expired Malaysia Airlines BNE to KL $604/ Jakarta $645/ Delhi $658/ Ho Chi Minh City $663/ Shanghai $698/ Taipei $704/ London $1290 Retu

120

Since Malayasia Airlines can't get a break from the Spotlight, here's something if you are feeling adventurous.

Malaysia Airlines is having a Sale on the new BNE-KL (and connections) route which starts in June

Booking Dates: Now - 22 Jan 2018
Travel Dates: 06 Jun- 30 Nov 2018

Economy Deals from Brisbane:

Kuala Lumpur/ Surabaya Juanda/ Medan Kuala Namu/ Manila Return $ 645

Bali Return $650

Langkawi/ Kota Bharu/ Penang/ Alor Setar/ Kuala Terengganu Return $654

Delhi/ Mumbai/ Chennai/ Hyderabad/ Bengaluru Return $658

Hanoi/ Ho Chi Minh City Return $663

Kathmandu Return $673

Haikou/ Hong Kong Return $694

Colombo Return $696

Guangzhou/ Nanjing/ Fuzhou/ Chongqing/ Shanghai/ Xiamen Return $698

Taipei/ Tawau/ Sibu/ Labuan/ Kota Kinabalu/ Bintulu/ Kuching/ Sandakan/ Miri Return $704

Tokyo/ Bandar Seri Begawan/ Osaka/ Seoul/ Phnom Penh/ Yangon/ Singapore/ Siem Reap Return $713

Beijing Return $722

Bangkok/ Phuket Return $743

Dhaka Return $753

Koh Samui Return $803

London Return $1290

Malaysia Airlines

Related Store: Malaysia Airlines

Comments

  • +15 votes

    Those are some pretty expensive flights just to go to Alice Springs…

  • +4 votes

    "… if you are feeling adventurous“
    Yes, you need to adventurous to take the risk …

  • +8 votes

    Given the number of incidents which have impacted the airline in the last 5 years, I'm reluctant to fly MH even if they paid me! It is a shame though as they used to be a great airline.

    •  

      Still are a great airline. Particularly with prices like this.

      • +12 votes

        Sorry but an airline which doesn't constantly make the news for crashes and "technical" mishaps (like losing an entire engine) is what I would call a great airline. An airline which stays out of the headlines as much as possible is who I'll be flying with. It's easy to say they are still good when you are sitting safe in your home, but at 10,000 feet you'll be singing a different tune. I don't care how good the cabin crew or facilities are, they are no good to you during the terror of the plane nose diving into the Indian Ocean… But hey, what great prices!

        • +3 votes

          I dont understand why would ppl downvote this comment.

        • +5 votes

          I agree. People who say that the MA plane that got shot down was totally out of their hands are also wrong. MA took a flight path over hostile territory. Other carriers did this too, but others used more fuel to ensure safe passage. MA cheaped out on the fuel, knowing full well that the territory was hostile, given that it was publicly known that the rebels had a BUK (as it took down a Ukranian military plane a week before, killing every one on board). I can't believe anyone would even touch the hot mess that is Malasia Airlines.

        • +8 votes

          @alwynpan:

          I didn't downvote it but it displays ignorance

          I have over 10,000 hours airline time and worked in flight safety. They've had plenty of bad luck but assuming they are more dangerous from their records isn't an accurate way to determine how they fly.

          An old airline saying when I was flying general aviation was that you couldn't get into an airline without doing a gear up landing. Basically it means you learn from experience. MA has always been one of the better Asian airlines, if not the best. Since the accidents they have incorporated further training and much more stringent requirements. This actually makes them a good choice!!

          I would still prefer a high end "westernised" airline. The training is often superior and more often better taken on and respected by the training aircrew. For instance, I spent 10 months with Virgin Australia, prior to this and after I flew for both Middle Eastern and Asian Airlines. A Captain at some of these airlines wouldn't even pass training as an FO with Virgin(Malaysian Airlines would have passed). Some of the Chinese Airlines having exceptional safety records but compared to some western counterparts they are a very high risk (comparatively is the operative word). I know, I spent time training for China Southern and Singapore Airlines….when things go wrong and how they deal with it….that's how you should judge how safe you feel.

        • +5 votes

          @slipperypete:

          With all due respect, I don't quite agree. In the 3 years, MA had 7 accidents and incidents (caused 537 fatalities), which is way higher than industry average. It seems the ' incorporated further training and much more stringent requirements' didn't help them much.

