Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ Final A340-500 SIN - LAX Service  
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11196 posts, RR: 33
Posted (10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25064 times:

Singapore Airlines today operates final Airbus A340-500 service between SIN and LAX. The second longest non-stop passenger flight (7,621nm) will come to an end after today; the longest flight SIN-EWR (8,285nm) will be axed on November 23, 2013.

SQ38 currently en route SIN-LAX:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/S...8/history/20131020/0820Z/WSSS/KLAX

SQ37 scheduled final return flight LAX-SIN:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/S...7/history/20131021/0415Z/KLAX/WSSS


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineglbltrvlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 715 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24507 times:

A bit like the Concorde, I'm afraid. Having flown those flights on multiple occasions, I will miss them.

User currently offlinegeorgiaame From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 967 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (10 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24331 times:

I did the LAX-SIN non stop shortly after it was introduced, in premium economy, and it was a surprisingly easy flight. PE was eliminated to boost the number of higher paying business class seats available, but apparently even that move was insufficient in boosting revenue return to justify the flights. I just did some homework on the Boeing website, and a 772LR has about an extra 1000nm range available, over the EWR-SIN flight distance, and it has considerably more seats available than the 345, at least in a multiclass setup. It's obviously a rhetorical question, but might Singapore benefit by using a LR rather than discontinuing the route? I know they don't own any , and I fully understand the logic, or lack thereof in packing extra fuel to burn when it is cheaper to carry less on board, land and refuel then continue on the route. But still, Singapore has been flying those two very long routes for more than 10 years. Our LAX flight lasted just under 17 hours, and shaved a good 4-5hours off transit time via Narita, and coupled with Singapore's service, it was a very easy flight. Any thoughts?


"Trust, but verify!" An old Russian proverb, quoted often by a modern American hero
User currently offlinetrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4745 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (10 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 24105 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

They crunched the numbers before, and fuel was cheaper then as well. The capital cost if a new 77LR despite its lower fuel burn cannot overcome the high cost of lifting that fuel to fly those last thousand odd miles!

User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4435 posts, RR: 19
Reply 4, posted (10 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 16931 times:

Great shame. these flights captured the imagination and provided a very convenient link for
passengers, amazing the performance of this Aircraft.



It was a very special part of a very special Airline whose star does seem to be fading of late.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9168 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (10 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 16644 times:

Wonder if they will resume both flights once they have the right aircraft.

User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (10 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 16420 times:

Quoting United Airline (Reply 5):
Wonder if they will resume both flights once they have the right aircraft.

They don't currently have any aircraft planned that could cost-effectively operate the route. And I doubt they ever will. I don't see them as a likely 777-8X customer.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1762 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 16127 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

They have the 359 on order to the tune of 70 of them with 20 options. It is listed by Airbus as 8,100nm in a 314 passenger three class layout. If you cut that to a mix of J and Y+ classes with ~150 seats, this a/c should be able to do the route with no problem. It would mean a sub fleet but that should not be an issue for Singapore.

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=sin-lax&MS=wls&DU=nm
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=sin-ewr&MS=wls&DU=nm


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (10 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 15469 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 7):
It is listed by Airbus as 8,100nm in a 314 passenger three class layout. If you cut that to a mix of J and Y+ classes with ~150 seats, this a/c should be able to do the route with no problem.

   You need an aircraft with at least 8500 nm of nominal range, ideally closer to 9000, to be able to fly the route. Nominal range translates only roughly to real-world range.


User currently offlineFerroviarius From Norway, joined Mar 2007, 225 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13189 times:

Quoting georgiaame (Reply 2):
I did the LAX-SIN non stop shortly after it was introduced, in premium economy, and it was a surprisingly easy flight. PE was eliminated to boost the number of higher paying business class seats available, but apparently even that move was insufficient in boosting revenue return to justify the flights. I just did some homework on the Boeing website, and a 772LR has about an extra 1000nm range available, over the EWR-SIN flight distance, and it has considerably more seats available than the 345, at least in a multiclass setup. It's obviously a rhetorical question, but might Singapore benefit by using a LR rather than discontinuing the route? I know they don't own any , and I fully understand the logic, or lack thereof in packing extra fuel to burn when it is cheaper to carry less on board, land and refuel then continue on the route. But still, Singapore has been flying those two very long routes for more than 10 years. Our LAX flight lasted just under 17 hours, and shaved a good 4-5hours off transit time via Narita, and coupled with Singapore's service, it was a very easy flight. Any thoughts?

Yes, thoughts:
The 777 (and even 350, 787, ...) are to my mind MUCH less comfortable. The 345s' 2-4-2 in Y and 2-3-2 in Y+ are much less "socially demanding" for pax than anything beyong 8 abreast. Besides that, the 777 is awfully noisy compared to 343/5/6 or 332/3. I have not experienced any 787 yet and neither (of course(?)) any 35? and cannot tell anything about how I would perceive noise level in these.

