Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
More Information: SQ To Go For 7E7 Over A332?  
User currently offlineBCAInfoSys From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7493 times:

Hey guys.. yet another indication that SQ may go with the 7E7 over the A332.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/176783_singapore08.html

The thing that I found most intriguing about the article... 50 aircraft!!! I never thought the SQ order had the potential to be that big! Though it wouldn't be for all 7E7's.. I think it would also include 773ERs.

"If we do make a decision, it will be for a mix of planes (midsize and larger) to be delivered over a number of years," he said. "But nothing has been ruled in or out."

Anyway... thought I'd get your speculation and thoughts on the article...

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7408 times:

Ugghh i have had enough 7E7 foreplay already. Its fairly inevitable that they are going to choose the 7E7 over the A332Lite. They have already snubbed the A332lite before. IMO the 773ER vrs A346 decision is far less predictable though, despite what many think.

User currently offlineBCAInfoSys From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7361 times:

Yeah.. I agree with Rob. My personal hunch.. 7E7 is a shoe-in, with the 773ER vs A346 there are two possible scenarios:

A.) (most likely scenario) SQ will go for A346 to complement the A345.
or
B.) Boeing will do another buy-back of the A345 and replace with 772LR to complement the 773ER.

I personally think this one will get split... but either way, it's a big boost for the 7E7!  Smile


User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2122 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7359 times:

I believe that they will go for a 7E7/773ER combination. Although one kicker will be GE engines on the 773. The 346 would be an interesting purchase also, as it may work well with the 380. Guess I will just sit on the fence!

User currently offlineStarrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1126 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7332 times:

Methinks I'd better get me some Boeing stock......

Airlines seem to regard the 7E7 with the same lukewarm halfhearted attention that a Lioness regards a zebra with a broken leg........



Knowledge Replaces Fear
User currently offlineN754PR From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7266 times:

1) They want aircraft in 2006.... there will be no 7E7 in 2006.

2) They have already accepted the 777 was a mistake for some routes in Asia. Even more so after the A310's left the fleet.

Would it be possible for SQ to play their games again with airbus and take the A332 and then dump them when the 7E7 comes along?


User currently offlineCessna172RG From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 749 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7235 times:

Yeah, that stock is looking a little more appealing now...

One thing about that article, and I don't mean to be picking the details off of the carcass, but the article mentions that ANA is an all-Boeing airline. That fact is false. ANA, as we all know, operates the following birds:

All Nippon Airways

Boeing 747SR-81 (domestic only)
Boeing 747-481D (domestic only)
Boeing 737-500 (Painted in ANA colors, many used by ANK)
Boeing 767-281
Boeing 767-381 (in four and five door variants)
Boeing 777-281
Boeing 777-381 (domestic only)
Airbus A320
Airbus A321

Air Nippon (Air Japan)

Boeing 737-400 (only two or three of these, painted as dolphins)
Boeing 737-500 (tons of these, with a dolphin on the engine nacelle)
Airbus A320 (in ANK colors)
Boeing 767-300 (In Air Japan titles)

So I emailed the guy who wrote it and informed him about it...

It is nice to see them ordering more Boeing products...let's face it, Boeing needs the orders to compete with Airbus... There's a lot of optimism about the 7E7 right now, and it sounds like it might do some good for the industry. I just wish that it didn't resemble a big flying Tuna...but asthetic qualities never proved to be economic now, did they?



Save the whales...for dinner!!!
User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7192 times:

Cessna,

True, however, the A320s will be replaced by 737-700s, and the A321s are already being phased out.

Thus, the proper terminology is ANA will be an all-Boeing airline.

Regards,

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineUal747-600 From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7118 times:

I think 7E7/777-300ER will be the winning combo. Those that think the 340-600 will be selected over the 777-300ER because of compatibility with 5 340-500's are misguided. Wouldn't it make better sense to have that compatability with 50+ 777's already in the fleet?? And while 2006 in-service date has been mentioned, I've never read that it pertains specifically to the 7E7/330-200 aircraft and not the 777-300ER/340-600 category. Has anybody read that the 2006 in-service date pertains to the smaller of the 2 aircraft??

UAL747-600


User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7037 times:

Those that think the 340-600 will be selected over the 777-300ER because of compatibility with 5 340-500's are misguided.

the basis on my argument is this

future fleet

7E7 RR Trent
772ER RR Trent
773A RR Trent
A345 RR Trent
A380 RR Trent

so you've got

A346 with RR Trent
or the 773ER with GE90's

whether or not engine choice will have any influence is debatable.

Wouldn't it make better sense to have that compatability with 50+ 777's already in the fleet??

increasing a fleet of 5 planes to 20 regardless of aircraft would help a lot more than increasing a fleet of 50 to 65. The smaller fleet would benefit from economies of scale a lot more than the larger fleet would. Ie crew training, maintenance costs, spare parts.

I think the A346 would slot into SQ's fleet a lot more nicely commonality wise, than the 773ER but SQ will be more concerned about the F/Eff charts.