          I also strongly disagree the point that the accidents and incidents 'actually makes them a good choice'. For me, I still prefer the 25 airlines that have 0 fatality in their history, although they have 0 experience in handling fatal accidents.

        • +1 vote

          @slipperypete:
          Ignorance? Bad Luck? Tell that to the dead and their families. Typical pilot response, always theory over reality.
          The proof is in the pudding, and the pudding has been smashed to bits, not once, but twice. Half the pudding nearly fell out of the sky over the West Australian coastline the other day.

          I'll judge how safe I feel on an airline by how many of their planes make it from the departure point to the destination, not your opinion on how educated you think you are on pilot training and the airline industry - which by the way amounts to zero considering Malaysian Airlines has lost 537 lives in 3 years and two separate incidents.

          P&O cruise liners start randomly exploding into flames killing 100's of people, and you pipe up saying, "I've worked in the cruise industry and well… P&O engineers are pretty well regarded and they have even more stringent requirements now… not like those idiots at Royal Caribbean who wouldn't even make deckhand at Carnival… so yeah, cruise with P&O for sure!"

          You might put your family on Malaysian Airlines buddy, but mine sure as hell won't be flying with them.

        • +1 vote

          @Dontreadthis:
          Stop being such a drama queen. You sound like those newspaper headlines that amp it up to entice the gullible.

          Half the pudding nearly fell out of the sky over the West Australian coastline the other day.

          No it didn't, however, you should write for the Womens Weekly, you would do well!!

          There are dozens of airlines that have never crashed, yet I would never with for them. To rely on 0 fatalities without understanding facts is gambling.

          I've sat with BA and Qantas pilots drinking till 4am when they had a 8am start. Just because they are regarded as good airlines you think that that is safe behaviour? I would take MA over a crew that had just finished their 6th pint only 5 hours earlier. Do you do background checks on who is flying and whether they are fatigued or not fit to fly? That is getting rarer these days but pilots for 'accident free' airlines are arrested each year from being over the limit. Imagine if one of these crews happened to have a catastrophic engine failure after take off, at a guess I would say they may end their perfect record!!

          The fact is, MA have had a lot of bad luck. I'm not saying they are the best airline in the world, but I know the standards of their training and also their maintenance. There are MUCH MUCH worse out there and lots of those are accident free.

          So to go back to your comment, If I was deciding which airline to put my family on, I would scrutinise their training and maintenance over history any day of the week. That is an educated gamble rather than an emotional gamble.

        •  

          @slipperypete: To be honest, the fact that you were up to 4am drinking with people who you knew (assuming you knew) were going to fly a bunch of people around is pretty slack on your part. I can't stand (profanity) who allow their friends to get into a car drunk or even drink drive themselves. I hope you're just trying to make a point and aren't the irresponsible, reckless moron that your comment alludes to, again, assuming you knew at the time and that you're not making things up. If not, that's just truly disgusting and shameful.

        • -2 votes

          @slipperypete:

          Stop being such a drama queen.

          People are dead, over 500 of them, or are their deaths just inconvenient for you?

          The fact is, MA have had a lot of bad luck

          Yeah MA are the victims, you are in some sort of certifiable denial that's for sure.

          So to go back to your comment, If I was deciding which airline to put my family on

          That wasn't my question, you are dancing around it because you don't want to answer it - would you put your son or daughter on Malaysian Airlines tomorrow?

          That is an educated gamble rather than an emotional gamble.

          You are talking rubbish. Your rambling is just empty speculation and opinion. Your theories are meaningless "what ifs". What matters are actual results, not "stories from the pilots lounge".

          The fact you care more about Malaysian Airlines image rather than the souls lost on their flights is disturbing. If you are actually a pilot or involved somehow with passenger aircraft it is very worrying indeed.

        •  

          @no not me:

          You are right it is disgusting and to me, anyone who gets caught under the influence, should be up for charges similar to manslaughter. Basically by doing this, they are knowingly putting lives at risk.

          Airlines often share the same hotels. In hotels crews are coming and going, for example, we may get into the hotel at 3am and go for a beer. Maybe end up sitting with another group of airline crew. It isn't until you notice the crew down in reception at 7am that the penny drops. This was commonplace 30 years ago, fortunately it isn't now. The point is, it does happen, and it is a gamble, you must have read the headlines….and for each person that gets busted I'm sure there are more who get away with it.