Best,
Ferroviarius


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2604 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (10 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 10986 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting georgiaame (Reply 2):
It's obviously a rhetorical question, but might Singapore benefit by using a LR rather than discontinuing the route?

In terms of fuel costs, undoubtedly. If I'm not mistaken, it was the acquisition costs of the 777-200LR, combined with the low resale value of the A340-500 which were the main reasons why SQ continued flying this route with the markedly less efficient A345.

Quoting Ferroviarius (Reply 9):
The 777 (and even 350, 787, ...) are to my mind MUCH less comfortable. The 345s' 2-4-2 in Y and 2-3-2 in Y+ are much less "socially demanding" for pax than anything beyong 8 abreast.


What about the 747 and A380 then?

But you forget that SQ operates these routes in an all business class, 1-2-1 configuration, each seat a lie flat bed, and with direct aisle access. How would any widebody be less comfortable than another in that configuration?



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4721 posts, RR: 39
Reply 11, posted (10 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 10855 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):

Singapore Airlines today operates final Airbus A340-500 service between SIN and LAX. The second longest non-stop passenger flight (7,621nm) will come to an end after today; the longest flight SIN-EWR (8,285nm) will be axed on November 23, 2013.

Too bad to hear this, but we all have seen it coming. The days of the A340-500, the most beautiful civilian airplane ever to take to the skies will become a rather rare sight pretty soon. No matter how good she is, the fuel consumption in combination with the fuel price in the end have determined that she is not attractive to operate anymore.  .

After the demise of the 3-holers, this is an example of the diminishing presence of 4-holers. Which to me is sad, but it is the reality of the market. Which is always right in the end.


User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3218 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (10 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 10764 times:

Quoting glbltrvlr (Reply 1):
Having flown those flights on multiple occasions, I will miss them.

how does the body feel after 18hrs under pressure, did the air feel dry?



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlineyakima From South Africa, joined Mar 2005, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 10720 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 11):
The days of the A340-500, the most beautiful civilian airplane ever to take to the skies will become a rather rare sight pretty soon. No matter how good she is, the fuel consumption in combination with the fuel price in the end have determined that she is not attractive to operate anymore.

How is the A340-500 doing for Arik Air? Also unprofitable?


User currently offlineBoeingMerica From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10688 times:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Reply 9):

Configuration is not an argument for or against a plane type on this route. With the A345 they had 100J seats, all with aisle access. If they were to deploy a -200LR or some other large two holer it is almost certain theywo uld use the same config, as the weight savings for the config was the only reason the route was possible.


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4721 posts, RR: 39
Reply 15, posted (10 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10617 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting yakima (Reply 13):
Also unprofitable?

I do not know. But I did not say these A340-500's are unprofitable to operate, but their yields will no doubt be very low due to the fuel situation compared to what the competition, or even other SQ-products are offering. And in combination with market demand SQ is now terminating the operations with these beauties.


User currently offlineglbltrvlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 715 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (10 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 10394 times:

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 12):
how does the body feel after 18hrs under pressure, did the air feel dry?

Anytime you are traveling that distance, it won't feel good. I live at 2100m elevation and very low humidity, so a typical cabin altitude isn't much higher than what I'm used to. I took a United 787 (lower cabin altitude, higher humidity) to China recently and didn't feel any notable difference.

Mostly I liked the SQ non-stops as they avoided the need for the time and hassle of Narita.


User currently offlinedennys From France, joined May 2001, 878 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (10 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4276 times:

Yes , this is a saw expcted news ; nethertheless these five beauties did make their jobs for which SIA was counting on them . For 10 years .

User currently offlinedennys From France, joined May 2001, 878 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4000 times:

I have heard they would go to AR.

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11196 posts, RR: 33
Reply 19, posted (10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3999 times:

Quoting dennys (Reply 18):
I have heard they would go to AR.

The A345s will go back to Airbus but it's possible they have found a new customer already.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineBirdwatching From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 3818 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3950 times:

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 12):
how does the body feel after 18hrs under pressure

You got it wrong, you're "under pressure" when you stand on the ground. On board, you're the opposite of "under pressure". You got fooled by the fact that the cabin is pressurized. But that's only relative to the outside air (or lack thereof). Compared to the ground, you're under a much lower pressure.

Very common misconception.

Soren   



All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
User currently offlineAM777LR From Mexico, joined Sep 2013, 206 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3899 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 19):
found a new customer already.
Quoting dennys (Reply 18):

I have heard they would go to AR.

AR just purchased 40 737-800s: Aerolineas Argentinas Orders 20 New Boeing 737 (by planemannyc Oct 23 2013 in Civil Aviation) and 4 A330-200s: Aerolíneas Argentinas Takes First A330 (by KarelXWB Sep 4 2013 in Civil Aviation) An order/lease for several A340-500 would be perfect to replace the A340-200s and the oldest A340-300s. Maybe they could start new routes to Africa and continue New Zealand and Australia. The A345 would look amazing in ARs livery!


User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9328 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3855 times:

Bloomberg did an interesting lengthy piece on this service.


