Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Singapore Airlines And The 757  
User currently offlinevheca From Australia, joined May 2007, 281 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 16169 times:

I am a gret admirer of the Boeing 757! Love it! Love the sleek body and its aggrssive stance. Alos loved it in the SIA colours and even flew on a number of them on the KUL-SIN milkruns!

My question is that the '57 did not last long with SIA, so what was the meaning or the reasoning behind it? Was it an interim thing (I would be leaning towards this as the time in service was short) or did it not meet expectation?

Did a topic search but came up a little empty.

Cheers

vh-eca


Types Flown on - 312,320,722,732,733,73H,73W,742,743,74C,752,762,AB4,D1C,D28,DHT,F27,L11
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 16005 times:

I remember at the time, SIA Chairman said they wanted widebodies/dual aisle aircraft as it was a better fit for the company so they kept the A310s which seated about the same as the 757.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinevheca From Australia, joined May 2007, 281 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 15775 times:

Thanks, LAX, for the prompt response. But it would be interesting to know the thoughts behind purchasing them.

Was it purely for a "bus" role between large regional centres (milk runs), complemention of the A310 and 747 widebody fleet (as neighbours MH had the 732 to complement their A300 and 747 fleet) or did it meet specific guidelines for weather, range or because it looked just so damned sexy (not a realictic reason, other than for maybe, myself!)

Cheers

vh-eca



Types Flown on - 312,320,722,732,733,73H,73W,742,743,74C,752,762,AB4,D1C,D28,DHT,F27,L11
User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16371 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 15741 times:

SQ ordered the 310 and 757 at the same time, which seemed like an odd match (given that the 762 would have provided commonality with the 752 and the relatively close capacity match betw the 752 and the 310).

I seem to recall that the first 310 and 757 were both delivered at the same time; I recall a delivery ceremony photo at SIN with the 310 and 752 nose to nose.

Needless to say, the 752 fleet was sold to ATA and then DL.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineaquariusHKG From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2010, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15418 times:

I believe SQ ordered both to evaluate the two aircraft, which one is widebody and the other is a narrow body

Eventually wide body wins out, I think the reason is that passenger can load/unload faster


User currently offlinePITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3256 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 15325 times:

Cities served were Medan, Jakarta, Kuatan, Penang, and Kuala Lumpur


FLYi
User currently offlineryanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 15119 times:

Indeed it was the good old days where the airline could afford to do things like this. Anecdotally, I knew some people who were involved in the technical evaluation of these 2 aircraft types back in the days. The arguments about their virtues went on for months and the camp was pretty much equally divided. Towards the end, there was no conclusion and the decision was then made to purchase them all albeit in small numbers to try out.

Obviously the A310 won the battle because not only the fleet numbers eventually increased, they went on to serve destinations further afield like India, Japan and Australia other than the immediate region. There were also supposed numerous customer feedback about the Asian preference for a widebody which led to the 757's demise. How true is that is anyone's guess.



Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
User currently offlineEx_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1436 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 15060 times:

Ability to carry containerized cargo/baggage was also an important factor.

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8517 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 14328 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ryanair!!! (Reply 6):
Obviously the A310 won the battle because not only the fleet numbers eventually increased, they went on to serve destinations further afield like India, Japan and Australia other than the immediate region. There were also supposed numerous customer feedback about the Asian preference for a widebody which led to the 757's demise. How true is that is anyone's guess.

AT the time the original A310's were delivered they were -200 short haul version, SQ did also get the A310-300 with greater range. AT some point SQ did fly the A310 to JNB perhaps with a stop in Mauritius. When the 777 arrived they replaced the A310, SQ 777 went on to operate many routes in all areas of Singapore Airlines operations world wide.


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 14095 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 8):
When the 777 arrived they replaced the A310

They held onto some of the A313s for a while after the 777s arrived. Indeed, the 777 was too much for some of the routes the A310 served.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8667 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 12378 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 8):
When the 777 arrived they replaced the A310, SQ 777 went on to operate many routes in all areas of Singapore Airlines operations world wide.

SQ served JNB with the 743/744. It was only later that they switched to 777s.

Quoting ryanair!!! (Reply 6):
There were also supposed numerous customer feedback about the Asian preference for a widebody which led to the 757's demise. How true is that is anyone's guess.

How many Asian carriers do you know that operated or operate the 757 on international or regional routes? Not many.
Another factor for the demise of the narrowbody in SQ colors was SIA's decision to start a regional subsidiary (Tradewinds) operating 737's and later rebranded as SilkAir and operating A320's.


User currently offlinePRAirbus From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1144 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 10998 times:

I like the 757s but comfort wise I would trade it in a heartbeat for any widebody; especially any Airbus type is wider than the Boeing narrowbody's.

User currently offlinePresRDC From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 664 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 10613 times:

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 9):
They held onto some of the A313s for a while after the 777s arrived. Indeed, the 777 was too much for some of the routes the A310 served.

Based on the photos available here, it seems the last A310 was retired in 2003.


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 10456 times:

Quoting PresRDC (Reply 12):

Based on the photos available here, it seems the last A310 was retired in 2003.

