Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ Fleet Changes For 2006  
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14948 times:

From an SQ press release dated 2 February 2006:
"Singapore Airlines will take delivery of two Airbus A380-800s and six Boeing 777-300ERs, and de-commission six B747-400s, during 2006, thereby increasing the operating fleet to 92 passenger aircraft by 31 December 2006. The first Airbus A380-800 and the first Boeing 777-300ER are expected to be delivered in November 2006."
http://www.singaporeair.com/saa/en_U...any_info/press_release/NR_0106.jsp

158 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSTARalliance24 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 378 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14939 times:

Nice to see that SQ is getting B777-300ERs!!!! And by November! Will they add new destinations because of these new aircraft or will they simply replace the 747-400 by 777-300?

Regards Bryan  Smile


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14915 times:

Quoting STARalliance24 (Reply 1):
Will they add new destinations because of these new aircraft or will they simply replace the 747-400 by 777-300?

Replacing six JumboJets with two WhaleJets and six B777-300ERs is an overall increase in capacity. It would be a safe guess that either new destinations will be added or frequencies will be increased on existing routes or both.


User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14833 times:

So does the addition of the second airbus type have any bearing on if the A345 will be replaced with 772LR


Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 14777 times:

Quoting BWIA 772 (Reply 3):
So does the addition of the second airbus type have any bearing on if the A345 will be replaced with 772LR

No, the main determinant will be the price and terms that Boeing offer to SQ. If SQ like the deal, they'll buy the B777-200LR. If they don't like the deal, they won't buy it.


User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4748 posts, RR: 43
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 14700 times:

will SQ be converting these 6 B 744s into freighters or will they dry lease them out to interested carriers such as AI, 9W etc?

User currently offlineAirtropolis From Singapore, joined Apr 2000, 142 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 14640 times:

Quoting STARalliance24 (Reply 1):
Nice to see that SQ is getting B777-300ERs!!!! And by November! Will they add new destinations because of these new aircraft or will they simply replace the 747-400 by 777-300?

Another possibility, could be that with a 2 (extra) aircraft buffer, SQ could start refurbishing some of the B744s it intends to retain till 2010 (or whatever the date was), so that the new product can be rolled out to other destinations as soon as possible.


User currently offlineNZCH From New Zealand, joined Jan 2006, 119 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 14469 times:

What destinations are the new aircraft destined for, I'm guessing LHR for the A380 but I could be wrong and what about the 777-300ER ?

Regards NZCH



Airlines flown: BA,BD,NZ,SQ,FR,ZB,EK,JQ
User currently offlineDreamflight767 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 86 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 14459 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I could be wrong, but a while back I understood that they got ride of the other A-340s because they didn't like them. Do they like their new Airbuses?

User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 14413 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting NZCH (Reply 7):
I'm guessing LHR for the A380

If I remember correctly SQ said that 2 out of the 3 SIN-LHR flights will be A380 operated. One will operate the SYD-SIN sector then operate the SIN-LHR sector


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 14201 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Thread starter):
six Boeing 777-300ERs



Quoting Zvezda (Thread starter):
first Boeing 777-300ER are expected to be delivered in November 2006

So they will receive 6 77W's in two months? I did'nt know the production rate was this high, or is it a small error?

Quoting Dreamflight767 (Reply 8):
I could be wrong, but a while back I understood that they got ride of the other A-340s because they didn't like them. Do they like their new Airbuses?

Also because Boeing gave them a great deal on the 772's in a controversial buy-back scheme of the a343's. But SQ is extremely happy with the 772's, hence their huge fleet.
I guess they are happy enough with the a345's, because they opened up a non-stop market that was unavailable before, and IIRC the load-factor and yield on these flights was good. Of course the 772LR is capable of carrying more cargo, but only SQ knows if it's worth the investment. Time will tell.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2613 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 14144 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 10):
Also because Boeing gave them a great deal on the 772's in a controversial buy-back scheme of the a343's

Why is it controversial?

If you don't particularly agree with the idea, then thats your opinion.. but don't go labelling it a controversial deal unless you have evidence to show that not all was above board, as the description controversial intimates.

[Edited 2006-02-04 12:29:13]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 14039 times:

Quoting GARPD (Reply 11):
Why is it controversial?

