ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 2:24 am

...only temporarily.

Buzz from the bees at Orders/FlyerTalk is that SQ is going to have to swap out more than one A345 for maintenance concurrently this summer. As a result, they're going to have to use the 9V-SV* 772ERs to fly the route nonstop outbound, with a tech in TPE westbound. No word on compensation for pax who paid for Exec. Econ.

SIN-EWR will of course remain A345-- at least until the inevitable happens  Wink
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15208
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 2:47 am

Under what payload/circumstances, if any, can the 777-200ER make it nonstop westbound?
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
B742
Posts: 3559
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:48 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 2:52 am

Hopefully TG can pick up some extra PAX on SIN-BKK-JFK from this SQ equipment change!

Nice to see a SQ 772 at EWR

Rob!
 
iluv747400
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2000 8:12 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:35 am

B742,

Did you read the message? It says the equipment for SIN-EWR will not change. Only SIN-LAX will see 772s.
 
Ari
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 5:08 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:37 am

Just a query, how can you differentiate between an SQ B772 and a SQ B772ER??I no SQ operate 9V-SQ*, 9V-SR* and 9V-SV* are these specially designated to whether they are an ER model or not??

ari
 
LUV4JFK
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:46 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:45 am

I did not know the 772ER could make that range. Isn't LAX-SIN similar in range to EWR-SIN, according to the great circle mapper?

LUV4JFK
 yes 
John F. Kennedy International Airport: Where America Greets The World.
 
A350
Posts: 1010
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:40 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:50 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Thread starter):

SIN-EWR will of course remain A345-- at least until the inevitable happens Wink

The deployment of the A380-800 HGW on that route starting in 2010  confused 
(Maybe with a change from EWR to JFK)

Just kidding

A350
 
B742
Posts: 3559
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:48 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:57 am

Quoting Iluv747400 (Reply 3):
id you read the message? It says the equipment for SIN-EWR will not change. Only SIN-LAX will see 772s.

Oops, didn't think, as usual!  Wink

Anyway great to see the 772 at LAX

Rob!
 
col
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 4:02 am

Singapore have different seats/seating arrangements in their 772's. The SV series have the higher rated engines and the new Raffles seats. These do the long haul flights. SQ series were the regional seating type. The SR's used to be used mainly on OZ, but I think they do a lot more now.

Feel sorry for those people expecting the 345 and getting the 772.
 
widebodyphotog
Posts: 885
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 1999 9:23 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 4:02 am

interesting...

SIN-LAX non-stop no problem for the -200ER with a bit lower payloads than the A345 is now carrying Eastbound. Trip cost will be a lot less though and flight times shorter by 20 min or so. The tech stop Westbound would enable 80,000lb payloads, which is even or better than what the A345 is doing now, and use less fuel. Maybe this will finally convince SQ that they are better served by replacing the A340-500's with 777-200LR's. Something to think about...

-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
 
Ryanair!!!
Posts: 4071
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 8:55 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 4:11 am

Just a query, how can you differentiate between an SQ B772 and a SQ B772ER??I no SQ operate 9V-SQ*, 9V-SR* and 9V-SV* are these specially designated to whether they are an ER model or not??

Regional 772
9V-SQ* configured 3 class
9V-SR* configured 2 class

Both do not have the SpaceBed but the horrid "Ultimo-Lite" seats...


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Ryan Soh



Long haul 772
9V-SV* configured 2 class with SpaceBed.
Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 4:51 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Thread starter):

Buzz from the bees at Orders/FlyerTalk is that SQ is going to have to swap out more than one A345 for maintenance concurrently this summer.

That seems like a fairly major scheduling error. SQ needs 4 out of 5 operational. It seems to me that it should be easy to schedule 5 aircraft such that two never need to be in heavy maintenance at the same time. I don't think SQ are stupid, so I'm probably missing something. What am I missing?
 
cloud4000
Posts: 475
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:38 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:08 am

How long will they be out of service? Can't be a heavy check, right?  Confused
Boston, USA
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:12 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 11):
What am I missing?

unexpected problems, maybe...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
commavia
Posts: 9629
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:19 am

Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 9):
Maybe this will finally convince SQ that they are better served by replacing the A340-500's with 777-200LR's.

