atnight
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:06 am

SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:01 pm

I was wondering, how is SQ doing on this routes? How are their loads? How is the service? Since these are still the world's longest routes, is it ok to fly for such a long time? I just want to know how is SQ doing on them.... I know that TG's BKK-JFK did poorly (do they still have the flight or not?), so I'm wondering if SQ is having a hard time filling up those seats... Is hard to see why would airlines want to buy any more ULR aircraft when they can't seem to fill these planes.... Maybe there really isn't much future for ULR planes, no matter how far these can go...
B707 B727 B733/5/7/8/9 B742/4 B752/3 B763/4 B772 A310 A318/319/320 A332 A343 MD80 DC9/10 CRJ200 ERJ145 ERJ-170 Be1900 Da
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:52 pm

SQ are enjoying high loads are yields on SIN-LAX/EWR -- especially EWR and especially in business class. Just because TG didn't get it right doesn't mean that SQ cannot.
 
Pieinthesky
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:30 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:59 pm

SQ would like a larger Raffles cabin on the EWR flights such is the demand on the route at times.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:39 pm

Quoting Pieinthesky (Reply 2):
SQ would like a larger Raffles cabin on the EWR flights such is the demand on the route at times.

Actually, they'd like a F cabin! The demand for "enhanced" Raffles class has been beyond their expectations.
Fly fast, live slow
 
atnight
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:06 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:46 pm

Oh wow, I am so glad to know that they are doing very well on these flights, has any one of you been on one? Is the cabin layout very comfortable? From what I've read here, it seems that folks are enjoying SQ's A345s and their quietness (so that you can sleep without having to buy noise cancellation headphones), and if they are doing great, why not add a 2nd flight? Not enough demand yet, or is just the lack of planes (only 5 A345s) holding them, or both?

And speaking of not enough planes, would SQ order more A345s or B777LRs? To me it seems logical that if people have responded to its existing service on their A345s and have positive results, especially with their J class high demand, why would SQ exchange its A345s for B777LRs? I know many will say commodity with SQ's existing 777 fleet (plus longer range and extra loads), but is the sky high price of the LR worth the change? Here is what I think....SQ is also getting the A380, and that's commodity too between the airbuses.... also, SQ doesn't need the 777LR's extra range, as I doubt they will want or need to start flights somewhere else that's farther than EWR, and as far as extra seats (or cargo), wouldn't be better to add another flight which will give more flexibility to pax than just upgrade to a bigger plane? I would like your answers on these....

As a last question, I am interested in knowing whether is better to fly direct for 18+ hours or fly with a stop-over, has anyone taken the flight to compare??
B707 B727 B733/5/7/8/9 B742/4 B752/3 B763/4 B772 A310 A318/319/320 A332 A343 MD80 DC9/10 CRJ200 ERJ145 ERJ-170 Be1900 Da
 
iowa744fan
Posts: 906
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:31 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:36 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
And speaking of not enough planes, would SQ order more A345s or B777LRs? To me it seems logical that if people have responded to its existing service on their A345s and have positive results, especially with their J class high demand, why would SQ exchange its A345s for B777LRs? I know many will say commodity with SQ's existing 777 fleet (plus longer range and extra loads), but is the sky high price of the LR worth the change? Here is what I think....SQ is also getting the A380, and that's commodity too between the airbuses.... also, SQ doesn't need the 777LR's extra range, as I doubt they will want or need to start flights somewhere else that's farther than EWR, and as far as extra seats (or cargo), wouldn't be better to add another flight

One thing to think about though. Especially with the 773ER fleet that they are buying, commonality will help reduce the total maintenance costs, plus will give them flexibility between the 772LR and the 773ER. I know that Airbus always touts the cross commonality of its products, but I would imagine that most pilot contracts tend to stipulate that only so many are allowed to fly each type of aircraft and others fly this type due to pay issues. I could be completely wrong about that (and please let me know if I am), but that is what I have heard from some pilots. It is easier to retrain them between types. Anyway, back to the payload questions. People may like the A345, but the 772LR offers SQ more options. First, they can offer a dedicated first class cabin, which seems to be a major issue for them. Second, they can add more seats total - particularly in economy. Passengers may like the comfort of the 345's 2-3-2 seating in Y, but I can guarantee you that the yield guys at SQ don't . They would rather have more seats to sell. Airlines care about making money first. I could see them just adding a 2-4-2 interior in the -200LRs though. Even if they choose to keep the seat total roughly the same, they could always have the option to carry additional cargo on these flights, which would also be very lucrative.

In the end, I think that it would make a lot more sense to replace the A345s with 772LRs for these flights. As for doubling frequency, I don't know enough about the loads or demand. Plus, I would think that SQ could unload their A345s pretty easily. If it sways the decision for any or all of the upcoming orders (748/380, 772LR/345, and 787/350), I am sure that Boeing would accept the 5 A345s the SQ operates in exchange for the order. Likewise, I am willing to bet that Airbus would accept them as trade-in should SQ decide to order additional A380s or goes with the A350. So, I don't think that this should be an issue. That is my opinion, and people are welcome to dispute it.