User currently offlineAirbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7026 times:

Won't be surprised at all. Now with the B7E7 out I doubt Airbus is gonna be winning much orders with its A332. Yes it is a good plane but it still can't beat a totally new aircraft with latest technology...!

Airbus is gonna start losing its lead with Boeing coming aggressive with the B7E7...


User currently offlineSandiaman From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6974 times:

Remember that leasing companies could be involved too. Even if the 7E7 is preferred after 2008, SQ has a near term requirement for regional aircraft as was pointed out in the article. Also, ILFC is known to be interested in the A330-200Lite because of its near term availability. SQ might order a mixed leased/purchased fleet.

User currently offlineMlsrar From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1417 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6944 times:

I think the A346 would slot into SQ's fleet a lot more nicely commonality wise, than the 773ER but SQ will be more concerned about the F/Eff charts.

Of course, since SQ already flies the 773A  Insane

increasing a fleet of 5 planes to 20 regardless of aircraft would help a lot more than increasing a fleet of 50 to 65

I fail to see the logic in that statement, when you can augment an existing, proven structure of frames within a training and fleet deployment regiment that has proven to be successful.



I mean, for the right price I’ll fight a lion. - Mike Tyson
User currently offlineUal747-600 From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6922 times:

Ok, so you airline folks out there which would be better from a cost standpoint??

7E7 RR Trent
772ER RR Trent
773A RR Trent
A345 RR Trent
A346 RR Trent
A380 RR Trent

or

7E7 RR Trent
772ER RR Trent
773A RR Trent
A772LR GE
A773ER GE
A380 RR Trent

Now assuming 7E7 cockpit CCR and that other stuff, which would be a better fleet to run with??

UAL-747-600


User currently offlineUal747-600 From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6896 times:

Oops, forgot the 330-200 up top. So

A332 RR Trent
772ER RR Trent
773A RR Trent
A345 RR Trent
A346 RR Trent
A380 RR Trent

or

7E7 RR Trent
772ER RR Trent
773A RR Trent
A772LR GE
A773ER GE
A380 RR Trent

UAL747-600


User currently offlineOerk From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6863 times:

What happened to the A345? It is assumed they will be removed from the fleet somehow?

User currently offlineBCAInfoSys From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6855 times:

Oerk -

The thinking is that if this goes Boeing's way, as part of the deal, we will pull another buyback like we did a few years back with the 777 order.


User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6839 times:

Of course, since SQ already flies the 773A

They sure do, and your point?

I fail to see the logic in that statement, when you can augment an existing, proven structure of frames within a training and fleet deployment regiment that has proven to be successful.

Its a pretty simple logic

The SQ 777's are no doubt operated very efficiently by SQ. They know a lot about the aircraft, they know its quirks, they have plenty of spare parts and experience maintaining it, they could get its DR down to a tee. Also there are a lot of crew trained which allows them to be more flexable.

The A340 is a new plane and they only have 5 of them. When things go wrong it may take them a long time to figure out the problem. They may not have many spare parts lying around and there is a small amount of crew trained to use the aircraft.

If you introduced 15 more 777's into the fleet then they would go on running the 777 smoothly but they would still have 5 awkward A340's

If they introduce 15 more A340's the 777's would continue to run smoothly but the new A340's would mean they can begin to help the A340's performance too.

Off course they could just give the A340's the heav ho but i dont think Airbus-SQ realations would be amicable what with the new A380's coming and all.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 18, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6812 times:

The A340 is a new plane and they only have 5 of them. When things go wrong it may take them a long time to figure out the problem. They may not have many spare parts lying around and there is a small amount of crew trained to use the aircraft.


CX has a large pool of A340 trained crew and engineers. They did operate 340s for several years.

N


User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6781 times:

We're talking about SQ Gigneil. Although you must have meant SQ, i dont know whether the A340 staff have hung around or not. And i dont think the A346 has an amazing amount of commonality with the A343 anyway. Different wings and engines ect, anyone wanna shed light on that? And i was trying to demonstrate a theory not necessarily this scenario.

User currently offlineIowa744fan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 931 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6768 times:

Just a couple of comments.

Roberta, what you are saying about the 345/346 (if ordered) fleet increasing from 5 to 20 aircraft, in terms of provide much better operating efficiency for this fleet of aircraft, is true. However, I think what Mlsrar is saying is that with a Boeing purchase, the 345s would probably be on removed from the fleet (whether it be a buy back deal by Boeing or whatever). This would present cost savings in terms of spare parts, crew scheduling, and things of that nature. I don't know the difference performance-wise (and don't want to start a debate about it), so I am going to leave those details out and just look at crew-scheduling, spare parts, etc. It will be a lot more efficient with crew scheduling to just operate one type instead of two.