What is happening with that? There was a lot of buzz a few months back about SQ not being happy with the 345 and wanting the 772LR, but then nothing happened. Is (and was) SQ really happy with the 345? What were supposedly the issues SQ had with the 345s?
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:23 am

Quoting Col (Reply 8):
Feel sorry for those people expecting the 345 and getting the 772

Lol, me too... looks like SQ will have to order a few more 345's soon if they want to keep the business pax.

KL911
 
GVBIG
Posts: 332
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:52 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:26 am

Quoting KL911 (Reply 15):
Lol, me too... looks like SQ will have to order a few more 345's soon if they want to keep the business pax.

Or do the sensible thing and order 777-200LRs  Wink Giving them total fleet commonality and getting rid of those 345s  Wink
Booked it, Packed it, f*cked off!
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A3

Fri May 27, 2005 5:36 am

Quoting GVBIG (Reply 16):
Or do the sensible thing and order 777-200LRs

This has been beaten to death here but, of course, the sensible thing for SQ to do is replace their A340-500s with B777-200LRs (without the optional belly tanks). I believe SQ are pretending to not be interested while waiting for Boeing to offer them the B777-200LR at a lower price.
 
col
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:49 am

The logical sense is for them to go with 772LR, it is a superb performer. As a Passenger I much prefer the 345, so I go out of my way to get on the SQ direct out of EWR. The 772LR will be noisier, but hey its gonna only be 17 hours instead of 18 if they go that route.
 
PHXinterrupted
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 6:41 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:54 am

Quoting KL911 (Reply 15):
Quoting Col (Reply 8):
Feel sorry for those people expecting the 345 and getting the 772

Lol, me too... looks like SQ will have to order a few more 345's soon if they want to keep the business pax.

KL911

More like they need to dump those 345s and get 772LRs.
Keepin' it real.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:55 am

it's not that much noisier. come now, that's as much PR hype as anything. either way, you'd be best served to use noise canceling headphones for watching movies, and using foam airplugs otherwise. 30dB reduction will make any plane quiet. that's how I deal with flying exit row on a 733.

also, the quieter the cabin, the more you hear FAs chatting, babies crying, old timers coughing, etc. But with earplugs, you knock all that sound down or out. The only way to fly...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:55 am

Quoting Ari (Reply 4):
Just a query, how can you differentiate between an SQ B772 and a SQ B772ER??I no SQ operate 9V-SQ*, 9V-SR* and 9V-SV* are these specially designated to whether they are an ER model or not??

All of SQ's 772s are 777-212ERs.

The 9V-SQ* and 9V-SR* are however operated at restricted MTOWs with the Trent884B. For whatever reason, airline chooses to identify them as 772s; even though they can easily be certified to op at 656k.lb for 7730nm with an software adjustment and a penstroke.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Bsmalls35
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:32 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:58 am

I guess when SQ puts the 777-200ER or the SIN-LAX route, it will be the longest scheduled 777 service ever, even if it's only temporary. I'll tell you, the 777-200ER is one versatile and capable plane.
 
Boogyjay
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 1:29 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 6:08 am

Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 9):
replacing the A340-500's with 777-200LR's

In every case, it won't help for this summer.
When is the EIS of the 777LR scheduled for?
 
col
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 6:09 am

lKramerica,

Not PR hype, just my own on this topic. The 343/345 is much quieter down the back.

You are certainly right about the internal noises, and they are the same on all types.
 
Ricci767
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:28 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 6:17 am

Why are so many airlines unhappy with the A340-500/-600? Surely they perform much better than the A340-200/-300 which airlines seem to be happy with. Plus they look so cool with those huge engines (yes, I know airlines don't care about that last point)
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 6:27 am

Quoting Ricci767 (Reply 26):
Why are so many airlines unhappy with the A340-500/-600?