Thanks.
 
COEWR787
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:35 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:47 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
has any one of you been on one?

Yes, I have been on it (EWR - SIN - EWR) and am going to be on it again in March. The seat layout is comfortable in Exec Economy. Since I have never found noise to be a problem either in the 340 or in the 777 I guess I cannot comment on the noise issue. I sleep like a baby in either of those without the aid of any noise canceling gizmo.

However, I would readily admit that part of the attraaction of the flight is the Exec Economy. In regular Economy this would be a considerably less pleasant flight and I would probably opt for the one stopper if there were no Exec Economy. The bottom line is that a properly presented ULR product can be very attractive even in spite of the long duration of the flights. So all in all I believe that ULR flights do have a good future. However, they will always remain a bit of a niche.

It seems to me that SQ would most likely go with 777LR on these routes to be able to provide First Class service in addition to Raffles and Exed Economy and perhaps also be able to carry some revenue cargo.

[Edited 2006-01-11 17:24:13]
 
nethkt
Posts: 1014
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2001 10:27 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:24 am

Any SQ insiders here?

SIN are full of American's companies. SIN is actually the American of South East Asia!! No wonder there are lots of Businessmen travel between SIN-USA all year long.

Too bad for TG on JFK routes. I would love to see them flying for long time. I think they will cut the route very soon. The service I saw in http://www.hflight.net/forum/b-review are rather world class standard in Business, so does Economy.
Let's just blame it on yields.
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:31 am

Quoting COEWR787 (Reply 6):
Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
has any one of you been on one?

Yes, I have been on it (EWR - SIN - EWR) and am going to be on it again in March. The seat layout is comfortable in Exec Economy. Since I have never found noise to be a problem either in the 340 or in the 777 I guess I cannot comment on the noise issue. I sleep like a baby in either of those without the aid of any noise canceling gizmo.

However, I would readily admit that part of the attraaction of the flight is the Exec Economy. In regular Economy this would be a considerably less pleasant flight and I would probably opt for the one stopper if there were no Exec Economy.

I've been a passenger in executive economy on both routes (departing twice from LAX, and once from EWR). I would echo COEWR787's comments about cabin comfort. The excellent AVOD also helps to make the long flight-times bearable, although I rely mostly on my own iPOD.

My anecdotal experience on six flights flown is that the executive economy cabin has never been more than 50% full (including the inaugural SIN-EWR flight), which has also greatly enhanced my personal experience.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
COEWR787
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:35 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:49 am

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 8):
My anecdotal experience on six flights flown is that the executive economy cabin has never been more than 50% full (including the inaugural SIN-EWR flight), which has also greatly enhanced my personal experience.

Seems to vary a lot on a few it was as low as 50% full, but on several others it was 90% plus full. The flight I am scheduled to take in March already appears to be over 60% full. I was lucky to get the last seat in the Exec Economy forward cabin, and the rear was more than 50% full.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:14 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
has any one of you been on one?

I have in Raffles Class. Here are the two trip reports for EWR-SIN and SIN-EWR:
United/Singapore ORD-EWR-SIN In Raffles Class (by RoseFlyer Oct 17 2005 in Trip Reports)
SQ/UA SIN-EWR-ORD Raffles Class (stranded In EWR) (by RoseFlyer Oct 24 2005 in Trip Reports)

Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
Is the cabin layout very comfortable? From what I've read here, it seems that folks are enjoying SQ's A345s and their quietness (so that you can sleep without having to buy noise cancellation headphones)

The cabin layout is quite comfortable. There are a full 10 rows of Raffles Class, which are very nice. There is a lot of space up front in the two cabins. It is amazing how much space there is and how nice it is to walk around the large cabin. Also a lot of people congregate in the galley area to chat during the flight.

The plane is adequately quiet. The A345 is one of the quietest planes in the sky, which is nice. Also if you are in Raffles Class, you are given noise cancelling headphones to use. Although I chose to sleep with earplugs.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 3):
Actually, they'd like a F cabin! The demand for "enhanced" Raffles class has been beyond their expectations.

Yes Please! This route totally warrents a first class cabin. As good as the Spacebed in Raffles Class is, there are people that want a true first class experience with fully flat seats, more storage space and improved meal service.

And one more thing. The capacity of the A345 that SQ is operating on these routes is very low. There are about the same number of seats that you would typically find on a 757 (less than 200), so it doesn't surprise me that they can fill up a single A345. The 772LR would be a good plane as it can carry more payload on the route which would translate into more passengers.

[Edited 2006-01-11 18:28:32]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
gkpetery
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:35 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting COEWR787 (Reply 6):
It seems to me that SQ would most likely go with 777LR on these routes to be able to provide First Class service in addition to Raffles and Exed Economy and perhaps also be able to carry some revenue cargo.

