Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ To End LAX/EWR-SIN Nonstop Flights  
User currently offlinesfoa380 From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 223 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25906 times:

This appears in the article about the big SQ order and deserves its own thread...

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...pore_business/view/1233225/1/.html

96 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 463 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25947 times:

This was inevitable. SQ could never figure out how to make these routes work in a high fuel environment and notorious A345 fuel hogs. Sad to see them go from a spotters perspective.


We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25906 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The link does not work  

User currently offlinesfoa380 From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 223 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25887 times:

Sorry--don't know what happened--this one should work

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...pore_business/view/1233225/1/.html


User currently offlineplanemannyc From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1010 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25837 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

USA Today also picked up on it:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayi...e-airlines-longest-flight/1653833/


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25785 times:

It's a shame, will they retain EWR services and run it through a Star hub as before (EWR-FRA-SIN).


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31384 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25727 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tdan (Reply 1):
SQ could never figure out how to make these routes work in a high fuel environment and notorious A345 fuel hogs.

They made it work for longer than TG did.  

Honestly, I'm not sure the 777-200LR would have saved this route (or TG's). While flight-planning projections I have seen show the 777-200LR burned about 20% less fuel on the mission (at the same payload weight), those projections also showed that the savings worked out to about $20,000 per trip / $15,000,000 per year with a fuel price of $1.95/USG. The current spot price is now $3.19 so while the savings would now be close to $32,000 per trip, the 777-200LR's fuel bill would be higher today then the A340-500's was at the time the original projections were run.

If SQ was filling all 100 seats on the A340-500, then the route still would have been profitable. But clearly they were not, and the route was losing money. So applying the same loads to the 777-200LR would still have generated a loss, just not quite as large, but I believe large enough to warrant closing the service.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25717 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks for that SFO. It looks like given the fleet orders by SQ, the only aircraft which could service these routes in the future would be the 359 (which I would assume they ordered). No other a/c in their fleet could operate these routes without significant penalties.

Interesting times ahead. I wonder how this affects the rumor that SQ is negotiating to be the launch customer for the 787-10?


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31384 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25679 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 7):
It looks like given the fleet orders by SQ, the only aircraft which could service these routes in the future would be the 359 (which I would assume they ordered). No other a/c in their fleet could operate these routes without significant penalties.

Well they could add the 777-200LR, but see above.

The 777-8XLR could also be a future option. Not sure how a hypothetical 251t MTOW "787-8LR" would work out...


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25526 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't see a 251t 788 being produced within the foreseeable future. As the 788 program matures, they will trim weight and improve engine efficiency. Perhaps this route could work with an all J class 788 going forward but SQ won't have 787's in their fleet. They are trending Airbus. The lack of a 787 order for SQ tells me they will eventually phase out their 77W's in favor or an Airbus replacement.

User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1523 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25469 times:

It looks as though the news of the ending of these ultra long-haul flights was buried within the new aircraft order announcement.

There is some further analysis in Business Traveller. I chuckled when I read what AF's ex-CEO Pierre-Henri Gourgeon thought of the A340-500s when he described them as "flying fuel tankers with few people on board."

http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...non-stop-flying-to-los-angeles-and


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25468 times:

Wow!

I was always shocked this was at EWR instead of JFK...but either way the equation (ULH, fewer seats, high fuel) does not make this flight work.

Quite the blow to EWR. I dare say they should ax EWR altogether...how many money losers NYC-FRA do they need? They already run the route from JFK and it is being downgraded from 380 to 777


User currently onlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 3020 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25371 times:

This is the sort of route that could have worked 15 years ago. It's just not viable to run these sorts of very long flights any more unless they are connecting really major hubs where the traffic is virtually guaranteed to come.

I am a little disappointed I'll never get a chance to do the flight though, as I doubt we'll see it return until something really major shakes up aviation (ie a completely new concept aircraft).


User currently onlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3224 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25215 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
They already run the route from JFK and it is being downgraded from 380 to 777

When the decision was made, EWR was not a star alliance powerhouse. Now it is. LH really should ramp up operations there too, but we know like LHR, ppl outside the US automatically think "go to JFK". That is of course changing and I could see at some point UAL moving the PS shuttle across.... if they did that, they could combine some flights and send widebody aircraft at a few peak times, shuttling them inbetween hubs before they go off intercontinentally at each end, which would give them an advantage over the competition. particularly on the red eye. Even though UAL and singapore are hardly the best of friends, it does give Singapore's loyal star flyers a better connection option, at taps into the massive UAL frequent flyer base in the area much better. I could see a strong business case for SIA sending the smaller 777 to JFK to maintain a presence, and sending the A380 to EWR to maintain volume, get CASM right down, and fill it from UAL's huge connection possibilities. IE - premium class traffic largely headed to NYC, and fill up half of the back with locals and the other half from the UAL network.


User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1367 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 25185 times:

Aww man, I always liked spotting the A340-500, it was like a giant DC-8 Super Seventy. Still, I can't say I'm altogether surprised, it seems like that sort of route+business plan only works for certain city pairs under certain conditions.

User currently offlineordjoe From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 743 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 25014 times:

Too bad, I always heard it was filled with, and SQ does not really discount those J seats or give them out as awards, but still even with all the wall street types filling it is still is not enough. This is a blow ULH for sure, so what is the I guess ATL-JNB is now the longest once this ends

User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1028 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24926 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm hoping SQ will eventually add a second A380 flight SIN-NRT-LAX to make up for the non-stop cancellation

we'll see what happens


User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2036 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24874 times:

A shame, hopefully the A345s will find a new home, probably as a gorgeous private jet!


it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineusairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3472 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24775 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
Quite the blow to EWR. I dare say they should ax EWR altogether...how many money losers NYC-FRA do they need? They already run the route from JFK and it is being downgraded from 380 to 777

That is likely because LH already serves FRA-JFK/EWR quite well. SQ upping it from a 744 to a A380 was probably way to much capacity.


User currently offlinevincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24713 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 16):
I'm hoping SQ will eventually add a second A380 flight SIN-NRT-LAX to make up for the non-stop cancellation

SQ had in the past LAX-TPE-SIN (night) and LAX-NRT-SIN (day), both dailies. If SQ ever wants to resume redeye from LAX, it should fly through HND, PVG, ICN, or HKG instead. I doubt getting 5th freedom rights from those hubs will be easy.

NH is already flying LAX-HND redeye.


User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4415 posts, RR: 19
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24625 times:

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 13):
When the decision was made, EWR was not a star alliance powerhouse. Now it is. LH really should ramp up operations there too, but we know like LHR, ppl outside the US automatically think "go to JFK". That is of course changing and I could see at some point UAL moving the PS shuttle across.... if they did that, they could combine some flights and send widebody aircraft at a few peak times, shuttling them inbetween hubs before they go off intercontinentally at each end, which would give them an advantage over the competition. particularly on the red eye. Even though UAL and singapore are hardly the best of friends, it does give Singapore's loyal star flyers a better connection option, at taps into the massive UAL frequent flyer base in the area much better. I could see a strong business case for SIA sending the smaller 777 to JFK to maintain a presence, and sending the A380 to EWR to maintain volume, get CASM right down, and fill it from UAL's huge connection possibilities. IE - premium class traffic largely headed to NYC, and fill up half of the back with locals and the other half from the UAL network.

1. Newark is not equipped to handle the A380.

2. SQ will almost certainly continue to prioritize connecting traffic over JFK, just as most international carriers that serve both EWR and JFK do.

3. SQ sees the new United (and the new Delta) as major competitve threats to its North American services. The USA carriers have retooled themselves on costs, are leveraging fleet flexibility to unprecedented levels, and have increased premium cabin product quality to levels that are acceptable to business travelers. There's little desire on either side of the Pacific for SQ and UA to work more closely together than the Star Alliance requires.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently onlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3224 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24554 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 17):

A shame, hopefully the A345s will find a new home, probably as a gorgeous private jet!

since it looks like most of the fleet will be dumped, across the globe (i think thai's are parked at don muang?) I wonder if a good role for these aircraft lies with the military, who aren't so concerned about fuel burn?

They could potentially make a very good tanker. They can uplift lots, have lots of range, could be used as a troop transporter as well as a tanker. It's been called by some as a ridicule a 'flying fuel tanker'... so if that's what its good at why not put it to use for that very purpose? Sure its full range will never be needed in this role, but it has the potential to lift lots of very heavy cargo, or refuel lots of jets by uploading vast quantities of fuel, the rest of the A340 program will ensure a steady flow of parts and support (much easier than say, a VC-10 for instance) and they probably can be bought relatively cheaply. The A330 military version allows for a full PAX interior, so make it attractive to governments around the role by saying duel purpose... and fit the front of the cabin with a very nice first class. Therefore when its not needed for air force duties, it can be called on to fly VIP's over long distances (im thinking the British PM for example who politically won't be allowed to buy a dedicated plane for some stupid reason) and of course transport troops. The global fleet of them is relatively small and all the equipment developed for the A330 MRTT probably could easily be applied. And if it isn't politically correct in the west, well, the chinese could probably take 30 of them without too many issues.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26128 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24465 times:

These flights have been struggling for a while.

Remember SQ announced it would reintroduce Y+ last March on the A345.
SQ Reintroducing Y Class On A345 US Nonstops... (by hodja Mar 28 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Also for several years now they have been playing with frequency going less then daily for various periods.


Anyhow for fun here is their 2011 load factors on the routes:

EWR
Jan - 77
Feb - 63
Mar - 80
Apr - 61
May - 83
Jun - 78
Jul - 72
Aug - 59
Sep - 76
Oct - 72
Nov - 60
Dec - 60
Average = 70.1%

LAX
Jan - 76
Feb - 74
Mar - 70
Apr - 73
May - 86
Jun - 82
Jul - 77
Aug - 69
Sep - 80
Oct - 81
Nov - 77
Dec - 69
Average = 76.2%

Quoting vincewy (Reply 19):
SQ had in the past LAX-TPE-SIN (night) and LAX-NRT-SIN (day), both dailies. If SQ ever wants to resume redeye from LAX, it should fly through HND, PVG, ICN, or HKG instead. I doubt getting 5th freedom rights from those hubs will be easy.

For LAX, I am sure SQ will resurect its 3rd flight (which would now become the 2nd one).
SQ already holds rights to operate via a host of stops including TPE, ICN, HKG, KIX, etc..



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31384 posts, RR: 85
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 24420 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 17):
A shame, hopefully the A345s will find a new home, probably as a gorgeous private jet!

Airbus agreed to take them in as trade on the A350+A380 deal. I expect they'll be broken up and sold as OEM spares as the planes are worth far more in pieces than complete.


User currently offlineolympic472 From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 24347 times:

Quoting avek00 (Reply 20):
3. SQ sees the new United (and the new Delta) as major competitve threats to its North American services. The USA carriers have retooled themselves on costs, are leveraging fleet flexibility to unprecedented levels, and have increased premium cabin product quality to levels that are acceptable to business travelers. There's little desire on either side of the Pacific for SQ and UA to work more closely together than the Star Alliance requires.

Insightful and well stated.
The "non-cooperation" from scheduling to lounge makes me think that they are in different Alliances.

Reading the posts here and previous posts, there are so many that believed in the SQ KoolAid. This is hardly a surprise if they have flown this sector and understand the numbers.

As previously suggested, they will make good tankers and troop carriers for the RSAF. Despite the fact that they are traded back to Airbus as part of the 380 and 350 deal.

[Edited 2012-10-24 09:05:47]


