents have they had but yet they're still regarded as being one of the safest in the world?
 
Is it really? For such a large carrier 4 accidents (only 2 which have been proven to have been preventable on the carrier's part) is nothing. If you look at American Airlines for example, how many accidents have they had but yet they're still regarded as being one of the safest in the world?
Depending on the pilot error, you could argue no mechanical faults so safe un that aspect.
 
Really unreliable? Barring the two incidents (one obviously not their fault) i've heard nothing but praise within the industry and customers. They were a 5* airline not sure if they still are.

I'm not too bothered who we are sponsored by as long as they stump up the cash.
MA have never been a 5 star airline but I've always thought their pricing attractive !
I must have flown 25-30 times with them over the years and I last flew with them in June (Kathmandu-KL and KL-Shanghai) though their business class is pretty average to say the least compared to the industry leaders. We are flying with Qatar Airlines back to Shangers tomorrow and they were superb on the way out here (London).
However from a safety standpoint they really aren't anything to worry about. My 'Going Down' app says that KL to Shanghai on MA (type of aircraft I gave as 'unknown) has a 1: 1,072,722 chance of crashing or once on every 2,938 years !

Better MA than Garuda any day !
 
Last edited:
MA have never been a 5 star airline but I've always thought their pricing attractive !
I must have flown 25-30 times with them over the years and I last flew with them in June (Kathmandu-KL and KL-Shanghai) though their business class is pretty average to say the least compared to the industry leaders. We are flying with Qatar Airlines back to Shangers tomorrow and they were superb on that out here (London).
However from a safety standpoint they really aren't anything to worry about. My 'Going Down' app says that KL to Shanghai on MA (type of aircraft I gave as 'unknown) has a 1: 1,072,722 chance of crashing or once on every 2,938 years !

Better MA than Garuda any day !
Sorry FF but you are wrong. According to skytrax which is regarded as the go to barometer, they were a 5 star airline at least as far back as 2007 until the 2 incidents.

Right now they are under review. Meaning that it will probably be a 4 star going forward.
 
I refuse to fly with them for work ... citing their safety record.
This Christmas me and the family are off to NZ to visit the cousins, and we're flying MA cos they are cheap.
So principals change based on who's wallet I am using [emoji1]
 
Sorry FF but you are wrong. According to skytrax which is regarded as the go to barometer, they were a 5 star airline at least as far back as 2007 until the 2 incidents.

Right now they are under review. Meaning that it will probably be a 4 star going forward.
Ah OK. Not sure what criteria they use (Skytrax list Garuda as #5 in Asia which is clearly undiluted bollocks !) but they don't come even close to the top Asian/Middle Eastern Airlines (JAL, Singapore, ANA, EVA, Cathay and maybe even Thai, plus Qantas, Air NZ, Emirates, Qatar and Etihad), MA are probably on a par with the now lower standards of BA !

Still, if they are laying down the big bucks then I'm happy enough to see them on board ;)
 
You were doing so well until you out Qantas on that list. Since Qantas went into the one world alliance they have gone down rapidly.
 
You were doing so well until you out Qantas on that list. Since Qantas went into the one world alliance they have gone down rapidly.
My daughter reckons they have the best 1st and business class lounges in the world plus superb food and service on board. They flew with them last month (London - Dubai). She and her partner have this hobby of seeking out and finding incredible deals (there are a few websites dedicated to this and they text each other when great deals, which sometimes last only minutes, come up) and they use these to fly all over the world, they even flew in Singapore Suites (that's above 1st class !) for the price of a business class seat !
 
Fair enough. I flew with them (qantas) cattle class back from Australia. They were better than BA admittedly. But Virgin massively ahead of them in cattle class. Ironically the best cattle class I flew with were American Airlines pre 9/11.
 
Fair enough. I flew with them (qantas) cattle class back from Australia. They were better than BA admittedly. But Virgin massively ahead of them in cattle class. Ironically the best cattle class I flew with were American Airlines pre 9/11.
I think cattle class is getting worse, more seats, fewer services and now many airlines are switching to the low-cost carrier example of paying for your suitcases and reducing the quality of food (if any on short haul flights) or asking you to pay.
We mix the class up depending on the length of the flight (we also just flew RyanAir from Pisa to Charleroi and EasyJet to/from Gatwick - Reykjavik, RyanAir much better for what that's worth) and cost.
 
Last edited:
And now anyone that hasn't seen the other thread thinks I'm a pilot. Until they read this post.
 
I've flown with dozens of airlines and they are hands down the worst I've ever had to deal with. But I don't care as long as they put money in our pockets
 
I've flown with dozens of airlines and they are hands down the worst I've ever had to deal with. But I don't care as long as they put money in our pockets

You've never flown Garuda then. I flew them once and the whole plane stank of piss. It was disgusting.
 
Try being flown to Peru by Iberia airlines.

I'm 6ft 2 and barely had any skin on my knees at the end. The seats were shocking for a long haul flight.

Crying babies were also everywhere. This wasn't stictly their fault, but if they had launched them out the window, preferably into the jet engine, they certainly would have gained some bonus points.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom