Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5771005/

Topic: SQ At Newark.
Username: fxramper
Posted 2013-05-22 20:37:01 and read 12399 times.

Have read on this site SQ will discontinue their SIN-EWR-SIN flight. It's on an Airbus A345 in all business class. This flight goes out full pretty regularly. Curious why SQ is dumping this route. Seems prestigious to the company as the longest revenue flight in the world at present. Thoughts appreciated.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-05-22 21:49:28 and read 12253 times.

The A345 fleet is going bye-bye.

Due to the ULH nature of the flight, I doubt even full loads produce profits.

SQ has struggled with these flights having changed configurations more than once on the aircraft, and even announcing they would put economy back on planes the last year, before changing course and pulling the plug completely now.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: cipango
Posted 2013-05-22 21:59:51 and read 12202 times.

The main problem is the deadweight on this flight. They need to carry all the fuel at once during departure and the aircraft is fuel heavy until around 50-/75% of the flight when the benefits of a reduced load can then be felt.

I remember reading that SQ would lose less money by operating these flights than they would by grounding them, mainly due to the fact that no one wants to buy an A345.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
SQ has struggled with these flights having changed configurations more than once on the aircraft, and even announcing they would put economy back on planes the last year, before changing course and pulling the plug completely now.

This is the one route I really wanted to try out. Unfortunately I never found the reason nor the money to travel from SIN-EWR.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: infinit
Posted 2013-05-22 22:01:29 and read 12197 times.

This was discussed in the following thread awhile back:
SQ Publishes A345 SIN-LAX/EWR Nonstop End Dates (by LAXintl Dec 20 2012 in Civil Aviation)

The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.
Airbus is stopping the A345 program
There is no other model that can do this route profitably from what I hear.

Despite the yields being good, some have questioned the profitability of these flights in light of present-day fuel costs.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: qf340500
Posted 2013-05-22 22:07:45 and read 12172 times.

what a sad day! One of the best looking planes ever!

Any idea if SQ plans to do a "last flight" ceremony or lucky draw or a farewell flight to HKG as they did with the 747 or a few short runs to CGK? Would love to make a trip on this machine before it disappeares...  

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: VC10er
Posted 2013-05-23 05:34:13 and read 11479 times.

Can a 787 in all business class do the trip? It would be ONE thing United could do that would add some sizzle to it's image...and given United's big EWR hub and it's virtual ownership of APac market. But for over 20 hours I'd hope they would use the GlobalFirst seat. Their Bf seat wouldnt be premium enough to command the fare needed.

I guess I am just curious if a smaller thinner approach on a 787 would make it more feasable? Or perhaps 2 holes can't do it.

After SQ stops it, what will be the best way to SIN from NYC area? Via FRA?

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: falkerker
Posted 2013-05-23 06:09:38 and read 11350 times.

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.

So the A380 have 3 years left??? Weird...

Quoting VC10er (Reply 5):
After SQ stops it, what will be the best way to SIN from NYC area? Via FRA?

It would be the only way to fly SQ all the way. Other options would be NYC-HKG-SIN or NYC-LAX/SFO-NRT/HKG-SIN. Obviously not as practical and comfortable as a direct, non stop.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-05-23 06:38:02 and read 11196 times.

Quoting falkerker (Reply 6):
So the A380 have 3 years left??? Weird...

Hard to believe right, but that's been pretty standard. I think back when the 744's made up the majority of the fleet the average age was 5 years old. There's a reason why they've been ordering additional A380's.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: LY777
Posted 2013-05-23 06:52:15 and read 11108 times.

But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: KaiTak747
Posted 2013-05-23 08:38:38 and read 10289 times.

For getting pax from SIN-EWR, flying them directly by A340-500 is an extremely inefficient way of doing so.

As people have stated earlier, ULH haul flights are flying fuel tanks for the first half of the flight.

SQ will not lose many passengers by cancelling these ULH flights. LAX passengers will be routed via NRT and EWR passengers via FRA.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 7):
Hard to believe right, but that's been pretty standard. I think back when the 744's made up the majority of the fleet the average age was 5 years old. There's a reason why they've been ordering additional A380's.

The 747s left the fleet because a new VLA with far better economics came out. The A380s will not be going anywhere soon as there is nothing better to replace them with.

Of course operating young fleets saves money on fuel and m/x, but capital costs often outweigh these savings.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: thegivenone
Posted 2013-05-23 09:31:19 and read 9671 times.

Yup, very sad to see this route go. But I am glad to have secured a seat on SQ 22 SIN-EWR at the end of June to experience one of the last of these record-breaking flights. I'll be doing JFK-FRA-SIN on the outbound.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
As people have stated earlier, ULH haul flights are flying fuel tanks for the first half of the flight.

This is an interesting concept which I hadn't really thought of before. Does anyone know what the average yields on this flight are? Tickets go for around $8000-9000 roundtrip, which might not be bad at an ~85% load factor.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 5):

Can a 787 in all business class do the trip?

Interesting proposal – an extension of the Premium Service into long-haul routes. United certainly needs to do something to sizzle up its image. Yesterday's new uniforms didn't quite do it  

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: EWRkid1990
Posted 2013-05-23 10:33:22 and read 8990 times.

So does this mean that SQ is leaving EWR for good? or are the going to be operating EWR-FRA-SIN flights? If they do begin to operate the flights via FRA, which aircraft would be used? 777-300?

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: Bthebest
Posted 2013-05-23 10:39:09 and read 8919 times.

Quoting LY777 (Reply 8):
But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Oldest is 15 at present

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.

Looking back at 747s (-400 at least) the retiring age is between 10-14 years. Could the policy be to keep and average fleet age of 8/9 years?

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: KaiTak747
Posted 2013-05-23 12:27:54 and read 7947 times.

Quoting Bthebest (Reply 12):
Looking back at 747s (-400 at least) the retiring age is between 10-14 years. Could the policy be to keep and average fleet age of 8/9 years?

The A340-500s are an exception. When they were brought fuel prices were a fraction of what they are today. The increase in fuel price has widened the gap between the 777 and the A340 economics to the point where the A340-500 now serves zero purpose.

I would have loved to have flown on one of SQ's ULH flights, and the A340-500 is one of the best looking planes out there!

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-05-23 12:35:31 and read 7873 times.

Quoting falkerker (Reply 6):
So the A380 have 3 years left??? Weird...

They just don't do D Checks on anything, the late A380 meant some of the B744s got one though. The B777-200ER fleet is not in the first flush of youth and not all are being replaced by A333s.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: cedarjet
Posted 2013-05-23 12:36:22 and read 7846 times.

I am sure it's not why SQ are pulling the plug but I always wondered, why EWR and not JFK. And I guess when the A340-500 goes, EWR will go with it. Hoping to take a ride in September.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 5):
Can a 787 in all business class do the trip? It would be ONE thing United could do that would add some sizzle to it's image...and given United's big EWR hub and it's virtual ownership of APac market.

It makes sense for SQ cos at the end of the flight is...NEW YORK CITY! While I like Singapore* I don't know if it's worth United configuring a subfleet to operate ULH. I would say, if they are looking to do something along these lines (they're not, and they won't), New York to Sydney makes more sense, it's 400 mi further but in the same ballpark. But Singapore? Meh, there isn't enough there there!

* it's fashionable to say it's bland etc but I think it has a lot going for it, nothing glamourous about the ghetto!

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: Roseflyer
Posted 2013-05-23 12:40:31 and read 7802 times.

I did this route back in 2005. I flew ORD-EWR-SIN. It came out as an option that was cheaper than UA ORD-HKG-SIN, so my travel agent was able to book it at $5000.