Because the relative performance of the B777-200LR is so much better than that of the A340-500. The A340-600 is more or less competitive with the B777-300ER.
 
airtropolis
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 10:42 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 6:32 am

As far as I can recall, the ULH routes can actually be covered by 4 of the aircraft with the 5th, being rotated for the Jakarta route and as a backup for maintenance reasons. If that is the case, then wouldn't it be unecessary for a B772ER to be placed on the LAX route with inconvenience for passengers?
 
birdbrainz
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A3

Fri May 27, 2005 7:21 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 27):
Quoting Ricci767 (Reply 26):
Why are so many airlines unhappy with the A340-500/-600?

I'm not sure, but it seems to agree with my informal survey of flight attendants for SAA: 11 out of 12 strongly prefer the 747-400. (The 12th was neutral.) Curious, I asked an SAA customer service rep who (anonymously) said that virtually everyone at SAA hates the A340-600. That person tells me that they've had tons of passenger complaints since putting it into service. I wonder if that's why they subleased three of -300s to an Indian airline.

However, it's important to realize that SQ isn't saying that they're unhappy with the A340, they just need to service one or two of them.

The 777 and A340 are both fine aircraft. Personally, I don't care for the roundness of the fuselage of the A340. Also, on an empty flight, one needs a minimum of 3 seats to sleep across. BA's 3-3-3 arrangement on their 777s is ideal IMHO. Someone also said that the flexing of the A340-600 during turbulence makes for sick pax in the back.
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
 
avek00
Posts: 3155
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 7:38 am

Quoting Ricci767 (Reply 26):
Why are so many airlines unhappy with the A340-500/-600?

Among other things, the planes carry around alot of dead weight, and burn significantly more fuel than their 777 counterparts as a result.
Live life to the fullest.
 
avek00
Posts: 3155
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 8:13 am

It should be noted that the 772ER will be able to carry 100 MORE pax on SIN-LAX than the 345 designed for the route in the first place.
Live life to the fullest.
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 8:39 am

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
I'm not sure, but it seems to agree with my informal survey of flight attendants for SAA: 11 out of 12 strongly prefer the 747-400. (The 12th was neutral.) Curious, I asked an SAA customer service rep who (anonymously) said that virtually everyone at SAA hates the A340-600. That person tells me that they've had tons of passenger complaints since putting it into service. I wonder if that's why they subleased three of -300s to an Indian airline.

Yes, SAA do have a somewhat cozy configuration on their A340's.
 
Kangar
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 8:11 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 8:46 am

It should also be noted the people will be crammed like cattle on the 772 ER for a similar length of time as on the A345, except the folks on the A345 will have quite a bit more comfort to stretch out, etc.....
 
PyroGX41487
Posts: 246
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 3:06 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 10:06 am

I've given up on ever finding A345 sympathizers on A-net.  Sad
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 10:12 am

Quoting PyroGX41487 (Reply 34):
I've given up on ever finding A345 sympathizers on A-net.

Plenty of cheerleading and misinformation though.

Never let facts like the summer being the time to do work for SQ get in their way. It's winter in the southern hemisphere where SQ get much of their traffic from, and spare capacity is available.

Or other minor things like SAA being happy with the increased payload the A346 gives them. They are making SAA a ton of money, more than the 744 did.

SQ will probably be doing routine work on the A345 and also some upgrades on the IFE and other systems. They operate a small fleet and when you only have five aircraft, taking one or more out for a hangar visit impacts badly. But the cheerleaders don't ever see it that way.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
TGV
Posts: 716
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 1:37 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 10:16 am

Quoting Col (Reply 25):
Not PR hype, just my own on this topic. The 343/345 is much quieter down the back.

You are certainly right about the internal noises, and they are the same on all types.

100 % agree with you regarding the plane noise at the back.

For the passenger noise, note that in a given length of Eco cabin you have 12.5% less passengers on a 340 compared to a 777, thank to the 8 abreast versus 9 abreast.

So that will give you a proportional reduction in noise too.
Avoid 777 with 3-4-3 config in Y ! They are real sardine cans. (AF/KL for example)
 
LPLAspotter
Posts: 671
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:27 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 10:24 am

Quoting PyroGX41487 (Reply 34):
I've given up on ever finding A345 sympathizers on A-net.

Don't give up - I'm one  Smile!!

