Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ At Newark.  
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 85
Posted (1 year 5 months 1 day ago) and read 12430 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Have read on this site SQ will discontinue their SIN-EWR-SIN flight. It's on an Airbus A345 in all business class. This flight goes out full pretty regularly. Curious why SQ is dumping this route. Seems prestigious to the company as the longest revenue flight in the world at present. Thoughts appreciated.


I miss the old Anet.
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25737 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 12284 times:

The A345 fleet is going bye-bye.

Due to the ULH nature of the flight, I doubt even full loads produce profits.

SQ has struggled with these flights having changed configurations more than once on the aircraft, and even announcing they would put economy back on planes the last year, before changing course and pulling the plug completely now.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinecipango From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 12233 times:

The main problem is the deadweight on this flight. They need to carry all the fuel at once during departure and the aircraft is fuel heavy until around 50-/75% of the flight when the benefits of a reduced load can then be felt.

I remember reading that SQ would lose less money by operating these flights than they would by grounding them, mainly due to the fact that no one wants to buy an A345.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
SQ has struggled with these flights having changed configurations more than once on the aircraft, and even announcing they would put economy back on planes the last year, before changing course and pulling the plug completely now.

This is the one route I really wanted to try out. Unfortunately I never found the reason nor the money to travel from SIN-EWR.


User currently onlineinfinit From Singapore, joined Jul 2008, 584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 12228 times:

This was discussed in the following thread awhile back:
SQ Publishes A345 SIN-LAX/EWR Nonstop End Dates (by LAXintl Dec 20 2012 in Civil Aviation)

The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.
Airbus is stopping the A345 program
There is no other model that can do this route profitably from what I hear.

Despite the yields being good, some have questioned the profitability of these flights in light of present-day fuel costs.


User currently offlineqf340500 From Singapore, joined Oct 2011, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 12203 times:

what a sad day! One of the best looking planes ever!

Any idea if SQ plans to do a "last flight" ceremony or lucky draw or a farewell flight to HKG as they did with the 747 or a few short runs to CGK? Would love to make a trip on this machine before it disappeares...  


User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2940 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 15 hours ago) and read 11510 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Can a 787 in all business class do the trip? It would be ONE thing United could do that would add some sizzle to it's image...and given United's big EWR hub and it's virtual ownership of APac market. But for over 20 hours I'd hope they would use the GlobalFirst seat. Their Bf seat wouldnt be premium enough to command the fare needed.

I guess I am just curious if a smaller thinner approach on a 787 would make it more feasable? Or perhaps 2 holes can't do it.

After SQ stops it, what will be the best way to SIN from NYC area? Via FRA?



The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
User currently offlinefalkerker From Seychelles, joined Apr 2012, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 15 hours ago) and read 11381 times:

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.

So the A380 have 3 years left??? Weird...

Quoting VC10er (Reply 5):
After SQ stops it, what will be the best way to SIN from NYC area? Via FRA?

It would be the only way to fly SQ all the way. Other options would be NYC-HKG-SIN or NYC-LAX/SFO-NRT/HKG-SIN. Obviously not as practical and comfortable as a direct, non stop.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8475 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 14 hours ago) and read 11227 times:

Quoting falkerker (Reply 6):
So the A380 have 3 years left??? Weird...

Hard to believe right, but that's been pretty standard. I think back when the 744's made up the majority of the fleet the average age was 5 years old. There's a reason why they've been ordering additional A380's.


User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2702 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 14 hours ago) and read 11139 times:

But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineKaiTak747 From Switzerland, joined Aug 2012, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 12 hours ago) and read 10320 times:

For getting pax from SIN-EWR, flying them directly by A340-500 is an extremely inefficient way of doing so.

As people have stated earlier, ULH haul flights are flying fuel tanks for the first half of the flight.

SQ will not lose many passengers by cancelling these ULH flights. LAX passengers will be routed via NRT and EWR passengers via FRA.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 7):
Hard to believe right, but that's been pretty standard. I think back when the 744's made up the majority of the fleet the average age was 5 years old. There's a reason why they've been ordering additional A380's.

The 747s left the fleet because a new VLA with far better economics came out. The A380s will not be going anywhere soon as there is nothing better to replace them with.

Of course operating young fleets saves money on fuel and m/x, but capital costs often outweigh these savings.


User currently offlinethegivenone From Austria, joined Jan 2008, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 9702 times:

Yup, very sad to see this route go. But I am glad to have secured a seat on SQ 22 SIN-EWR at the end of June to experience one of the last of these record-breaking flights. I'll be doing JFK-FRA-SIN on the outbound.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
As people have stated earlier, ULH haul flights are flying fuel tanks for the first half of the flight.

This is an interesting concept which I hadn't really thought of before. Does anyone know what the average yields on this flight are? Tickets go for around $8000-9000 roundtrip, which might not be bad at an ~85% load factor.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 5):

Can a 787 in all business class do the trip?

Interesting proposal – an extension of the Premium Service into long-haul routes. United certainly needs to do something to sizzle up its image. Yesterday's new uniforms didn't quite do it  


User currently offlineEWRkid1990 From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 10 hours ago) and read 9021 times:

So does this mean that SQ is leaving EWR for good? or are the going to be operating EWR-FRA-SIN flights? If they do begin to operate the flights via FRA, which aircraft would be used? 777-300?

User currently offlineBthebest From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 10 hours ago) and read 8950 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 8):
But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Oldest is 15 at present

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.

Looking back at 747s (-400 at least) the retiring age is between 10-14 years. Could the policy be to keep and average fleet age of 8/9 years?


User currently offlineKaiTak747 From Switzerland, joined Aug 2012, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 7978 times:

Quoting Bthebest (Reply 12):
Looking back at 747s (-400 at least) the retiring age is between 10-14 years. Could the policy be to keep and average fleet age of 8/9 years?

The A340-500s are an exception. When they were brought fuel prices were a fraction of what they are today. The increase in fuel price has widened the gap between the 777 and the A340 economics to the point where the A340-500 now serves zero purpose.

I would have loved to have flown on one of SQ's ULH flights, and the A340-500 is one of the best looking planes out there!


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 7904 times:

Quoting falkerker (Reply 6):
So the A380 have 3 years left??? Weird...

They just don't do D Checks on anything, the late A380 meant some of the B744s got one though. The B777-200ER fleet is not in the first flush of youth and not all are being replaced by A333s.


User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8142 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 7877 times:

I am sure it's not why SQ are pulling the plug but I always wondered, why EWR and not JFK. And I guess when the A340-500 goes, EWR will go with it. Hoping to take a ride in September.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 5):
Can a 787 in all business class do the trip? It would be ONE thing United could do that would add some sizzle to it's image...and given United's big EWR hub and it's virtual ownership of APac market.

It makes sense for SQ cos at the end of the flight is...NEW YORK CITY! While I like Singapore* I don't know if it's worth United configuring a subfleet to operate ULH. I would say, if they are looking to do something along these lines (they're not, and they won't), New York to Sydney makes more sense, it's 400 mi further but in the same ballpark. But Singapore? Meh, there isn't enough there there!

* it's fashionable to say it's bland etc but I think it has a lot going for it, nothing glamourous about the ghetto!



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9666 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 7833 times:

I did this route back in 2005. I flew ORD-EWR-SIN. It came out as an option that was cheaper than UA ORD-HKG-SIN, so my travel agent was able to book it at $5000.

The EWR-SIN flight wasn't bad in business class leaving at 11pm and arriving at 5am. You eat a late dinner, watch a movie, get 10-11 hours of sleep in time to enjoy a nice breakfast and movie and you are in SIN with little jetlag ready to start your day.

The SIN-EWR flight is a different story. The flight leaving at 11am makes jetlag rather bad. You are up for the first half of the flight, and then you go to sleep. You wake up at what feels like 5am Singapore time, but it is 5pm in Newark, so you get a sleepless flight.