If you don't particularly agree with the idea, then thats your opinion.. but don't go labelling it a controversial deal unless you have evidence to show that not all was above board, as the description controversial intimates.

LOL!!! That is amazing. The deal was extremely controversial as Airbus threatened to withdraw any service on the aircraft involved if Boeing re-marketed them. However, after several outburst from other carriers and the threat of litigation, Airbus relented. Especially when EK agreed to take some of the aircraft.


User currently offlineGman94 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 14021 times:

I'm booked to fly on Singapore Airlines in December and January from LHR - MEL and SYD - LHR, lets hope for a brand spanking new A380.  crossfingers 

The thought had no bearing on my decision to book my flight's to Australia, honest Guv.  angel 



British Airways - The Way To Fly
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 13968 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 10):
So they will receive 6 77W's in two months? I did'nt know the production rate was this high, or is it a small error?

Boeing can produce three B777s per month.

Quoting Gman94 (Reply 13):
I'm booked to fly on Singapore Airlines in December and January from LHR - MEL and SYD - LHR, lets hope for a brand spanking new A380.

SQ317/SQ322 will get the WhaleJet. SQ320/SQ321 might get the WhaleJet. SQ318/SQ319 will not get the WhaleJet -- at least for the next several years.


User currently offlineTifoso From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 13960 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Thread starter):
The first Airbus A380-800 and the first Boeing 777-300ER are expected to be delivered in November 2006."

So that means SQ should have the A380 running for the holiday season. Some initially thought that the A380s would not enter service until Jan 2007. Good job by Airbus  checkmark 


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13899 times:

Quoting Tifoso (Reply 15):
So that means SQ should have the A380 running for the holiday season. Some initially thought that the A380s would not enter service until Jan 2007. Good job by Airbus

They will take delivery of them, however, that doesn't mean they will enter revenue service. Right now the plan is to have them in service perhaps in the last week of Dec 2006!


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13899 times:

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 5):
will SQ be converting these 6 B 744s into freighters or will they dry lease them out to interested carriers such as AI, 9W etc?

My question too, Behramjee. Given SQ's maintenance standards, these aircraft should be able to bring top dollar if sold, leased, or converted.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2613 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13841 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 12):
LOL!!! That is amazing. The deal was extremely controversial as Airbus threatened to withdraw any service on the aircraft involved if Boeing re-marketed them. However, after several outburst from other carriers and the threat of litigation, Airbus relented. Especially when EK agreed to take some of the aircraft.

Well, when you put it that way.... lol

But that doesn't make the deal itself controversial in my opinion.

However, Airbus reaction to it did seem like a really "spoiled child" thing to do. Glad they grew up quick and withdrew their threat.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 13643 times:

Quoting GARPD (Reply 18):
But that doesn't make the deal itself controversial in my opinion.

It all depends on what one means by "controversial". The traditional meaning described a question for which a good argument could be made on both sides. Now it's often (mis?)used to mean any sort of dispute. By the former meaning, SQ's A340-300 deal was not controversial, since there was no good argument on Airbus' side. By the latter meaning, the deal certainly was controversial.

So, you're both right.  Smile


User currently offlineTifoso From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 13227 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 16):
They will take delivery of them, however, that doesn't mean they will enter revenue service. Right now the plan is to have them in service perhaps in the last week of Dec 2006!

Oh!

I thought they would get the frames in the first week of November and enter service in the first or second week of December.


User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3476 posts, RR: 67
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 13170 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 10):
So they will receive 6 77W's in two months? I did'nt know the production rate was this high, or is it a small error?

Production rate of the 777 is headed to seven per month, but they probably won't be quite that high at the end of 2006.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineHighflyer9790 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1241 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 12430 times:

Any info on SQ replacing their A345s with the 777LR? or do they still have to work out a deal?


121
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30546 posts, RR: 84
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 12405 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 16):
They will take delivery of them, however, that doesn't mean they will enter revenue service. Right now the plan is to have them in service perhaps in the last week of Dec 2006!

Was not SQ planning on running the first pair of A388s SFO-HKG? I believe you commented they were afraid it might not be able to make the trip with a full-load (during Winter?), so would they instead run it MEL/SYD-SIN-LHR first to "test" it out and get a feel for how she performs?


