Cobra27 From Slovenia, joined May 2001, 1091 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10968 times:
What a stupid configuration. Only 275 seats on 365 3-class configuration. What a waste of fuel and more pollution on the environment. Why bother conserving, if a an airline like SIA consumes so much fuel just becuase of luxury.
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8554 posts, RR: 27
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10932 times:
Point taken Cobra, but need I remind you this is Customer Retention 101, not Saving The Earth 101. They were doing the same thing back in the day on CV-880s and 707s...would you rather we still had those gas guzzlers everywhere?
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 10428 times:
Quoting Cobra27 (Reply 2): What a stupid configuration. Only 275 seats on 365 3-class configuration. What a waste of fuel and more pollution
Stupid.........you must be joking. SQ's 773ERs are configured with large F and J cabins with cutting edge accommodation for those premium passengers. These airplanes will be dedicated to high-yeild longrange routes.....where F and J cabins go out full on a daily basis although the fares are outrageously high. From a financial point of view, SQ's 773ERs are nothing short of brilliant.....lots of F and J seats to sell at premium fares, a reasonable number of Y seats that can be sold at good fares and will not wreck yields, and lots and lots of room for very profitable cargo. I think that SQ knows exactly what they are doing.....
As for fuel and pollution, being that the 773ER is one of the most fuel effecient and enviornmentally friendly airliners around, I would not be very concerned.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10302 times:
Quoting Cobra27 (Reply 14): EK puts 385 or even 430 passengers on their 777-300ER's.
In a rather high denisty arrangement.....AF also has high density 773ERs for specific routes from France to the Caribbean and Indian Ocean destinations. The high density configuration is needed t compensate for fares, demand the yeilds on the route.
Quoting Cobra27 (Reply 14):
It is not offiecient if you have a maximum of only 278 seats. The fuel burn per seat is 50% over normal
I think that you are forgetting that SQ is in the business to make money.....take a look at F and J class fares as compared to Y class fares. Consider that the more seats that SQ offers to the Y class market, the lower yeilds will be in the long run. Those 50 premium seats will ensure that SQ makes a profit on each and every flight operated by the 773ER. Like it or not, that is the priority......airlines like SQ must make money on longhaul premium passengers and the 773ER with this type of configuration is the way that they can do it.
Take a look at the EK configuratiion for the A340-500 and there updated layouts for the 777 family (low density with 3 classes) and let me know what you think......not all that different from the SQ 773ER.
The SQ 773ERs are to be dedicated to longhaul routes with high premium demand, the high density EK 773s are used on shorter haul segments (lots of DXB to India services for example) where demand is high but yeilds are marginal. Big difference.
So they should fill it up with Y seats, which might not necessarily be filled, make a loss, and burn fuel flying half empty planes around?? They are flying brand new, more fuel efficient a/c. There's not a whole lot else they can do until someone invents truly environmentally friendly planes. But that's not up to SQ. If you don't like it, don't fly.
YULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2219 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 9535 times:
Quoting Cobra27 (Reply 14): It is efficient if it has more seats.
It is not effiecient if you have a maximum of only 278 seats. The fuel burn per seat is 50% over normal,
Well, if you look at how much space (~50%) is occupied by 80% of the pax, there is nothing environmentally worse than competitors, except for the 3-4-3 777s. Now, the fuel waste is about the premium pax, who in this configuration probably need more fuel per capita than a 2-2-2 J cabin. Then, you can always try to convince the J pax to change their habits...
It should also be noted that a plane that is less densely populated is more likely to weigh less. If you compare the range and efficiency per mile of an EK 77W vs. an SQ 77W, I think that you would find that the SQ aircraft burns less fuel, ergo polluting less per mile than the more heavily burdened EK A/C.
Sic 'em bears
: Most widebody aircraft have 6- or 7-abreast in business class. Exceptions are 5-abreast on some 767s and those carriers who have those slanted seat la
: You must not have done your homework. 1-2-1 config is not anything new. A lot of airlines are starting to use this config especially the one's using
: When do these birds go to Barcelona and Milan?