It says 2005 on Airfleets but they must have just been in storage for 2 years.

Mind you they had 16 777s by the end of 1999.


User currently offlineEx_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1436 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 9512 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 8):
AT some point SQ did fly the A310 to JNB perhaps with a stop in Mauritius
SQ did fly the A310 to MRU, but I am very sure it never operated to JNB. It did operate as far as CAI (via DXB) and DHA though.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 10):
Another factor for the demise of the narrowbody in SQ colors was SIA's decision to start a regional subsidiary (Tradewinds) operating 737's and later rebranded as SilkAir and operating A320's.

Actually Tradewinds began ops with an MD87. You are right that MI may have been a factor, but I doubt it was a major one. Most of the routes on which SQ operated the 757 eventually went to MI, but IIRC KUA was the only one that immediately went to MI when it started up. MES and LGK went to MI a few years later, and PEN and KUL much much later. SilkAir was started to begin new regional routes and that may have negated the need for an aircraft smaller than the A310. MI's brief disastrous foray into widebody A310 ops only proved that its niche lies in lower density narrowbody ops.

Based on my understanding when I worked at SQ, apart from customer feedback, a big part of it the decision lay with the A310s ability to carry containers/pallets, thus boosting cargo loads and yields. Ability to carry baggage in containers was also beneficial to SQ's lower-frequency higher-density (relative to US hubs) hub ops.

[Edited 2010-03-26 14:12:29]

User currently offlineRyanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 6453 times:

Quoting PresRDC (Reply 12):

Based on the photos available here, it seems the last A310 was retired in 2003.
Quoting RJ111 (Reply 13):
It says 2005 on Airfleets but they must have just been in storage for 2 years.

Nope, the A310 was reitred while I was with the airline in 2005. There were many A310 related articles written on the employee's newsletter about it. One of which featured an A310 captain who rose through the ranks as a technician -> flight engineer -> 2nd Officer -> 1st Officer -> Captain. I should have kept that newsletter but I have so much SQ junk at home so a lot of it got thrown away during my last spring clean.

Yes the A310 was a good aircraft. I figure it is up to the A330 to carry on the legacy left behind, of which the 777s could not fulfill.



Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8517 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 5397 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ryanair!!! (Reply 15):
Yes the A310 was a good aircraft. I figure it is up to the A330 to carry on the legacy left behind, of which the 777s could not fulfill.

The 777 fullfilled the A310 legacy( whatever that was ) quite well thankyou. The 777 is an awesome plan, perhaps one of the most versatile made, helping Singapore Air accomplish many missions including being good enough to launch the new very wide Business Class seat when the A380 was late. Can an A310 say that ?


User currently onlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8632 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 5047 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 16):
The 777 fullfilled the A310 legacy( whatever that was ) quite well thankyou. The 777 is an awesome plan, perhaps one of the most versatile made

I don't think that Ryanair!!! was disparaging the 777 , it is an excellent aircraft , it is simply far too big as a replacement on some of the former A310 routes and that is the point I think he was trying to make when he said that the 777 could not fulfill some of the A310s legacy .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlinejayeshrulz From India, joined Apr 2007, 1029 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week ago) and read 4970 times:

Should i put it in simple words?  

SQ wanted to have all wide body fleet, and 757 is not a widebody and is single aisle aircraft.


So they had to remove it from their fleet.
Also, 757 was I THINK, just a test bird in their fleet.
please correct me if i'm incorrect... 



Keep flying, because the sky is no limit!
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1118 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4677 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 3):
I seem to recall that the first 310 and 757 were both delivered at the same time; I recall a delivery ceremony photo at SIN with the 310 and 752 nose to nose.

First B757 was delivered on 12 November 1984, and the first A310 on 19 November 1984. The ceremony photo was probably taken later for the publicity stunt? 
Quoting aquariusHKG (Reply 4):
I believe SQ ordered both to evaluate the two aircraft, which one is widebody and the other is a narrow body
Quoting ryanair!!! (Reply 6):
Indeed it was the good old days where the airline could afford to do things like this.

Well isn't SQ doing it again now with the B787 and the A350?

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 8):
When the 777 arrived they replaced the A310

No, the B777s were not purchased as specific A310 replacements. SQ could not find a suitable aircraft to meet its needs when it needed to buy replacements in the mid-1990s, and had to settle for derated B777s instead as part of its gigantic B777s order to capitalise on economies of scale and the "flexibility" it offered:

Then SQ CEO Cheong Choong Kong said: "In terms of capacity, the B777 is a larger aircraft than the A310 and therefore not a direct replacement in terms of size, but it offers us the flexibility to use the aircraft on both the shorter-haul services currently operated by the A310, as well as on the longer sectors."

Fast forward twenty years later, and the economies of scale that the B777s were supposed to bring begins to diminish as the oversized planes turns out to present less flexibility than they should, as regional routes begin to thin with the introduction of LCCs and fluctuate wildly with the ravages of the global and Asian economy in 1997, 2001, 2003 and 2009.