However, I sure was impressed with my only 777 ride on SQ from MNL to SIN. Man, what an airplane!

Cheers:
LPLAspotter
Nuke the Gay Wales for Christ
 
SIN_SQ
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2000 2:36 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 10:35 am

Hahahaha!

No, SIA does not use B777-200ER for long range flights on SIN-LAX. Airbus A340-500 is still alive. Nobody wants to stay more than 16 hrs in cramped B777.  Smile
 
9v-svc
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 12:32 pm

Thanks goodness I thought SQ getting rid of the A345s for 772ERs ! I got a bit shocked until I read the thread. Phew !
Airliners is the wings of my life.
 
zoom1018
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 2:59 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 1:36 pm

but you have to admit that SQ's 777-200ERs are of normal/typical configuration, but if they order the LRs, then their Excutive Economy should be 8 abreast and of course passengers could enjoy the spaciousness then Big grin

way to go... SQ's 777-200LRs
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 2:00 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 1):
Under what payload/circumstances, if any, can the 777-200ER make it nonstop westbound?

They could probably do it with about a half passenger load and no cargo, certainly not what one wants to be profitable

Quoting LUV4JFK (Reply 5):
I did not know the 772ER could make that range. Isn't LAX-SIN similar in range to EWR-SIN, according to the great circle mapper?

That is what happens when you have the wind at your back. Also, SIN-LAX is significantly shorter than SIN-EWR

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 27):
The A340-600 is more or less competitive with the B777-300ER.

I would take less there, considering the major discrepancy in performance

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 35):
Or other minor things like SAA being happy with the increased payload the A346 gives them. They are making SAA a ton of money, more than the 744 did.

Hmm, the aircraft with the lower seat-mile cost makes less money? Sounds a bit fishy there
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A3

Fri May 27, 2005 2:57 pm

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
I asked an SAA customer service rep who (anonymously) said that virtually everyone at SAA hates the A340-600.

And did he/she also tell the reasons?  Confused

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
That person tells me that they've had tons of passenger complaints since putting it into service.

Most likely most complaints were about seat pitch which is not the aircraft's fault. Never draw conclusions without knowing the background...  Yeah sure

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
I wonder if that's why they subleased three of -300s to an Indian airline.

Now you are talking about the A343 - the complaints were about the A346. Confusion...  Wink

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 29):
Someone also said that the flexing of the A340-600 during turbulence makes for sick pax in the back.

Someone? It's not uncommon on stretched aircraft. Ever felt the B773's flexing? I have.  biggrin 

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 31):
It should be noted that the 772ER will be able to carry 100 MORE pax on SIN-LAX than the 345 designed for the route in the first place.

But requires a stop en route on LAX-SIN, what an achievement...  sly 

Quoting N1120A (Reply 41):
Hmm, the aircraft with the lower seat-mile cost makes less money? Sounds a bit fishy there

Lower seat-mile costs is not the one and only magic formula. It depends on whether you can fill your seats...if the B744 were so superior within SAA's network, they would have ordered more and not decided for A340s.


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:14 pm

Udo, great to see you

Quoting Udo (Reply 41):
Lower seat-mile costs is not the one and only magic formula. It depends on whether you can fill your seats...if the B744 were so superior within SAA's network, they would have ordered more and not decided for A340s.

Well, not filling the plane was SAA's fault, wasn't it? Also, the A346 came as part of an overall deal to completely switch to Airbus

Quoting Udo (Reply 41):
But requires a stop en route on LAX-SIN, what an achievement...

Well, not bad for a plane that is older and still burns less fuel, along with flying faster

Quoting Udo (Reply 41):
Someone? It's not uncommon on stretched aircraft. Ever felt the B773's flexing? I have.

It has been noted that the flexing on the A346 is much more a problem than on the 773ER in that the 773ER is wider as well as shorter, allowing for more balance
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13229
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:31 pm

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 30):
It should be noted that the 772ER will be able to carry 100 MORE pax on SIN-LAX than the 345 designed for the route in the first place.