          As I said though, fortunately it isn't commonplace these days. Most airlines have random drug and alcohol testing which seems to do the job.

        • +2 votes

          @Dontreadthis:

          I understand your point but you are thinking emotionally rather than logically. To answer you….

          No I think it is incredibly tragic about each and every death ever. Not just with MA but any airline or other crash.
          I worked in flight safety, I analyse all of these accidents…most were pilot error or could be prevented with better responses or training. There is no denial from my part….I know the flaws and what could be improved. It makes me sick to the stomach every time I hear of an accident

          I would not hesitate to put my family on MA, they are one of the better airlines out there. I know their training and it is pretty good.

          Most of the top ten safest airlines have had fatal accidents.

          Would you fly Korean Airlines? 10-15 years ago they were uninsurable and could not fly in European airspace due to accidents and poor safety. They were audited by an American airline who compiled so many faults (you can find these online I think) that the only way they could fly was to have a western pilot on the flight deck. They went through significant training and now have an excellent record as good as most out there. I also wouldn't hesitate to fly with them now.

          KLM has killed as many as MA due to poor communications and gaps in procedure. They are a top 5 and are excellent.

          NZ airlines flew into a mountain!!

          I could go on about each and every airline who are listed with Grade A safety records and who have all had fatalities. Just check out each airline, it is easy to do. A lot better than reading news headlines with emotional passenger comments to sell stories.

          MA has had 2 crashes with major fatalities. One is still unexplained, the other was shot down. Yes, maybe they shouldn't have flow over the area, some airlines bypassed it, other top 20 airlines didn't. Lufthansa Singapore Airlines and Virgin Atlantic as well as others were happy to fly over that airspace. How would that alter your opinion if it was one of them who got shot down? Would you refuse to fly with them based on 'being in the wrong place at the wrong time"? Would you prefer boarding another flight from an airline that also flew over and was not shot down, yet despite never having an accident this actual airline faces bans in several different countries due to poor training compliances?

          Lets put that another way. Who would you feel happier driving your family. My Dad who is in his late 80's, he is quite deaf and bit doddery and shaky at the wheel. Despite this he has never had a speeding ticket or any accident in 65 years of driving. Or a 35 year old who had two accidents when he/she was young. One due to a lapse in concentration the other was due to someone else? This person learnt from their mistake and is now super cautious.

          Everytime you get in a car, bus, train, plane or cross the road it is a gamble. I would rather look at the actual risk rather than what has happened in the past. If a road had several fatalities, yet since then extensive road works and lane widening had occurred, I wouldn't look at what happened in the past to make my judgment on using the road, I would look at what is in the here and now and the actual risk in the here and now

          I actually don't care about MA image rather than souls. I have no links with them. However, I don't take the emotional perspective when it comes to reality.

          It is your choice. My view is different because I come from a background of expertise in flying commercial aircraft and also having worked in flight safety and risk management. My perspective and risk assessment is what could potentially happen that next time an aeroplane gets airborne. Of course I take into account previous history, but I don't wholly base decisions on that

        • +2 votes

          @slipperypete:

          I've sat with BA and Qantas pilots drinking till 4am when they had a 8am start.

          I haven't been following the long discussion, but just read this just now and thought it was amusing. :)

          https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/01/21/09/45/drunk-pil...

        •  

          @eug:
          Wow!!! Great way to end your career!!!

  • +7 votes

    Does this include the search and rescue cost?

  • +3 votes

    They can't pay me enough to take their flights.

  • +11 votes

    I think Malaysia Airlines should just partner up with Adrenaline.com.au.

  • +9 votes

    Not a bargain. It's should be a lot cheaper if fly with one engine only…

  • +3 votes

    MH? I will skip… Not worth risking my life…

  •  

    Deal should only be for one way, it's all you'll need.

    It's one way of getting water on a plane when the flight attendants aren't around.

  •  

    Bit expensive for a roller coaster ride isn't it?? Albeit the world's scariest roller coaster…

  • -1 vote

    Hmm not that great. There are much more inexpensive ways to die.

  • +1 vote

    I am here only to see the posts and proved what I thought. I would like to pay more for less risk!

