ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 13358 times:
Buzz from the bees at Orders/FlyerTalk is that SQ is going to have to swap out more than one A345 for maintenance concurrently this summer. As a result, they're going to have to use the 9V-SV* 772ERs to fly the route nonstop outbound, with a tech in TPE westbound. No word on compensation for pax who paid for Exec. Econ.
SIN-EWR will of course remain A345-- at least until the inevitable happens
Col From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2083 posts, RR: 22 Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 12745 times:
Singapore have different seats/seating arrangements in their 772's. The SV series have the higher rated engines and the new Raffles seats. These do the long haul flights. SQ series were the regional seating type. The SR's used to be used mainly on OZ, but I think they do a lot more now.
Feel sorry for those people expecting the 345 and getting the 772.
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 12748 times:
SIN-LAX non-stop no problem for the -200ER with a bit lower payloads than the A345 is now carrying Eastbound. Trip cost will be a lot less though and flight times shorter by 20 min or so. The tech stop Westbound would enable 80,000lb payloads, which is even or better than what the A345 is doing now, and use less fuel. Maybe this will finally convince SQ that they are better served by replacing the A340-500's with 777-200LR's. Something to think about...
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 12480 times:
Quoting ConcordeBoy (Thread starter):
Buzz from the bees at Orders/FlyerTalk is that SQ is going to have to swap out more than one A345 for maintenance concurrently this summer.
That seems like a fairly major scheduling error. SQ needs 4 out of 5 operational. It seems to me that it should be easy to schedule 5 aircraft such that two never need to be in heavy maintenance at the same time. I don't think SQ are stupid, so I'm probably missing something. What am I missing?
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10631 posts, RR: 62 Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 12289 times:
Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 9): Maybe this will finally convince SQ that they are better served by replacing the A340-500's with 777-200LR's.
What is happening with that? There was a lot of buzz a few months back about SQ not being happy with the 345 and wanting the 772LR, but then nothing happened. Is (and was) SQ really happy with the 345? What were supposedly the issues SQ had with the 345s?
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 12180 times:
Quoting GVBIG (Reply 16): Or do the sensible thing and order 777-200LRs
This has been beaten to death here but, of course, the sensible thing for SQ to do is replace their A340-500s with B777-200LRs (without the optional belly tanks). I believe SQ are pretending to not be interested while waiting for Boeing to offer them the B777-200LR at a lower price.
Col From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2083 posts, RR: 22 Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 12115 times:
The logical sense is for them to go with 772LR, it is a superb performer. As a Passenger I much prefer the 345, so I go out of my way to get on the SQ direct out of EWR. The 772LR will be noisier, but hey its gonna only be 17 hours instead of 18 if they go that route.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21313 posts, RR: 60 Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 12072 times:
it's not that much noisier. come now, that's as much PR hype as anything. either way, you'd be best served to use noise canceling headphones for watching movies, and using foam airplugs otherwise. 30dB reduction will make any plane quiet. that's how I deal with flying exit row on a 733.
also, the quieter the cabin, the more you hear FAs chatting, babies crying, old timers coughing, etc. But with earplugs, you knock all that sound down or out. The only way to fly...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 12074 times:
Quoting Ari (Reply 4): Just a query, how can you differentiate between an SQ B772 and a SQ B772ER??I no SQ operate 9V-SQ*, 9V-SR* and 9V-SV* are these specially designated to whether they are an ER model or not??
All of SQ's 772s are 777-212ERs.
The 9V-SQ* and 9V-SR* are however operated at restricted MTOWs with the Trent884B. For whatever reason, airline chooses to identify them as 772s; even though they can easily be certified to op at 656k.lb for 7730nm with an software adjustment and a penstroke.
Bsmalls35 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 12041 times:
I guess when SQ puts the 777-200ER or the SIN-LAX route, it will be the longest scheduled 777 service ever, even if it's only temporary. I'll tell you, the 777-200ER is one versatile and capable plane.