The service was always good. I was impressed they could keep up the attitude and service on such a flight.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineETinCaribe From Ethiopia, joined Dec 2009, 737 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 7 hours ago) and read 7384 times:

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years.

Is that from an accounting perspective (i.e. depreciation) or fleet retirement perspective? A quick look at average fleet age says it is 6.9 years and some 37 planes are 9+ years old.

Surely, they have a relatively young fleet by most standards.


User currently offlinemesaflyguy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3192 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 7 hours ago) and read 7128 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
EWR passengers via FRA.

I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8142 posts, RR: 54
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 2 hours ago) and read 5246 times:

Quoting infinit (Reply 3):
The A345s are going to be decommissioned in line with SQ's policy to decom their planes when they're 8 (or was it 9?) years

The age of the hardware isn't relevant. No aircraft can make money on sectors like these. Fuel prices are too high. The aircraft have very low cycles and are well taken care of. Sure SQ like a young fleet but these planes have life in them even by those standards. It's the economic model that doesn't work.



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4064 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 2 hours ago) and read 5226 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cipango (Reply 2):
I remember reading that SQ would lose less money by operating these flights than they would by grounding them, mainly due to the fact that no one wants to buy an A345.

Singapore Airlines is not known for operating loss-making routes out of prestige and grounding a plane isn't that expensive. My guess is the flights are profitable still, but the profits so thin that it wouldn't justify the expense of a major overhaul (think D check) and Singapore Airlines was able to use them to get a discount on their Airbus order instead.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
SQ will not lose many passengers by cancelling these ULH flights.

They will probably lose a significant section of the connecting traffic, of which I know there is always a decent number for having flown SIN-EWR/LAX in both directions several times and talked to other passengers or seen them re-check bags after customs.

Take me, for example. Flying non-stop between SIN and LAX/EWR let me do my journey with a single connection. Once these flights are over, I have a number of other one-stop options left to/from Singapore, none of which involving a plane liveried Singapore Airlines. I prefer SIA over others, but not enough to add another stop.



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months ago) and read 4533 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 8):
But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Quite a number of 772s and some 773s have been replaced by A333s. The remaining regional 777s seem to fly on either high volume routes (CGK, HKG, DEL, BOM) or where 1st class is still required.

Most of the 77Es are gone, but they just started refurbishing of the remaining ones as these fly on routes with less J demand where a 77W in SQ config is overkill and the A333 can not do the job (e.g. AMS, CPH, MXP and a few others). I expect these to be among the first routes for the A359 after initial introduction on some high profile routes. I think the 77E is the only one suitable for these routes today.

By the end of this year, all remaining 772/773/77Es should have been refurbished. They were getting quite run down before they were refurbished.


User currently offlineKaran69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2892 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4271 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 15):
and not JFK. And I guess when the A340-500 goes, EWR will go with it. Hoping to take a ride in September.

All the best for that mate, i was fortunate enough and got myself to ride from SIN-EWR this month, burnt a lot of miles doing so

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 18):
I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

Yes, thats what SQ said they intend to do

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 21):
By the end of this year, all remaining 772/773/77Es should have been refurbished. They were getting quite run down before they were refurbished.

AFAIK, there are two refurbished 77E, one which gets the 77W interior in J and F, which as you said will do AMS CPH and the morning SIN-BOM flight, and the other refurbishment is just the J cabin which gets the same J as the 333s, this is the aircraft i got from BOM-SIN SQ 425, the Y cabin was untouched J was same as the 333

Karan


User currently offlinecipango From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4165 times:

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 20):
Singapore Airlines is not known for operating loss-making routes out of prestige and grounding a plane isn't that expensive. My guess is the flights are profitable still, but the profits so thin that it wouldn't justify the expense of a major overhaul (think D check) and Singapore Airlines was able to use them to get a discount on their Airbus order instead.

Its nothing to do with what SQ normally does, it's called business! I have heard numerous times that the routes are loss making.