User currently offlineKLMCedric From Belgium, joined Dec 2003, 810 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 12295 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
Was not SQ planning on running the first pair of A388s SFO-HKG? I believe you commented they were afraid it might not be able to make the trip with a full-load (during Winter?), so would they instead run it MEL/SYD-SIN-LHR first to "test" it out and get a feel for how she performs?

HKG-SFO is little over 6000NM, what do you mean with "not make it"??
Should be a nothing more than a formality to fly this stretch for the A380!


25 Stitch : I agree it should be a cake-walk, yet some folks who work for flight-ops/pilots in SQ have said there were some "concerns" about it being able to do
26 Flyjetstar : Slightly off topic but can anyone give me a breakdown of where each type in the SQ fleet is currently used and how it is configured?
27 Gigneil : CX was really the turning point... N
28 Post contains images Jacobin777 : well....there was an SQ pilot on the "longest flight in the world" by the -200LR a few months ago... I did read that PK's 2 pilots absolutely loved i
29 Gigneil : Haha... how, exactly, will PK influence SQ? Its a 777. It flies like a 777. SQ's pilots are already well familiar with it. N
30 Post contains images Jacobin777 : that's why I used "imbue"...as it is nothing more than a "mind prodding"... also, from what I read, they had enough fuel to fly another 470nm miles (
31 Zvezda : SQ have not yet announced a B777-200LR deal. The expectation is that a deal will be annnounced this month. Yes, more than a year ago that was the pla
32 PhilSquares : Right now the first two will do SIN-SYD. With the third plane in the rotation they will then add LHR. You're right, the direct NO-WIND mileage is 601
33 N79969 : Did Airbus initially promise that it would be able to do so?
34 Stitch : How badly does this condition affect the 744's loads?
35 Trex8 : and they also had to use special fuel, though they ended up not taking off with full tanks of the stuff as CX couldn't get them all the special stuff
36 PhilSquares : The 744 can do it on a very regular basis. The only real problem is when the winds approach 99% worst case. In those cases, SQ will stop at TPE for a
37 A319XFW : And didn't they also have the additional 3 fuel tanks in the cargo bay, which to my knowledge no-one has ordered?
38 Pilot21 : Does the SIN-SFO route get high enough loads to warrant the A380?? I thought it was a plane that was always bought for the 'big' routes SIN-LHR & SIN-
39 N79969 : It a major hub for United which is their Star Alliance partner. Northern California is the home to high tech and a big financial sector which generat
40 Post contains images Jacobin777 : good call..I completely forgot about that....so I guess that's a scratch...regardless.....it did very well............................. unlike AF, at
41 Stitch : Do you happen to know how many cargo/pax the A380 would have to drop to make it when the winds are unfavorable? And how close it would bring an A388
42 PhilSquares : In the standard Boeing configuration, the 748 will make it all year round. SQ doesn't block seats because of the problems that causes. Instead, they
43 Jacobin777 : does SQ get any freedom rights on SQ 1/2 or SQ 15/16? Interesting that SQ's 1/2 gets is one of its premier routes as it seems it is in direct competi
44 PhilSquares : Yes, most, if not all of SQ's transpacs have fifth-freedom rights. SQ 1/2 (HKG) and SQ 11/12 (NRT) do extremely well in terms of both pax load and yi
45 Post contains images Jacobin777 : very interesting....thanks for the information.. .......do you foresee SQ 15/16 going from a 772 to a 773 or a 744? Any -200LR's or 747-8I's in the h
46 PhilSquares : I could see it going to a 773ER, but not a 744. There just isn't the demand. Couldn't tell you who the pilot's were on the 772LR flight, although I d
47 Post contains images Jacobin777 : that would actually be quite nice, as there aren't any 773's flying to SFO yet... interesting information....the 748I rumour was the one which has be
48 Mattlancs : flyjetstar i can tell which routes are which aircraft
49 Flyjetstar : That would be great. I was just meaning 773's are used on ......, 772's are used on.... that kind of thing. I was curious as the various 744 layouts