The EWR-SIN flight wasn't bad in business class leaving at 11pm and arriving at 5am. You eat a late dinner, watch a movie, get 10-11 hours of sleep in time to enjoy a nice breakfast and movie and you are in SIN with little jetlag ready to start your day.

The SIN-EWR flight is a different story. The flight leaving at 11am makes jetlag rather bad. You are up for the first half of the flight, and then you go to sleep. You wake up at what feels like 5am Singapore time, but it is 5pm in Newark, so you get a sleepless flight.

The service was always good. I was impressed they could keep up the attitude and service on such a flight.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: ETinCaribe
Posted 2013-05-23 13:32:11 and read 7353 times.

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.

Is that from an accounting perspective (i.e. depreciation) or fleet retirement perspective? A quick look at average fleet age says it is 6.9 years and some 37 planes are 9+ years old.

Surely, they have a relatively young fleet by most standards.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: mesaflyguy
Posted 2013-05-23 14:00:36 and read 7097 times.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
EWR passengers via FRA.

I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: cedarjet
Posted 2013-05-23 18:58:04 and read 5215 times.

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years

The age of the hardware isn't relevant. No aircraft can make money on sectors like these. Fuel prices are too high. The aircraft have very low cycles and are well taken care of. Sure SQ like a young fleet but these planes have life in them even by those standards. It's the economic model that doesn't work.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: blueflyer
Posted 2013-05-23 19:01:18 and read 5195 times.

Quoting cipango (Reply 2):
I remember reading that SQ would lose less money by operating these flights than they would by grounding them, mainly due to the fact that no one wants to buy an A345.

Singapore Airlines is not known for operating loss-making routes out of prestige and grounding a plane isn't that expensive. My guess is the flights are profitable still, but the profits so thin that it wouldn't justify the expense of a major overhaul (think D check) and Singapore Airlines was able to use them to get a discount on their Airbus order instead.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
SQ will not lose many passengers by cancelling these ULH flights.

They will probably lose a significant section of the connecting traffic, of which I know there is always a decent number for having flown SIN-EWR/LAX in both directions several times and talked to other passengers or seen them re-check bags after customs.

Take me, for example. Flying non-stop between SIN and LAX/EWR let me do my journey with a single connection. Once these flights are over, I have a number of other one-stop options left to/from Singapore, none of which involving a plane liveried Singapore Airlines. I prefer SIA over others, but not enough to add another stop.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: AngMoh
Posted 2013-05-23 21:02:46 and read 4502 times.

Quoting LY777 (Reply 8):
But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Quite a number of 772s and some 773s have been replaced by A333s. The remaining regional 777s seem to fly on either high volume routes (CGK, HKG, DEL, BOM) or where 1st class is still required.

Most of the 77Es are gone, but they just started refurbishing of the remaining ones as these fly on routes with less J demand where a 77W in SQ config is overkill and the A333 can not do the job (e.g. AMS, CPH, MXP and a few others). I expect these to be among the first routes for the A359 after initial introduction on some high profile routes. I think the 77E is the only one suitable for these routes today.

By the end of this year, all remaining 772/773/77Es should have been refurbished. They were getting quite run down before they were refurbished.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: Karan69
Posted 2013-05-24 03:06:38 and read 4240 times.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 15):
and not JFK. And I guess when the A340-500 goes, EWR will go with it. Hoping to take a ride in September.

All the best for that mate, i was fortunate enough and got myself to ride from SIN-EWR this month, burnt a lot of miles doing so

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 18):
I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

Yes, thats what SQ said they intend to do

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 21):
By the end of this year, all remaining 772/773/77Es should have been refurbished. They were getting quite run down before they were refurbished.