User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4098 times:

Quoting Karan69 (Reply 22):
AFAIK, there are two refurbished 77E, one which gets the 77W interior in J and F, which as you said will do AMS CPH and the morning SIN-BOM flight, and the other refurbishment is just the J cabin which gets the same J as the 333s, this is the aircraft i got from BOM-SIN SQ 425, the Y cabin was untouched J was same as the 333

All 772/77Es for SQ are in fact 77Es, where the 772 are 77Es which are de-rated. The long distance 77E is 2 class only and is getting the same J and Y as the 77W and no F. The regional 772/77E are designated 77A and get the same J and Y as the A333.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8475 posts, RR: 10
Reply 25, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4196 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 8):
But some of their 777s are quite "old" (777-200/200ER/300)

Thanks to A350 and 787 delays. A lot have been replaced by A333's or newer 77W's. But you're right the 772's are some of the oldest frames in the fleet but they won't be around much longer.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 9):
The 747s left the fleet because a new VLA with far better economics came out. The A380s will not be going anywhere soon as there is nothing better to replace them with.

The A380's will be replaced by newer A380's. It is widely believed that the latest top-up order for A380's is to replace the oldest frames. Nevertheless the A380s will probably last longer than anything else.

Quoting Bthebest (Reply 12):
Looking back at 747s (-400 at least) the retiring age is between 10-14 years. Could the policy be to keep and average fleet age of 8/9 years?

They had to keep a few 744's longer than they wanted to because of the A380 delays and that screwed up the average age for the fleet.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 14):
They just don't do D Checks on anything

  
The current fleet age is 6.9 years old.
http://www.planespotters.net/Airline/Singapore-Airlines


User currently offlineKaran69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2892 posts, RR: 18
Reply 26, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4034 times:

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 24):

I know that very well, have flown SQ a lot and it is my fav airline,

My point of contention is that my aircraft on SQ 425 was a 772 with the regional J product of the 333, however the Yclass was the same

karan


User currently offlineSIA747Megatop From Singapore, joined Apr 2012, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4064 times:

Sad to see these flights go as I was the youngest unaccompanied minor on the inaugural SQ22 flight back in 2004 at age 9.

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 18):
I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

The A380 is permanent on SQ26/25.

Quoting Karan69 (Reply 22):
AFAIK, there are two refurbished 77E, one which gets the 77W interior in J and F, which as you said will do AMS CPH and the morning SIN-BOM flight, and the other refurbishment is just the J cabin which gets the same J as the 333s, this is the aircraft i got from BOM-SIN SQ 425, the Y cabin was untouched J was same as the 333

There are 3 refitted 77Es at the moment. The refitted 77Es are currently flying to AMS, BOM, CPT and SYD. At present, the only 772s in SQ's fleet with F are 9V-SQE and 9V-SQF, both of which are fitted with the 1997 F cabins.

All the refitted aircraft feature the same Y class product which utilises the original 1997 seat with new seat covers and 9" monitors. Whilst the J seat of the refitted 77As is the same as the ones fitted on the 333, the latter features the new Panasonic eX2 IFE system whereas the 77As and 77Es have the old Wiseman 3000 system with a new UI.



That's Mr. Bovine Joni to you.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 28, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3977 times:

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 18):
I wonder if this means the a380 will be permanently brought back to the SIN-FRA-JFK route, instead of the current seasonal 77W/a380 mix?

Apparently the answer is yes. I really (really) don't understand why SQ (a Star Alliance carrier) chooses to abandon service at a Star Alliance hub that offers hundreds of connections on anothe Star Alliance carrier (UA at EWR) and instead moves their operations to JFK. Could you imagine a SkyTeam or OneWorld carrier dumping JFK in favor of EWR?


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2257 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3960 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 28):

Since they are on completely different sides of the world, the fact that EWR offers more Star Alliance connections is rather meaningless as most of their passengers are likely not connecting in EWR anyways.


User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 30, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3947 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 29):
Since they are on completely different sides of the world, the fact that EWR offers more Star Alliance connections is rather meaningless as most of their passengers are likely not connecting in EWR anyways.