And the A380 will be able to carry a ton more than that. Shock news just in - bigger planes (especially those with denser seating arrangements) can carry more pax! Pictures at 11.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 3:57 pm

Quoting TGV (Reply 35):
For the passenger noise, note that in a given length of Eco cabin you have 12.5% less passengers on a 340 compared to a 777, thank to the 8 abreast versus 9 abreast.

So that will give you a proportional reduction in noise too.

not how sound works. sound doesn't fall off linearly with distance, and with the combined distances to the sides always larger on the T7 vs. 340, the reflections will always be closer (and louder) in a 340, assuming same materials (though I think A340 might have some extra sound dampening.) Also, one more pax per row adds one more sound absorbing body (also one more sound producing one). Lower ceiling might also increase reflections. So without measurements, it can't even be guessed at.

Also, the quieter a room, the more likely you will be to hear other noises. More conversations, more coughing, more crying, more snoring! it's hard to find info, but Airbus claims the average interior "interference" noise is 59dB, while conversation is 60dB. That means you can hear people speaking normally, but that can be bad if you are traveling alone and trying to sleep. Even at 65dB, it would be much harder to hear the 60dB people, even if they were talking a bit louder (62dB). Also, it would be harder to hear things of "fixed" volumes like babies and coughing and snoring, etc. It's the nature of sound.

All that said, like the 747, the back of a 777 is considered loud. I've only been over wing or forward on all my 777 flights, so I can't speak of that. And I've only been over wing or forward on an A340, either. But I have been back in the 747, and it wasn't so fun.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 4:49 pm

Quoting A350 (Reply 6):
The deployment of the A380-800 HGW on that route starting in 2010
(Maybe with a change from EWR to JFK)

Just kidding

Why just kidding? - It'll happen one day......

Quoting PyroGX41487 (Reply 33):
I've given up on ever finding A345 sympathizers on A-net

Don't - there are more than you think.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 4:59 pm

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 34):
SQ will probably be doing routine work on the A345 and also some upgrades on the IFE and other systems. They operate a small fleet and when you only have five aircraft, taking one or more out for a hangar visit impacts badly.

Taking one A340-500 out of SQ's fleet is not a problem. They just need to substitute B777-200s on SIN-CGK. Taking two out at the same time is the problem. It should never have been necessary.
 
PM
Posts: 4818
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:22 pm

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 30):
It should be noted that the 772ER will be able to carry 100 MORE pax on SIN-LAX than the 345 designed for the route in the first place.

Makes you wonder why SQ bought A345s in the first place. I'd sort of assume, though, that they were aware of the 772ER's potential when they did...  Wink

Quoting PyroGX41487 (Reply 33):
I've given up on ever finding A345 sympathizers on A-net.

Well, I'm one. I have no idea if they are truly as useless technically as some believe and I've never flown on one but they are about as beautifully proportioned as any airliner I know. Just on aesthetic grounds, the A345 is in my top five. Not everyone will agree with me. Know what? I don't care.  Smile

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42):
It has been noted that the flexing on the A346 is much more a problem than on the 773ER

It was also noted in the recent FLIGHT report on the A346 that this was an early problem that has now been fixed.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:30 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 47):

Makes you wonder why SQ bought A345s in the first place.

Because the B777-200LR was not yet available.
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: SQ 772ERs To Take Over SIN-LAX Nonstop From A345s

Fri May 27, 2005 5:36 pm

Hi Alireza, survived the trip to LA?  Wink

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42):
Well, not filling the plane was SAA's fault, wasn't it? Also, the A346 came as part of an overall deal to completely switch to Airbus

SAA simply don't have demand for three class B747s on certain routes, so the two class A346 suits them well there. It's not SAA's fault when demand is not enough for B747s.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42):
Well, not bad for a plane that is older and still burns less fuel, along with flying faster

The A345 would also do better than now when just configured to fly SIN-LAX and not for LAX-SIN as well.


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, A332DTW, ADent, AF022, Baidu [Spider], cabochris, CARST, DigitalBoy, FLJ, HomeSlice, jamesontheroad, qf002, quiet1, rokklagid, solnabo, Thule, tmiw, Yahoo [Bot] and 232 guests