50 Mattlancs : currently in your country at the moment which curious layouts? 744 are man-sin lon-sin fra-sin sin-hkg sfo-sin la-sin mel-sin syd-sin brisbane and per
51 Zvezda : It would be very odd had SQ planned SFO-HKG without assurances that the WhaleJet could fly it year-round with an acceptable payload. I don't know whe
52 GARPD : Carefully now... still plenty here that beleive that is poppycock. I suggest qualifying the claim with some sort of solid source. Not that I do not b
53 PhilSquares : Hmmm, how long did SQ keep their 343s? Did they take delivery of all on order? (No) I'd say that's a good indication for that aircraft. For the 345,
54 Post contains images Tifoso : PhilSquares, there has been a lot of speculation about the order composition, and not so much when it will be announced. Is there a possibility that w
55 GARPD : Dude, its ok... I can see it for what it is. I know, you know, Zvezda knows, but there are a certain number of people on these fora that simply do no
56 Zvezda : The argument that there has been no public comment, therefore SQ are happy and the argument that there has been no public comment, therefore SQ are u
57 Post contains images GARPD : I completely agree with you. I've known for some time SQ are not happy with their A340s. I was just trying to protect you from trolling by flag waver
58 Lufthansa747 : Who gives a shit if the planes are dirty or clean. DP anf Krug please, I don't care what the outside looks like.
59 MarcoT : Now you are being disingenious, if not intellectually dishonest. The claim was not that SQ was unhappy with the A343 or that the B777LR has better pa
60 KLMCedric : So according to you, the 744 is able to do it on a more regular basis then the A388 will?? If so, please explain, because I'm not completely followin
61 Mr.BA : KLMCedric, To put it simply, assuming those figures to be true and exact, are for the aircraft to be fully fueled. When an aircraft is fully fueled, i
62 Flying-B773 : Generally, SQ1/2 does fairly well MOST of the year. However, there are extremes when SQ2 gets less then 1/2 full for the hkgsfo sector and instances w
63 Mr.BA : There is a reason why they wouldn't put a B744 to replace the B777 on the perth flights. Notice that they only deploy the 2 class B777s on the Perth
64 Flying-B773 : I dont mean to say that SQ has to replace all the 3 flts all year round. Actually for example, SINPER.. The sector has no problem to sustain a big Bus
65 PhilSquares : I'll try to be brief. 1) That range is not with max payload or a nearly max payload. The 744/748 will be able to load just about all seats, respectab
66 Flying-B773 : OOps, got shot in the head again... I wasnt trying to say that SQ11/12 aint performing. I think it does perform very well, but well most people just t
67 Jacobin777 : your answer is below........
68 Zvezda : No one is asserting that there is proof. There is however evidence. For example, it is known that SQ had planned, based on Airbus' performance promis
69 KLMCedric : And what would be the "normal operational range" of the 744,744ER and 748? I'm sorry but I simply can not believe that the B744 (almost 20yr old) cou
70 N79969 : Before you get overly animated, consider that the messenger is a pilot for SIA (or perhaps among the most convincing liars ever). I think you can cou
71 Post contains images Qantas744ER : Funny how people always try to discuss with pilots and tell them how the things are Cheers
72 KLMCedric : If the range really is 7000nm, yes I think they should! But I have reasons not to believe this!! My father's (may he r.i.p.) best friend is very well
73 KLMCedric : Funny at wich lightning speed you draw your conclusions!
74 Zvezda : Range is not the only reason to choose one airliner over another. The WhaleJet is expected to have lower CASM than the B747-400 or B747-400ER. For mo
75 A360 : Hum... how do you explain than that CX flies HKG-JFK nonstop bothways, using an A340-600 which has a stated range of 7500nm (that's 500nm less than th
76 N79969 : That is all fine and I will take you at your word. But why don't you simply present the information you have, explain the technical reasons why you t
77 Post contains links PhilSquares : I am not going to get drawn into an online debate with you, it's pointless. You referred to the 346. The seating capacity, according to Airbus is 380
78 Post contains images A360 : Oh really?! So, are you saying that if the 346 had unlimited range, CX would fit them with 380 seats?! CX fits them 346's in a 3 class config with 28