: Cobra27, your argument would suggest that all aircraft, to maximize envinromental effiency, should be configured in an all Y-Class layout to accomadat
: Stating from December the 77W operates to CDG. I'd say services to MXP and BCN would begin early next year as more aircraft arrive. flyingKangaroo
: Cobra27 is right, this SQ bird is like a 2007 Bentley. It is opulent, powerful, large, and seats only a small number of people. Myself, I saw the SQ J
: As Cobra factually points out.... SQ is burning 50% more fuel than EK per passenger on the 77W, both of which have modern premium cabins. There is no
: I think comfortwise is just perfect. F and C psgr would be very happy to get what they really pay for. But, SIA 773ER will, for sure, burn the world's
: But the airlines making their profits with First and Business Class passenger, not with Economy Class Passenger. SQ´s 77W will make much money with
: Supa7E7, while I defnitley see the merit and validity in the points you and Cobra27 make, I would hardly compare the premium cabins of EK's 77Ws and S
: The fact that some airlines in the UK have 230-240 seats in their 757s does put it into perspective!
: Then go fly that EK cattle truck. And who cares? Go join your local green party. Fly SS 744, AY M11 or EK 773 2-class if you so much like these HD la
: You have a point. And I someday I will. But airtravel is about speed and long distance. Not much about luxury. If you don't like flying, you wouldn't
: Perhaps for most yes. But I will happily pay for good C/F even on many intra-asia routes if I can avoid Air Asia and the likes even for one hour. For
: Cobra27, given the fact that most airlines earn their largest profits in premium cabins goes against what you say about how air travel is mostly about
: I agree, but the airlines try to make as much money as possible and for SQ this layout seems to be best way to do this. Other airlines will go a simi
: OMG ! Only 275 seats instead of 365. For sure it means the aircraft is overweight and SQ is forced to do that in order to get full range ! Where are o
: Unfortunately these things do BKK also... 384 773 YC HD 386 77W YC HD 372 77W YC HD and a lot of SIN/CGK/KUL rotations too. BKK gets way too little F
: And why does everybody think that EK 777 with 10 abreast are cattle truck? They are still way more confortable than all CRJ, ERJ's (exept e -series),
: I was on a TG 777 with 10 abreast once, it took a while to notice it was 10 abreast (of course boarding after midnight probably didn't help!). having
: Try to imagine that your shoulders are more than 17 inches wide... If your going to spend most of your day/night somewhere, you wouldn't want to feel
: No. The second one probably, but the third one hasn't even made its maiden flight yet so there's only 9V-SWB ready to go. Impossible as 9V-SWA delive
: Why slam Americans, How about the pollution from plants in China & India ? Are the "lakes" of oil caused by the Russian pipeline leaks not a concern
: EK's 777's are packed to the brim....hence why EK can't get enough of them....It doesn't seem as if pax are complaining too much about the 17 inches
: I think the picture below dated 11/17 shows 9V-SWB and 9V-SWC. Note the lack of forward placed sat antenae on both frames as compared to 9V-SWA. http
: That is exactly what I saw, UAL777. As I was driving, I didn't stop to read the registrations, so I just assumed (with all the pitfalls that entails)
: My father will be on this flight, ill aks him to take some photos so that i can post them here. cheers Nick
: " target=_blank>http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...ize=o It must have been 9V-SWB and SWD that you saw then after all (there is no SWC). R
: So 777 # 600 (SV-SWD) is out of the paint shop and soon to be delivered. Congrats to BCA and SIA. UAL747-600
: Well I wouldn't say that. It hasn't even flown yet so it'll be 3 weeks at least before it delivers. R
: RE:SIA Take Delivery Of 2 777-300er's Tuesday 11-28 Congratulations SQ you have finally discovered EKs successful formula of Boeing 77W and GE power e
: 9V-SWB departs in half an hour (at 0600z) PAE-ICN as SIA777 if anyone's interested. R
: Apparently didn't get off the ground (along with the UAE 777) because PAE is snow bound. R
: Light flurries, but nothing sticking. Rain today, so she should be good to go.
: UAE777 is in the air as we spek according to FlightAware. Also when will SIA receive it's 19th and final 77W (assuming they don't order more)?
: Shame on me for misquoting information from your website!! In all seriousness, I visit your Seattle Deliveries website at least weekly and really enj
: Thanks for your kind words. I appreciate them and it makes the job all the more worthwhile! R
: Do you have a link to the web site...I've seem to have lost it.
: Yes it is a great resource, especially since I work across the street so I often get to see the birds take to the sky and fly around.
: hah, these Pacific Northwest types are a bunch of wimps, why would a little snow hinder anything!