Civil Aviation has a "Need for Speed"!
25 Stitch : SQ has always struck me as an airline that considered Star more an alliance of convenience than as an actual strategic alliance.
26 Post contains images kaitak : Sad to see, purely from an enthusiasts' perspective; one less airline to fly A345s on and five fewer of the most beautiful aircraft flying today. Not
27 migair54 : Actually the load factor of 76% is not bad, but if they can´t manage to make money with that load factor is better to reroute the flight and try to
28 mogandoCI : But then again, how many Star carriers are SQ actually working closely with anyway ? The fact that SQ is doing fine even on their 5th freedom segment
29 Post contains images MadameConcorde : I think I am going to break with my First to Fly habit this time. I'd really like the idea of being "last to fly" the world's longest route on that fi
30 Stitch : If SQ is actually averaging a 76-80% load factor, than the 20% fuel savings of the 777-200LR over the A340-500 might very well have kept the route vi
31 Post contains images PHX787 : I wonder if the 787/A350 could do such a route with such a seating layout. I hope you post a trip report Exactly. Sad but true.
32 IrishAyes : Well, this will create some bragging rights for any DFW or SYD-based fans. Now, QF 7 will officially become the world's longest route (although it sti
33 LAXintl : These are not normal flights. We are talking about ULH flights where the block times are at 18:30 and 17:45 respectively. Currently I doubt even clos
34 N62NA : I suspect they'll drop EWR and just stick with the "international gateway/prestige" NYC area airport, JFK. We'll never see an A380 at EWR and SQ will
35 ipodguy7 : Can anyone else confirm this officially? I'm really hoping so, I just flew SYD-DFW in August.
36 jfklganyc : Actually, it's not. While the 90s was very much about secondary hubs as gateways, the 2000s to today has seen a return to hubs with large O and D: JF
37 STT757 : That's more indicative of their own poor performance and not the airport's, case in point would be UA while dropping international flying from EWR in
38 mogandoCI : With load factors like these, it's stupid not to release some award seats to Star partners. It's much much lower rev per head than actual paid J, but
39 FlyPNS1 : But that's not really growth, it's just DL replacing AF/KLM flights because DL flights are effectively AF/KLM flights given the joint venture.
40 STT757 : It's a new airline on a route. Also AF leaving EWR, and ORD, is indicative of AF's ills and not the airport's otherwise DL would not be picking up th
41 slcdeltarumd11 : Its the economy and more businesses letting fewer and fewer people fly premium classes
42 caljn : You failed to mention Jet Blue and their contribution to JFK's increase in traffic. If it is the leading gateway it is a pity that international trav
43 MaverickM11 : The load factors weren't that bad; if those are actually paid seats with no or few rewards, then they're fantastic LF for an all premium layout. EWR
44 Ben175 : This is such saddening news to me as these flights are always my #1 choice when flying PER-NYC or PER-LAX. I have flown these ULH routes three times a
45 Post contains images N62NA : I smell a revival of the old "EWR vs JFK" topic once again! Correct. This makes no sense. An airport in the context of these comments IS the airlines
46 777law : That's not entirely true. Having lived in Singapore for 5 years (left in January) the SIN-EWR / SIN-LAX flights were the expat favorites - generally
47 Post contains images AirbusA6 : Yes, sadly it is the parts commonality with the super popular A330 which will condemn these planes to an early death
48 Post contains images MadameConcorde : Doubt you will get any award seat on any of these EWR-SIN-EWR flights. There are none available now. I doubt they will release any in the future. Sor
49 changyou : Just hope these flights will return someday with more fuel efficient planes...
50 babybus : If a route isn't carrying enough traffic it has to be dumped, that's just pure economics. I'm surprised a direct route to America couldn't support eno
51 777law : Just to give you all a flavor of some facebook comments from my American friends in Singapore on this news: " Noooooo!!!!!! That is the best way home!
52 ltbewr : The higher costs of a relatively small sub-fleet of model and cabin set up to service the EWR and LAX - SIN flights, that SQ has smart bean counters t
53 STT757 : The reason why SQ was operating the nonstop flight out of EWR and not JFK was because JFK was unable to support an all business class flight to Asia
54 RayChuang : I think what SQ might do is get more passengers to fly the SIN-TPE-LAX, SIN-HKG-SFO and SIN-FRA-JFK routes more. With the phaseout of the A340-500, al
55 RWA380 : I am very sad to see these pioneering routes go. I see these much like the pioneering routes in the 1970's that the 747sp was able to provide. My soft
56 JerseyFlyer : Given 70% load factors, I am surprised that SQ did not order 5 x A358s to replace the 345s directly, and accept break even at best until they were del
57 caljn : Yes. Typically initiated by a certain commentor(s) who bristle at the mere mention of EWR, and who then go on to defend JFK's "prestige". It's quite
58 VC10er : I can confirm one case; mine. Of the 7 or 8 RT flights I have taken to SIN, the non-stop was so expensive that compared to UA, with an upgrade to F ma
59 qf002 : Only if they fit some midair refueling capabilities... They'd need about 30% more range than their 744s offer.
60 sshank : Now you are talking. That will also make for some exciting Channel 9 action as the tanker is maneuvered into position!
61 qf002 : If only the aviation industry was run by the community on this site... Everything would be so much more interesting!