79 KLMCedric : A "presentation of info and explanation of technical reasons" is what I was looking for in the first place as to why the A380 couldn't do SFO-HKG yea
80 N79969 : That clearly was not stated nor was it even implied. Why do you resort to hyperbole? In the case of ANA, they have configured that airplane for a hig
81 Mattlancs : they plan to retire six more 744 this year what will that mean
82 PhilSquares : I've tried to tell you what various operators are using as an "operational range". Nothing more, nothing less. I do have a life and sadly it's not gi
83 KLMCedric : I'm afraid you're quoting the wrong part of my response . Try this
84 Dalecary : Does that mean further 380 orders are unlikely from SQ??? Consequently, this would seem to be possible good news for the 748I at SQ. Pretty worrying
85 Atmx2000 : All they are saying is that you can't make predictions about meeting range claims based on the A346 in CX's configuration if the aircraft isn't carry
86 Stitch : Perhaps the A380 is fuel-weight limited at the edge of her range envelope, where the 747-8 isn't? So an A380 can't carry enough fuel volume to make t
87 Atmx2000 : Well, maybe they will once Airbus gets updated engines using GEnx/Trent1000/Trent1700 tech on the A380. But I don't think that is going to be anytime
88 Zvezda : There are two problems with your analogy: 1) As already pointed out, CX fit their A340-600s with 100 fewer seats than the "standard" Airbus configura
89 A360 : 1)SIA 380's will have also fewer seats than the "standart" 555 for a 3 class config 2) I know that... that's why I said that HKG-JFK is longer not on
90 Zvezda : On an average day, the WhaleJet can fly SFO/LAX-HKG nonstop with a commercially viable payload. It is the days that fall outside the average that are
91 JayinKitsap : Refer to the A388 site for the payload range chart Basically it carries 83t up to 6,600 nm; steady down to 35t at 8,600nm; and 0t @ 9,500nm. Refer to
92 N79969 : Wow...Those are brutal numbers for the A380. I have read a a couple of articles saying that Boeing expects to sell some 748 pax in the near future an
93 Zvezda : The reason why the payload range charts (called Z charts) have the shape they do is: where the line starts to slope downward, one has to remove paylo
94 Aerlinguscargo : Any idea what the plans are for these birds. d
95 Mattlancs : how do they decide which registrations are used on which flights
96 Intothinair : So much here has been discussed on what routes the A380 will fly on, however not the 773ER, so does anyone know the first routes the 773ER will fly on
97 Mattlancs : 773 will obviously replace 744's on existing routes for example sin-syd sin-mel man-sin
98 Intothinair : not exactly true, i've heard that the 773ER will seat 278 people, whilst the 744 seats 375, thats 97 seats less, thus the 773ER will not directly rep
99 Post contains links Atmx2000 : http://www.content.airbusworld.com/S...a/docs/AC/DATA_CONSULT/AC_A380.pdf http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircompat/7478brochure.pdf The payload a
100 Ikramerica : looking at the tables it really does indicate that the A380, as designed, was not conceived well. people can flame me all they want, but the chart put
101 Atmx2000 : The fundamental problem is that the A380 is designed to support a stretch with that massive wing. The other problem is that the double passenger deck
102 Zvezda : You're both right. SQ will deploy the B777-300ER on existing routes currently operated by the B747-400. There is nothing wrong with reducing the seat
103 Atmx2000 : Is there a different standard for passenger+baggage weight allotments for winter to accomodate heavier clothing? I suppose it could be a problem for
104 Mattlancs : when is the 1st 777 arriving like i said before what determines which registrations are used for each flight
105 Carpethead : Come April that will change as NH will be sending their 773ERs that way. Obviously, LHR-SIN-SYD will see the A380 first. After the fourth & fifth air
106 PhilSquares : No
107 Zvezda : I used to hope so, as I fly SQ1/2 several times per year and it would be good to fly the WhaleJet at least once, but it has become clear that the air
108 A360 : It has become clear for you I guess... for me, it certanly hasn't. Also, the 748I has more range than the 380-800. Ok, doesn't surprise me. But we sh