  • +1 vote

    I think any airline from Malaysia needs to be avoided. Air Asia is also in the hot seat with airline safety etc. Most airlines have a 60-90 minutes turnaround whereas Air Asia only has 25 minutes. I wonder if the proper checks are carried out in the shortened time??

  • +1 vote

    Personally i am more concerned with an airlines corporate culture than luck. Safety starts from the top…

  • +5 votes

    Maybe they should offer an "on arrival" pricing where you pay when you actually get to the booked destination…..

  • +2 votes

    Added bonus is the savings on laxative purchases.

  • +5 votes

    I don't think it's fair to bash Malaysia Airlines. A Singapore Airlines plane crashed in Taiwan in 2000 killing 83 people yet I don't see anyone on OzBargain complaining about the safety of Singapore Airlines.

    • +1 vote

      Very good point.

      Also you can't blame Malaysian Airlines for the plane that went missing.
      That could even happen to any airline.

    • +3 votes

      SA: 3 incidents since 1947, 83 fatalities
      MA: 7 incidents in last 3 years, 537 fatalities

      You can do the math.

  • +4 votes

    Heh, I see the Ozbargain knuckle-draggers are out in force again. Like moth to flame.

  • +2 votes

    Pass , as OzBee I like deals , I like to go cheap , but not at the cost of safety .

  • +3 votes

    Some of the logic posted on this deal is very questionable.

    Flying with Malaysian Airlines isn't any riskier than other airline companies, they've just had bad luck, and just because others haven't had planes falling out of the sky yet, does not guarantee it will never happen.

    Just a bunch of Australians being overly critical about anything and everything for the sake of it.

    • +3 votes

      Your characterisation of these events as bad luck merely because the underlying causes are not known is itself questionable. It could be bad luck. It could also be bad management. The number of incidents alone suggests bad luck is less likely to blame.

    • +2 votes

      Bad luck cannot explain seven incidents and accidents in three years that caused 537 fatalities.

      OK. Say it was bad luck, would you mind risking your life to take an airline that always has bad luck? You may, me? No, thanks.

      BTW, I am not OZ.

    • -1 vote

      Just a bunch of Australians being overly critical about anything and everything for the sake of it.

      And the grieving families of 537 dead passengers. Maybe you should tell them that they are just being critical?

      • +1 vote

        And the grieving families of 537 dead passengers. Maybe you should tell them that they are just being critical?

        I highly doubt that any of those families have commented on this deal.

    • +3 votes

      Just a bunch of Australians being overly critical about anything and everything for the sake of it.

      I think you hit the nail on the head.

      I like this site but it is overly critical.

      People are scared to post bargains because so many others prefer to find a way to knock it or find some way to post a neg vote. I think there is a large group of people on this forum who always want to find the negative in everything, take pleasure in finding fault and criticising others. I would hate to live life like that.

  • +3 votes

    I would think that after the troubles Malaysian Airlines has had, they would be hyper vigilant with safety. Their safety rating is the same as Qatar and Air France and higher than Thai Airways and Tiger.

  •  

    I hope the Malaysia airline maintenance people don’t have the same attitude and culture as those with Air Asia indonesia that crashed near Borneo. I meant by The attitude and culture = eg. you don’t use forklift to lift up people to do scaffolding job nor using stacked up chairs as a ladder to change light bulbs in warehouse. “Alway Shortcuts” to fix problems . So , to me this deal won’t be a deal if it has the possibility to put my fellows ozbargainers in danger .

    •  

      You're talking as if that was the case. Does that actually happen with MAS?

      •  

        I hope it is not the case with MAS, but my living and working experince in those regions showed me many “shortcuts” to fix things.

  • +2 votes

    I posted this in the other recent deal. I'll post it again for visibility..

    Despite all the jokes about Malaysia Airlines, I've flown them 12 times since MH17 got shot down in August 2014.

    .. but I do understand why everyone is skeptical.. not that I've had bad experiences, but I get it. lol

  •  

    There is a history of airlines behaving badly one way and another. Generally they start reducing tickets and after a while the public start flying with them again. Seems that pax will get back on after a while when the price is right.

  •  

    i can't seem to fine any flights bne-kul for that price though.

  • +5 votes

    The level of childish comments here suggests to me that most of the naysayers would not be able to fly without mum and dad anyway.

  • Login
  • or
  • Register
  • to Join The Conversation
  • Top