62 N62NA : JFK could support an all biz class flight to Asia as well as or better than EWR. And despite that, JFK is still NYC's prestige airport.
63 krje1980 : Does anyone with more familiarity with the airline business with than me know whether or not these winter changes may remain permanent? I am scheduled
64 Post contains images astuteman : Does that mean the worlds longest scheduled flight might become one flown by ...... a 747? Rgds
65 VC10er : Not to over do the 747 thing, but didn't UA have 2 JFK to HK 747's about 10+ years ago? Just curious if they have left the fleet. I recall them, bran
66 nycdave : Though I'm loathe to go back into this whole thing again, just look at the PANYNJ's *own reports*. EWR has a higher percentage of business pax as tra
67 mogandoCI : But compared to that miserable JFK T-3 (with operations split across T2/3/4), if you fly DL, LGA is relatively a much better experience already
68 CV880 : What's to say that DL couldn't try the same routes with the 77L's, using the current seating configs, then adjust the seat density according to deman
69 N62NA : I know, I know, but a certain contributor makes such outlandish pro-EWR statements.... And as we discussed back then.... if airport "E" has 10 passen
70 daviation : Agree completely! Having lived in NYC and the surrounding area for over 50 years, I never once thought of NYC as having a "prestige" airport. The who
71 N62NA : It's not. Manhattan overwhelmingly goes LGA/JFK.
72 Aircellist : So true! We'd still have the choice between Concorde and a Super Constellation to cross the Atlantic!
73 LAXDESI : On the marketplace radio program(NPR) today, there was a brief discussion about discontinuation of SIN-LAX/EWR flights. Richard Aboulafia indicated th
74 NWADTWE16 : EWR attracts the North Jersey crowd from my daily dealings...and JFK has become very popular the past couple years with B6 operations and the Transcon
75 rwy04lga : WHAT? The EWR fanboys NEVER mentioned that! To be so lacking in facilities that allow service by the world's largest airliner is unforgivable and har
76 bwvilla : I don't think that's correct. The aircraft on this route had a mix of business class and economy plus until they were reconfigured to all business cl
77 mogandoCI : let's get 4 things straight among everyone going off tangents : 1. International carriers *do* prefer JFK over EWR, even Star Alliance ones (e.g. ANA,
78 Post contains images MaverickM11 : Having started flying through the airport on PA 741s, JFK and prestige in the same sentence is a little ridiculous. It is definitely the largest in t
79 caljn : To continue the childishness, let's get a few other things straight. JFK is a dump. A cluster F of buildings, parking lots, confusion and surly peopl
80 mogandoCI : I would actually give "best NYC terminal" crown to AA Terminal 8 at JFK.
81 N62NA : See below. Yes!
82 pellegrine : You call that struggling on an all business class layout? What are you smoking? Unfortunately, as usual, this issue is more complicated than many pos
83 docpepz : The interesting thing is, these flights operate close to full from Fridays to Mondays and maybe at 50-60% on Tue to Thu getting to an overall load fac
84 N62NA : Very interesting point!
85 Post contains links LH422 : Well, it's downgraded to 77W this Winter. Maybe this change will make the route go A380 year-round. I also think they'll be using the lower-density A
86 Post contains links LAXintl : SQ confirms that even with 80% LF the routes were loss making. Carrier states it remains committed to both LA and NY with 1-stop service, while it con
87 coolfish1103 : There isn't much SQ can do in exploring options to the US unless they utilize their 5th freedom rights in NRT, HKG, TPE, or ICN. In that case, no non-
88 changyou : Can the 77W do SIN-LAXvv all year round on an all jcl configuration as compared to 3 class config? Bloomberg mentioned the 77W can fly up to 7930nm wh
89 Post contains links and images SInGAPORE_AIR : Hello Changyou ! In previous discussions it was mentioned that SINLAX was around 7600 - 7700nm depending on routing but because of headwinds on the r
90 changyou :
91 LH422 : I seem to recall SQ has done this flight nonstop with a 77W before, but not scheduled. Can anyone confirm?
92 jfk777 : A 77W could probably do the nonstops to the USA but if an airline that can sell all its Business Class seats can't make it work then its about econom
93 LAXintl : Unless a random substitution, the LAX nonstop was never on the 77W. What LAX did get using the 77W was the daily service via TPE.
94 changyou : So the 77W does have the range if push to its limit. Even so when configured with roughly 100-110 jcl seats. Having said that...The new 77W which are
95 Megatop747-412 : I thought that was using the 77E (SV series birds)? IIRC the SIN -LAX-TPE flights were discontinued before the arrival of SQ's 77W...
96 Post contains links and images LAXintl : Airbus business jet division looking to resell the SQ A345s as VIP jets. Airbus Corporate Jets will soon have some additional A340-500s to put into th
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...
When Will SQ Launch LAX, SFO-SIN Nonstop? posted Thu Jul 5 2001 08:48:58 by TOMASKEMPNER
Province Of BC To End Fuel Taxes For Intl Flights posted Sun Sep 19 2010 18:40:26 by CGKings317
SQ To Operate More A380 SIN-SYD Flts posted Tue Aug 3 2010 08:32:48 by LondonCity
Aer Lingus To End All Its LGW-Europe Flights posted Wed Jan 27 2010 05:17:59 by Mozart
SQ To End 747 At LHR posted Wed Mar 4 2009 02:31:10 by Amciver
Oh No! SU To End All TU5 And IL9 Flights 10/09 posted Mon Feb 2 2009 13:41:26 by Planenutz
UA To Drop LAX-EWR/PHL posted Fri Aug 22 2008 08:58:31 by A330323X
EWR-SIN Nonstop - Batting Average? posted Fri Apr 6 2007 05:08:14 by Aa87
Delta Wants To Start Daily JFK-TLV Nonstop Flights posted Wed Jan 10 2007 19:19:04 by IAD380
AS To End Free Meals On Transcon Flights posted Fri Oct 6 2006 00:11:21 by COERJ145