N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 28812 posts, RR: 74
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3948 times:
At 7340nm, SFO-SIN would take some weight restrictions, but the main issue on that route is the massive amount of money SQ makes on the HKG traffic rights. This is the reason the A380 will first go to SFO. The O&D on the route would not be enough to justify the non-stop routing given that cargo would be a no go on the route. LAX-SIN, at 7621nm, would have a very tough time not taking pretty serious restrictions
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
AirxLiban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4534 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3791 times:
Quoting RJ111 (Reply 4): Well it'll be able to carry more payload than any other plane in the fleet. So if that's not acceptable then what is?
If you are talking about:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4): There is reportedly doubt about the WhaleJet's ability to fly SFO-HKG nonstop year-round with an acceptable payload.
Then I think what he means is not that the A380 can't carry an acceptable payload, but the weight restrictions that it would have to face in order to make it SFO-HKG nonstop year round would be a number greater than zero.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10512 posts, RR: 63
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3751 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 7): I really don't understand where all this comes from.
I heard that from a mid-manager at SQ who was my seat-mate once-upon-a-flight. We've kept in touch by email. I didn't post anything about it until PhilSquares did. So, this seems to be the rumour going around SQ. That SQ switched their plan for initial WhaleJet service from SQ1/SQ2 to (SQ317/SQ322 and then later to SIN-SYD) gives some credence to the rumour.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33652 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3555 times:
Could SQ moving to SIN-SYD with their A380s be either a competitve move against QF doing so, or if QF is not planning to run A380s between SYD-SIN to get on to LHR, a punitive move to note their displeasure about the Australian Government denying SQ the right to fly SYD-LAX non-stop?
I mean if 744s can do SFO-HKG and A388s only carry around 100 more people, I'd be pretty shocked that an A388 couldn't do it in "standard" 470-pax config.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8288 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3490 times:
Right now, I think SQ is waiting for the fuel burn test results on the A380-800 flying at standard MTOW for the A388. If it meets the 8,000 nautical mile still-air range guarantee, then the A388 will likely be dispatched on the SQ 001/002 flight route as soon as SQ gets enough planes, given that the segment between SFO and HKG is perhaps SQ's biggest moneymaker virtually year-round.