109 Post contains links A360 : From http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircompat/acaps/7474sec3.pdf: At 7000nm, the 744 can take 420 pax + bagages plus around 5 tons of cargo.(CF6
110 Post contains links PhilSquares : In the winter, the adjusted for wind range is over 8,000NM. Your link isn't working, but if you look at this chart http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7
111 Zvezda : I'm not sure that's always true for every set of conditions. Depends on many factors. Both of those are based on a lot of assumptions. For one thing,
112 A360 : Well, my data was based on Boeing and Airbus range charts. Don't know in which assumptions they base themselfs one, but they must the the same or ali
113 Zvezda : Actually, no, the assumptions about, for example, OEW are different. The assumptions about the ratios of F/C/Y seats are also different. There are so
114 Post contains images A360 : OEW is operational empty weight, right? Could you (if you have the time) elaborate on how the OEW are diferent for the 2 diferent planes (380 and 747
115 Post contains images Jacobin777 : can't wait...will get my camera ready... like the 744, it would make it one expensive tech-stop...especially landing, paying fees, takeoff time, ect.
116 Atmx2000 : Simplistically, weights for each cabin class are different on a passenger or area basis, so depending on the relative proportions of first, business
117 Zvezda : Operating Empty Weight. OEW includes all the interior fittings: monuments e.g. lavs, closets, galleys, and other fittings like seats, carpets, galley
118 Trex8 : so anyone know what the seating mix in the new 77Ws will be?
119 A360 : In terms of having established a lower weight per seat than in other airbus models or in terms of haveing put many Y seats on the standart layout? PS
120 Zvezda : I don't know the specific details (how many lavs, etc., etc.) of the reference interior upon which Airbus bases their reference OEW for the WhaleJet.
121 Stitch : Airbus tends to quote more Economy and less First and Business seats then Boeing. F and C seats weigh more (per seat) then Economy. That being said,
122 Ikramerica : There are a few routes where just about any airline could use the A380 with good success. That's what most of us who've been called A380 bashers have
123 A360 : The max range stated for the 380 (8000nm) is with 0 cargo. But the same happens for the 744... doesn't it? I mean... the stated max range for a 744 (
124 Kaitak744 : This indeed is a very interesting agrument, which I plan to stay out of. Just on a side note: The 777-200LR order is quite obvious. A considerable 787
125 Zvezda : Stated ranges are for baseline OEWs which are not flown by airlines. The way to answer this question is to look at the Payload with Max Fuel specific
126 Post contains images A360 : Yes I understand... the payload restricted and fuel restricted. It's said the 773ER, for example is fuel restricted. Which is better of course... Tha
127 A360 : I've been given the payload/range charts some carefull look... it's fun! I've been comparing the charts of the A380-800 with the charts of the B777-30
128 A360 : Based on this numbers I got, why do you (Zvezda at least) think the 77W would have the edge on the longest routes over the 380, and that SIA would pro
129 Atmx2000 : Max payload for the 77W is 154,000 pounds.
130 Ikramerica : I disagree with the assessment that the A380 has an advantage over the 773ER in payload at any range, from your numbers. While fuel burn and all the o
131 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : you can put me in that camp also, as I've been very vocal about the A380........ maybe its a great engineering feat, but in terms of a business model
132 Trex8 : the 92 agreement between the US and EU limited launch aid to 33% of R & D, I have seen nothing to suggest the EU have exceeded this amount. AWST also
133 Jacobin777 : the parent company of Airbus, EADS is a publically listed/traded company, they have to respond to their shareholders....many who believe Airbus when
134 Trex8 : the point is if there was no launch aid there may have been no project at all and no jobs! while the two are hardly similar business cases there were
135 Post contains images Jacobin777 : just like the possiblity of the A350 project, Airbus was going to get the money for the A380 they needed, regardless of the way it was going to be...