Courtesy: Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-1...nds-travelers-enter-jfk-chaos.html



Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
User currently onlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2421 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (10 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3794 times:

One hopes this flight (and EWR) will someday be back on a hypothetical A359LR. A359 cruises faster than a A345, and saves what ~20% in fuel? If the revenue is there, and I do not doubt...it is the way to go.


oh boy!!!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3411 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (10 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3784 times:

Quoting United Airline (Reply 5):
Wonder if they will resume both flights once they have the right aircraft.

I think its the economy more than anything. You need a significant amount of people willing to pay a significant premium for a non-stop. I just don't see it on that route in this economy. Once the economy recovers i could easily see this route being one to pop back but until you have enough people willing to pay the premium for a non-stop i think your gonna have to one stop.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11196 posts, RR: 33
Reply 25, posted (10 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3901 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 23):
One hopes this flight (and EWR) will someday be back on a hypothetical A359LR. A359 cruises faster than a A345, and saves what ~20% in fuel? If the revenue is there, and I do not doubt...it is the way to go.

More towards 30% savings I believe. And a much lower trip cost too.

[Edited 2013-10-23 14:40:58]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinechristao17 From Thailand, joined Apr 2005, 940 posts, RR: 8
Reply 26, posted (10 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3625 times:

What caught my eye near the end of that Bloomberg article: 14 flight attendants for a 100 passenger flight! Granted, it is a long flight and is all business class so you have fewer passengers per flight attendant, but that still is a pretty significant personnel cost for just 100 pax.


Keeping the "civil" in civil aviation...
User currently offlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (10 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3642 times:

Quoting glbltrvlr (Reply 1):
Having flown those flights on multiple occasions, I will miss them

Indeed. LAX-SIN was good to me. I'm not a fan of connecting - I'd rather get it over with.

Quoting georgiaame (Reply 2):
I did the LAX-SIN non stop shortly after it was introduced, in premium economy, and it was a surprisingly easy flight

Agreed. It really was no more difficult (well, easier) than, for example, DFW-FRA in AA economy class.


User currently onlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2421 posts, RR: 8
Reply 28, posted (10 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3587 times:

Quoting christao17 (Reply 26):

Check the revenue for this flight versus any TPAC flight. It's equal or higher. Those are 100 J pax, and the lowest RT fare i've ever seen is ~6500 USD all in, average seems to be 8500 USD, top FF is right around 10k USD. And well the EWR flight enjoys a very high LF, over 80%...



oh boy!!!
User currently offlinedennys From France, joined May 2001, 878 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (10 months 1 day ago) and read 3464 times:

For the Time being no NSTP flight is schedueled

User currently offlineredzeppelin From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 570 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (10 months 1 day ago) and read 3438 times:

Quoting christao17 (Reply 26):
14 flight attendants for a 100 passenger flight!

How do duty hours play into this? I'm no expert on F/A rest requirements, but I assume that on a 17+ hour flight they have 2 full crews? Could most or all of them help with meal services and still be able to get the required rest aong the way? Or would there never be more than half of them working the cabin?



Coming Up: BZN-MSP-ORD-FCO-VIE-CDG-SLC-BZN
User currently offlinedennys From France, joined May 2001, 878 posts, RR: 1
Reply 31, posted (10 months 1 day ago) and read 3452 times:

http://www.americas-fr.com/tourisme/...r-aerolineas-argentinas-17756.html

Sorry it is in French .


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11196 posts, RR: 33
Reply 32, posted (10 months 22 hours ago) and read 3257 times:

Quoting dennys (Reply 31):
Sorry it is in French .

Thanks, good to see those aircraft will have a second life.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3218 posts, RR: 2
Reply 33, posted (10 months 10 hours ago) and read 2756 times:

Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 20):
Compared to the ground, you're under a much lower pressure.

Very common misconception.

Thank you, that does make sense.  



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
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...
SQ Replaces A340 On SIN/PEK From 01 March? posted Wed Feb 12 2003 12:23:25 by Carnoc
How Soon Will AC's A340-500/600s Enter Service? posted Mon Jun 26 2000 23:43:17 by Samurai 777
A340-500 Vs. 777-200LR, SIN-LAX posted Fri Dec 10 2004 07:00:59 by Clickhappy
SQ Publishes A345 SIN-LAX/EWR Nonstop End Dates posted Thu Dec 20 2012 09:42:58 by LAXintl
SQ A340-500 At PHL 13 September? posted Mon Sep 13 2010 16:16:40 by BP1
SQ A340-500 No PTVs For Two Seats? posted Fri Aug 24 2007 19:33:31 by AirCanada014
SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s posted Thu May 26 2005 19:24:56 by ConcordeBoy
SQ's A340-500. posted Wed Oct 6 2004 06:36:37 by Changyou
SQ A340-500 Deliveries posted Thu May 13 2004 17:15:23 by Hkg_clk
SQ A340-500 LeaderShip: How Is It? posted Fri Mar 12 2004 19:31:44 by CX889