AFAIK, there are two refurbished 77E, one which gets the 77W interior in J and F, which as you said will do AMS CPH and the morning SIN-BOM flight, and the other refurbishment is just the J cabin which gets the same J as the 333s, this is the aircraft i got from BOM-SIN SQ 425, the Y cabin was untouched J was same as the 333

Karan

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: cipango
Posted 2013-05-24 04:27:39 and read 4134 times.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 20):
Singapore Airlines is not known for operating loss-making routes out of prestige and grounding a plane isn't that expensive. My guess is the flights are profitable still, but the profits so thin that it wouldn't justify the expense of a major overhaul (think D check) and Singapore Airlines was able to use them to get a discount on their Airbus order instead.

Its nothing to do with what SQ normally does, it's called business! I have heard numerous times that the routes are loss making.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: AngMoh
Posted 2013-05-24 05:07:32 and read 4067 times.

Quoting Karan69 (Reply 22):
AFAIK, there are two refurbished 77E, one which gets the 77W interior in J and F, which as you said will do AMS CPH and the morning SIN-BOM flight, and the other refurbishment is just the J cabin which gets the same J as the 333s, this is the aircraft i got from BOM-SIN SQ 425, the Y cabin was untouched J was same as the 333

All 772/77Es for SQ are in fact 77Es, where the 772 are 77Es which are de-rated. The long distance 77E is 2 class only and is getting the same J and Y as the 77W and no F. The regional 772/77E are designated 77A and get the same J and Y as the A333.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-05-24 05:47:24 and read 4165 times.

Quoting LY777 (Reply 8):
But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Thanks to A350 and 787 delays. A lot have been replaced by A333's or newer 77W's. But you're right the 772's are some of the oldest frames in the fleet but they won't be around much longer.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
The 747s left the fleet because a new VLA with far better economics came out. The A380s will not be going anywhere soon as there is nothing better to replace them with.

The A380's will be replaced by newer A380's. It is widely believed that the latest top-up order for A380's is to replace the oldest frames. Nevertheless the A380s will probably last longer than anything else.

Quoting Bthebest (Reply 12):
Looking back at 747s (-400 at least) the retiring age is between 10-14 years. Could the policy be to keep and average fleet age of 8/9 years?

They had to keep a few 744's longer than they wanted to because of the A380 delays and that screwed up the average age for the fleet.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 14):
They just don't do D Checks on anything

  
The current fleet age is 6.9 years old.
http://www.planespotters.net/Airline/Singapore-Airlines

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: Karan69
Posted 2013-05-24 12:20:38 and read 4003 times.

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 24):

I know that very well, have flown SQ a lot and it is my fav airline,

My point of contention is that my aircraft on SQ 425 was a 772 with the regional J product of the 333, however the Yclass was the same

karan

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: SIA747Megatop
Posted 2013-05-24 13:19:20 and read 4033 times.

Sad to see these flights go as I was the youngest unaccompanied minor on the inaugural SQ22 flight back in 2004 at age 9.

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 18):
I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

The A380 is permanent on SQ26/25.

Quoting Karan69 (Reply 22):
AFAIK, there are two refurbished 77E, one which gets the 77W interior in J and F, which as you said will do AMS CPH and the morning SIN-BOM flight, and the other refurbishment is just the J cabin which gets the same J as the 333s, this is the aircraft i got from BOM-SIN SQ 425, the Y cabin was untouched J was same as the 333

There are 3 refitted 77Es at the moment. The refitted 77Es are currently flying to AMS, BOM, CPT and SYD. At present, the only 772s in SQ's fleet with F are 9V-SQE and 9V-SQF, both of which are fitted with the 1997 F cabins.

All the refitted aircraft feature the same Y class product which utilises the original 1997 seat with new seat covers and 9" monitors. Whilst the J seat of the refitted 77As is the same as the ones fitted on the 333, the latter features the new Panasonic eX2 IFE system whereas the 77As and 77Es have the old Wiseman 3000 system with a new UI.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: N62NA
Posted 2013-05-24 14:18:39 and read 3946 times.