136 Ikramerica : This is not about launch aid. Let's not go there again. Heck, it's barely about the A380 range vs. the 77W, but at least that is relevant because SQ i
137 Post contains links Jacobin777 : "Cathay Pacific Airways' love affair with the 747-400 is set to continue for "many years yet," according to COO Tony Tyler. Speaking to this website
138 Zvezda : I'm glad you enjoyed it. Did it help you understand any of the questions you asked earlier in the thread? As Ikramerica pointed out, you seem to have
139 Post contains images A360 : Yes it did! Yes, I've got that backwards. That's true. I thought SIA operated SIN-HKG-LAX. Sorry for having misquoted you on the 748/77W. Regards: A3
140 Trex8 : anyone know what fuel burn difference there is likely to be between the 77W and 748
141 Post contains links Zvezda : The B777-300ER will burn 132,924 liters of fuel to carry 56,075 kg 6000nm. The B747-8 will burn 168,640 liters of fuel to carry 71,215 kg 6300nm. htt
142 Jacobin777 : possibly more, as we come towards the end the curve, the distance the plane will be able to fly starts falling off a cliff (actually much earlier)..
143 Ikramerica : Yep, there is supposed to be a fuel burn advantage flying a larger plane the same distance as a smaller plane, assuming both are current technology. I
144 Stitch : All three scheduled LAX-HKG flights flown by CX on 12/5/05 had to make technical fuel stops en-route (881 at TPE and 883/885 at ICN). Also, CX873 SFO-
145 Zvezda : That's what I had in mind when I wrote "somewhat more than 5%" but it's just a semi-educated guess on my part so I didn't want to be too specific. By
146 Jacobin777 : if Boeings current specs for the 747-8I holds true, I wouldn't be surprised to see CX pick some up as they have been familiar with the operations and
147 Ikramerica : Exactly. That's one thing A380 cheerleaders can't accept, that in it's current form, it's not exactly what it was meant to be. But it might be by 201
148 Trex8 : so wouldn't a 748 be a no brainer for like CX for JFK-HKG or even CI for JFK-TPE??
149 Zvezda : I'm sure that's true for some WhaleJet chearleaders, but not all. Yes and yes. For CX, the same B747-8 seating configuration would make sense for SFO
150 Atmx2000 : The orders are for the current versions. I'm sure they have contracts that allow them to upgrade to a later version, but there will be restrictions o
151 Zvezda : Anyone know about SQ fleet changes for 2007? I know that 2 WhaleJets are scheduled for delivery Q1 2007. I don't know when the other 6 WhaleJets are s
152 Ikramerica : Come on, you don't know any more than I do what EKs huge order encompasses. If you even read what I wrote, I suggest that even by 2010, the engines o
153 Atmx2000 : Well, the more flexibility existing customers have with regards to converting orders to a new model, the more incentive Airbus has to slow down intro
154 Zvezda : Ikramerica and Atmx2000, Note that Boeing have been making exactly these sorts of tweaks to the B777-300ER and I haven't heard of any such issues aris
155 Atmx2000 : I took Ikramerica to mean an A388R when he mentioned improved an A388 with better engines (that would be used on the A389 as well) in the comment I o
156 Post contains images Zvezda : You two might have been talking past each other. You might agree more than you think. I don't think little tweaks will be enough either for the WhaleJ
157 Donder10 : When will SQ receive its 3rd A388?
158 Zvezda : Unless there is a third delay, the 3rd and 4th WhaleJets will be delivered to SQ in Q1 2007. I think toward the beginning of Q1, but I don't know pro
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...
AeroMexico Fleet Plans For 2006 posted Fri Mar 4 2005 06:06:14 by AM773
Fleet Changes For Balkan posted Tue Sep 5 2000 13:17:18 by JumboClassic
TOM Fleet - Time For A Refresher? posted Tue Nov 14 2006 20:16:20 by FCAFLYBOY
Scasd Awards For 2006 posted Thu Aug 10 2006 05:45:53 by Ouboy79
Equipment Changes For AA Out Of SFO 9/6 posted Fri Aug 4 2006 21:05:20 by Funbird1
NZs B744 Fleet Changes posted Sat Jul 15 2006 21:04:59 by 777ER
SAA Airlink Fleet Changes? posted Sun Jul 9 2006 18:42:21 by Simairlinenet
My Predictions For 2006 posted Fri Feb 17 2006 17:40:13 by CHRISBA777ER
Aerorepublica Plans For 2006-2007 posted Fri Feb 3 2006 17:43:55 by RICARIZA
JetBlue Posts 4Q Loss, Warns For 2006 posted Wed Feb 1 2006 15:48:58 by TOLtommy