As for the two types of jet engines. It has been discussed before that having commonality does tend to save in costs. However, there are airlines that operate the same types of aircraft with different engines. For example, BA operates their 777s with both GE90 and RR Trent engines. JAL operates both GE90 and PW engines on their 777s...and those GEs are among the few that are operated by JAL in their longhaul fleet (if any? 747, 743, 744, 763, and M11 all P&W, right?). The GE engines for BA are the only GE engines in their longhaul fleet too. Two types of engines will increase spare parts costs with the engines, but will this additional cost outweigh operating two types of aircraft (spares, crew scheudling, etc.). I am not saying one is better than the other, but each side has its advantages.


User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1597 posts, RR: 17
Reply 21, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6733 times:

Heck, how about if SQ goes for 773ER and the 7E7 both with the GE GENX. I believe the 2 engines types have the same core and w/ 50 frames or 100 engines (not including some spares) would make it a bit easier to get a sweet deal from GE.


Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineGreaser From Bahamas, joined Jan 2004, 1101 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6133 times:

BoeingBus is rite..i forgot that the RR/GE engines can replace each other within 24hrs. Of Course, it all depends on whether SQ is willing to change or split engine manufacturer or whether they will like to stick with RR


Now you're really flying
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8329 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6096 times:

It seems to me as a pax that Airbus had their best opportunity to get this deal in a package when they sold SQ the 380. I can't understand why they didn't try to tie everything together.

Now Boeing is presenting a new 7E7 that generates as much excitement as the 380 and you know they are going to try to get a package deal.

I think that there has been a switch from advantage: Airbus to advantage: Boeing.


User currently offlineSQ452 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 5995 times:

SQ won't order the A346 i think, doesnt make sense...its going to be 773ER's and 7E7's and 772's I think.




SIN > CVG > BOS
25 Ex_SQer : To address a few points raised here: Also, ILFC is known to be interested in the A330-200Lite because of its near term availability. SQ might order a
26 DfwRevolution : Ok, so you airline folks out there which would be better from a cost standpoint?? 7E7 RR Trent 772ER RR Trent 773A RR Trent 772LR GE 773ER GE A380 RR
27 L.1011 : 7E7 vs. A332Lite is a no brainer. The A332Lite is another 736, A318. Its too capable for SQ's short routes. The enormous flexibility of the 7E7 will a
28 Travellin'man : How does this factor in? The A345 is weight restricted on the SIN-LAX runs, but I believe that the 772LR would not be. Do you think that increases the
29 Andrewtang : The current A345 does have weight restriction on the ULH routes in SIA. But i believe the B772LR will face the same too. Just probably they can carry
30 Post contains images Roberta : if only the 772LR and 773ER weren't better than the A345 and A346 in every way. The A346HGW vrs 773ER Better range + Cargo load A340NG's vrs 777NG's B
31 ND : Remarkable how you categorize the comparison into "A340NG vs. 777NG" Why not do "A345 vs. 777LR"?
32 Roberta : ND, Because the catagories apply for both the A345 vrs the 772LR and the A346 vrs the 773ER.
33 Post contains images Solnabo : Lets hope for 332L and A30X in 2014 Dont have much confidence for the U-turners SQ though Mike//SE
34 Ual747-600 : Nobody offering more ideas on which fleet would be more optimum to run from a cost standpoint??? Come on now airline experts!! UAL747-600
35 RayChuang : I think SQ is willing to wait for the 7E7-3. The reason is simple: the 7E7-3 is perfectly matched for the type of regional route flying that SQ used t
36 Ual747-600 : RayChuang, Do you think that if SQ orders 777-300ER (as 747-400 replacements) that it would then make more sense for them to replace the A340-500's wi
37 Gigneil : Only if they get a good resale value for them. If so, then yes definitely. N
38 ConcordeBoy : Only if they get a good resale value for them Considering they've even "allowed" public releases on such an event to "slip"... ...I'd say Boeing would
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Rumor: Swiss To Go For More Jumbolinos Or A318s? posted Tue Jan 6 2004 21:54:07 by SwissBrazil
Airlines Set To Sue For £300m Over Terror Losses posted Thu Aug 17 2006 05:04:29 by Clickhappy
Where To Go For Spotting In Asia posted Mon Jul 24 2006 16:57:44 by Joge
Where To Go For Good Spotting At ATL posted Wed May 19 2004 07:56:37 by Aviationwiz
United To Go For A340s? posted Thu Mar 20 2003 06:41:40 by Flyboy80
Cheapest Place To Go For The Summer From... posted Tue Apr 30 2002 02:56:34 by Bigo747
Is Qantas Likely To Go For 737NG Or A320? posted Thu Aug 16 2001 19:42:23 by Tupolev154B2
in reference to 'Go-ahead For Heathrow Expansion' article posted Fri Dec 8 2006 20:05:12 by Itsonlyme
Ground Stop To EWR For Go Around/Lost Com Aircraft posted Fri Apr 21 2006 22:55:33 by JCarv
Best Regional To Go Work For? posted Sun Apr 16 2006 20:30:46 by Higney85