But what proof do you have of that? Not trying to be argumentative, just curious. I would think that at least a somewhat significant amount of the pax on EWR-SIN where connections from UA at EWR.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25737 posts, RR: 50
Reply 31, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3969 times:

Besides the JFK vs EWR debate, going to a "Star hub" is not much value for some companies like SQ.

SQ does zero with UA. Domestically it codeshares with Virgin America, JetBlue and US Airways instead.

And SQ is not the only Star partner that prefers JFK and to work with other carriers then UA.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4064 posts, RR: 2
Reply 32, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3555 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 31):
SQ does zero with UA.

Singapore may not code-share with United, but that doesn't mean they do "zero." Every connection I've had at EWR to/from SIA, they were very happy to sell me a United flight on the same ticket to complete my itinerary... Connecting at LAX, they put me up on American for my domestic leg. I don't recall ever being offered a code-share on one of three carriers you mentioned, but the reason is probably that their code-share partners would usually (though not always) require an extra connection somewhere.



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

Just some question which popped up in my mind: what are the number of cycles and what are the number of flying hours for the SQ A345s? They must be the highest average hours per cycle of any aircraft.

User currently offlinenickofatlanta From Australia, joined May 2000, 1488 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

Any further news on whether SQ is likely to keep the EWR station open and launch a route via a third country? I know in the past, the EWR was routed ia AMS.

User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2940 posts, RR: 10
Reply 35, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2664 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

"Interesting proposal – an extension of the Premium Service into long-haul routes. United certainly needs to do something to sizzle up its image."

My point EXACTLY! United needs as many feathers in it's cap as possible. I would assume given; Star Alliance members, EWR, UA's Asia Pac domination and United (exCO) fliers, that this should be a big win for United and an opportunity to capture the NYC to Singapore route (except for SQ loyalists). If United could do a non-stop with an ac they have, or even if it's a all premium ac with a quick stop for gas (ala South African at Dakar) they ought to grab it.

However the United BF seat is woefully sub par to SQ, my only thought is United's Global First Suite is the only hard product that could suffice for a 23 hour flight.



The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
User currently offlinedennys From France, joined May 2001, 894 posts, RR: 1
Reply 36, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2356 times:

Quoting qf340500 (Reply 4):

what a sad day! One of the best looking planes ever!

Any idea if SQ plans to do a "last flight" ceremony or lucky draw or a farewell flight to HKG as they did with the 747 or a few short runs to CGK? Would love to make a trip on this machine before it disappeares...


Thank You . It is what i am expecting too !


User currently onlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4405 posts, RR: 19
Reply 37, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

Quoting fxramper (Thread starter):
Have read on this site SQ will discontinue their SIN-EWR-SIN flight. It's on an Airbus A345 in all business class. This flight goes out full pretty regularly. Curious why SQ is dumping this route. Seems prestigious to the company as the longest revenue flight in the world at present. Thoughts appreciated.

Short answer -- prestige doesn't pay the big fuel bills.



Live life to the fullest.
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...
Ball Park At Newark? posted Thu Aug 5 2010 10:58:32 by Goblin211
TSA Wide Awake At Newark posted Wed Jan 6 2010 20:00:34 by MMEPHX
United 777's At Newark posted Sun Dec 20 2009 07:18:20 by B777UA
Any Pictures Of SQ At Moscow On The IAH Route? posted Sat Jun 7 2008 10:57:55 by BP1
Anyone With SQ At SIN? posted Sun May 25 2008 23:12:20 by Jeremy
"dot Sets Flight Cap At Newark Airport" posted Mon Mar 10 2008 13:28:04 by NYC2theworld
Staffing Crisis/Air Space Redesign At Newark posted Thu Feb 7 2008 17:31:00 by UNDAEROSPACE
4 More Airlines To Join SQ At T3 posted Wed Nov 7 2007 13:56:06 by A2
Security At Newark Airport posted Tue Nov 21 2006 23:23:29 by Dornier328JET
Why No VS Or SQ At O-Hare? posted Sun Oct 2 2005 19:58:01 by Daron4000