So the A333s now enter the picture. Theoretically, you can say the A333s are replacements of the B777s just as you say the B777s are replacements of the A310s, but the fact is that the A333s are really "belated replacements" of the A310s. One is only left wondering why SQ did not order the A333s back in the mid-1990s in the first place, but again I would pin it down to economies of scale, for SQ probably felt it is better to have a giant B777 order then to have a mix of B777s and A330s back then.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 16):
The 777 fullfilled the A310 legacy( whatever that was ) quite well thankyou. The 777 is an awesome plan, perhaps one of the most versatile made, helping Singapore Air accomplish many missions including being good enough to launch the new very wide Business Class seat when the A380 was late. Can an A310 say that ?

See above. The B777 is not as versatile as you would like to think, else there is no reason SQ would be replacing them on regional routes as we speak.

Quoting jayeshrulz (Reply 18):
SQ wanted to have all wide body fleet, and 757 is not a widebody and is single aisle aircraft.

Erm...and I suppose that helps SQ's bottom line, or did I misread your underlying message?

[Edited 2010-03-27 17:33:32]


It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineEx_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1436 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4430 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 19):
One is only left wondering why SQ did not order the A333s back in the mid-1990s in the first place, but again I would pin it down to economies of scale, for SQ probably felt it is better to have a giant B777 order then to have a mix of B777s and A330s back then.

This probably needs a little more elaboration.

I am oversimplifying the situation significantly, but when you operate two aircraft types with overlapping missions, and if you deploy each of the aircraft types on the missions that suit them better, then you incur lower variable costs, of which fuel makes up the biggest part. But, you also incur two sets of recurring fixed costs and also two sets of one-off costs related to introducing the aircraft into the fleet.

When you operate just one aircraft type, then you incur one set of recurring fixed costs and one set of one-off costs, but your variable costs go up because you are deploying the aircraft on missions for which they are suboptimal.

SQ looked at the A330 seriously many times but my understanding is that they just could not make a case for purchasing another fleet for regional routes.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 19):
The B777 is not as versatile as you would like to think, else there is no reason SQ would be replacing them on regional routes as we speak.

The one variable at play here, of course, is fuel. The B777 is an extremely heavy aircraft to deploy on regional runs. With fuel costing much more today, it may make sense to deploy a second aircraft type, even if diseconomies of scale start coming into play.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15845 posts, RR: 27
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4416 times:

Quoting Ex_SQer (Reply 20):
With fuel costing much more today, it may make sense to deploy a second aircraft type, even if diseconomies of scale start coming into play.

Not to mention that the 777 order was pre-financial crisis, pre-9/11, pre-SARS, pre-oil spike, and pre-recession. The landscape is a bit different now.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1118 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4311 times:

Quoting Ex_SQer (Reply 20):
SQ looked at the A330 seriously many times but my understanding is that they just could not make a case for purchasing another fleet for regional routes.

I would interpret it as SQ wanted to buy a fleet specifically for regional routes, but non available on the market met its specifications. The A310 was the only one which was optimal!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 21):
Not to mention that the 777 order was pre-financial crisis, pre-9/11, pre-SARS, pre-oil spike, and pre-recession. The landscape is a bit different now.

I agree fuel is increasingly becoming an issue now, but I would not pin it down to a "changing landscape" due to those specific events. Economic cycles with its highs and lows will ever be present, so the economic landscape today is no different from 100 years ago. But as I alluded earlier, the airline probably felt at the point of initial purchase, that the cost savings from buying and maintaining one fleet is higher than the costs incurred from using suboptimal aircraft during economic downturns.

The same gamble is required with each aircraft purchase, and I feel SQ is going to either have the B787 or the A350 as its next mega fleet, even if there are going to be many more economic downturns to come.



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offline9mmpd From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 288 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4279 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 19):
Well isn't SQ doing it again now with the B787 and the A350?

I believe not. The 787 will be used for regional routes and if fact replace the A330s. The A350s will replace the 77Ws for long haul routes. The A330s were ordered as a stop gap for the late 787s. So in effect the 787 is actually the belated A310 replacement. I also have no idea why they did not order the A330 as it's lighter weight is perfect for regional routes.


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...
Singapore Airlines And The Future posted Sat Aug 18 2001 04:41:42 by 747_pilot85
G4 And The 757 posted Thu Feb 4 2010 11:57:47 by McCarranMGR
American Airlines And The Internet posted Tue Jan 6 2009 08:33:22 by BoeingForEver
US Airlines And The 380 posted Sun Dec 14 2008 17:30:06 by Plairbus
Lacsa And The 757 posted Sun Nov 30 2008 23:41:44 by Jimbobjoe
Latin American Airlines And The 747 posted Thu Oct 2 2008 08:49:17 by Birdwatching
Ocean Airlines And The 747-200F In ALA posted Tue Apr 8 2008 07:21:37 by WILCO737
Asiana Airlines And The A332 posted Mon Jun 25 2007 02:01:31 by CdfMxTech
Zoom And The 757 posted Sat Jun 23 2007 02:52:46 by Avrocomet
US Airlines And The A380 posted Fri Jun 22 2007 11:02:51 by MEACEDAR