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 18):
I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

Apparently the answer is yes. I really (really) don't understand why SQ (a Star Alliance carrier) chooses to abandon service at a Star Alliance hub that offers hundreds of connections on anothe Star Alliance carrier (UA at EWR) and instead moves their operations to JFK. Could you imagine a SkyTeam or OneWorld carrier dumping JFK in favor of EWR?

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: Polot
Posted 2013-05-24 14:24:52 and read 3929 times.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 28):

Since they are on completely different sides of the world, the fact that EWR offers more Star Alliance connections is rather meaningless as most of their passengers are likely not connecting in EWR anyways.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: N62NA
Posted 2013-05-24 14:30:42 and read 3916 times.

Quoting Polot (Reply 29):
Since they are on completely different sides of the world, the fact that EWR offers more Star Alliance connections is rather meaningless as most of their passengers are likely not connecting in EWR anyways.

But what proof do you have of that? Not trying to be argumentative, just curious. I would think that at least a somewhat significant amount of the pax on EWR-SIN where connections from UA at EWR.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-05-24 14:34:19 and read 3938 times.

Besides the JFK vs EWR debate, going to a "Star hub" is not much value for some companies like SQ.

SQ does zero with UA. Domestically it codeshares with Virgin America, JetBlue and US Airways instead.

And SQ is not the only Star partner that prefers JFK and to work with other carriers then UA.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: blueflyer
Posted 2013-05-25 01:49:04 and read 3524 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 31):
SQ does zero with UA.

Singapore may not code-share with United, but that doesn't mean they do "zero." Every connection I've had at EWR to/from SIA, they were very happy to sell me a United flight on the same ticket to complete my itinerary... Connecting at LAX, they put me up on American for my domestic leg. I don't recall ever being offered a code-share on one of three carriers you mentioned, but the reason is probably that their code-share partners would usually (though not always) require an extra connection somewhere.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: AngMoh
Posted 2013-05-26 02:38:10 and read 2863 times.

Just some question which popped up in my mind: what are the number of cycles and what are the number of flying hours for the SQ A345s? They must be the highest average hours per cycle of any aircraft.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: nickofatlanta
Posted 2013-05-26 03:27:34 and read 2781 times.

Any further news on whether SQ is likely to keep the EWR station open and launch a route via a third country? I know in the past, the EWR was routed ia AMS.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: VC10er
Posted 2013-05-26 06:06:04 and read 2633 times.

"Interesting proposal – an extension of the Premium Service into long-haul routes. United certainly needs to do something to sizzle up its image."

My point EXACTLY! United needs as many feathers in it's cap as possible. I would assume given; Star Alliance members, EWR, UA's Asia Pac domination and United (exCO) fliers, that this should be a big win for United and an opportunity to capture the NYC to Singapore route (except for SQ loyalists). If United could do a non-stop with an ac they have, or even if it's a all premium ac with a quick stop for gas (ala South African at Dakar) they ought to grab it.

However the United BF seat is woefully sub par to SQ, my only thought is United's Global First Suite is the only hard product that could suffice for a 23 hour flight.

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: dennys
Posted 2013-05-26 14:22:36 and read 2325 times.

Quoting qf340500 (Reply 4):

what a sad day! One of the best looking planes ever!

Any idea if SQ plans to do a "last flight" ceremony or lucky draw or a farewell flight to HKG as they did with the 747 or a few short runs to CGK? Would love to make a trip on this machine before it disappeares...


Thank You . It is what i am expecting too !

Topic: RE: SQ At Newark.
Username: avek00
Posted 2013-05-26 16:12:03 and read 2168 times.

Quoting fxramper (Thread starter):
Have read on this site SQ will discontinue their SIN-EWR-SIN flight. It's on an Airbus A345 in all business class. This flight goes out full pretty regularly. Curious why SQ is dumping this route. Seems prestigious to the company as the longest revenue flight in the world at present. Thoughts appreciated.

Short answer -- prestige doesn't pay the big fuel bills.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/