Why can't a A345 not have a first class cabin? Space? It's a big plane.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:24 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
To me it seems logical that if people have responded to its existing service on their A345s and have positive results, especially with their J class high demand, why would SQ exchange its A345s for B777LRs?

Simple, the option of F class and more cargo capability.

Quoting Atnight (Reply 4):
SQ is also getting the A380, and that's commodity too between the airbuses

...very little.

Quoting Gkpetery (Reply 11):
Why can't a A345 not have a first class cabin? Space? It's a big plane.

Nope, capability....or the lack thereof.

The A345 doesnt have the ability to carry heavy F-seats--- plus Raffles, plus significant amount of coach plus cargo on the New York route... while the 772LR could.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
atnight
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:06 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:58 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 12):
The A345 doesnt have the ability to carry heavy F-seats--- plus Raffles, plus significant amount of coach plus cargo on the New York route... while the 772LR could.

Seems that folks here say the A345 can't handle F class seats if they put the Raffles on..... however, how can Emirates put the "most amazing" F cabin (suites) in the sky on the A345s, plus Business and Y?? Could you explain the difference??? As far as I know, the A345s of EK have the greatest cabin, something that SQ is still unable to match....

If the A345 can't handle a 3-type config, then SQ has no other choice but to change their planes to B777LRs, yet somehow I'm reluctant to believe that Airbus made thier plane unable to be fitted with a 3 cabin layout.... Any data or verified information about it would be greatly appreciated....
B707 B727 B733/5/7/8/9 B742/4 B752/3 B763/4 B772 A310 A318/319/320 A332 A343 MD80 DC9/10 CRJ200 ERJ145 ERJ-170 Be1900 Da
 
iowa744fan
Posts: 906
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:31 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:22 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 13):
Seems that folks here say the A345 can't handle F class seats if they put the Raffles on..... however, how can Emirates put the "most amazing" F cabin (suites) in the sky on the A345s, plus Business and Y?? Could you explain the difference??? As far as I know, the A345s of EK have the greatest cabin, something that SQ is still unable to match....

If the A345 can't handle a 3-type config, then SQ has no other choice but to change their planes to B777LRs, yet somehow I'm reluctant to believe that Airbus made thier plane unable to be fitted with a 3 cabin layout.... Any data or verified information about it would be greatly appreciated....

Atnight,

The problem isn't an issue of whether or not an A345 could get off the ground with F class seats or whether the floor could support it. That is not that issue here. If SQ fitted their A345s in a standard 3 class layout of 250-300 seats, it could easily get off the ground. The problem is that the fuel required for the SQ flights is much higher and represents a larger portion of the max. take off weight of the A345.

Take a look at EK's longest A345 flights. I think presently that they are JFKDXB and DXBSYD. Here are the planned flight times for each:

JFKDXB: 12:40
DXBJFK: 14:10
DXBSYD: 13:55
SYDDXB: 14:45

If you compare this to SQ's ultra longhauls:

LAXSIN: 18:20
SINLAX: 15:25
EWRSIN: 18:35
SINEWR: 18:10

As you can see, the SQ flights are around 3-4 hours longer than the longest EK flights. Thus, they require a bit more fuel than the EK flights require. This additional weight from this fuel is what prevents SQ from operating an F class cabin, as it takes up a larger portion of the MTOW of the A345. They technicaly could take out quite a bit of Y and put in F class seats, but I doubt that the trade-off would be beneficial.

The benefit to SQ of the 772LR is that the payload capacity is higher than that of the A345. Thus, it is able to take additional weight on these flights, which can be used to provide an F class cabin.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 7:37 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 13):
If the A345 can't handle a 3-type config, then SQ has no other choice but to change their planes to B777LRs, yet somehow I'm reluctant to believe that Airbus made thier plane unable to be fitted with a 3 cabin layout.... Any data or verified information about it would be greatly appreciated....

The problem isn't about the 345 being able to handle a 3 class configuration, it's about finding the optimum configuration for SQ. If they wanted to add a F class, in reality, they'd have to rip out several rows in Y and move everything back. That would reduce the overall capacity. It's already small enough.

With the 777, a F cabin can be added and the aircraft can still have a decent pax load. Don't look for them to go to a 2-4-2 seating on the 772LR, but it will be kept just like it is on the 345.

I have "deadheaded" on the SIN-EWR section several times. More often than not in "enhanced Y" not the worst seats, but not as good as the "enhanced Rafles". But, everytime I've done the flight the aircraft was well over 90% full. IIRC, Tue and Wed are the slowest days with the weekend days having the highest LF in both directions.
Fly fast, live slow
 
singaporegirl
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2000 5:49 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:00 am

people always mentioned the lack of f class cabin on our a345s. for me, aside for the a345s, sometimes i also wish they company would put f class cabin on our long haul b772ers as well. some pax ask why we don't offer f class products on our a345s nor the b772ers.
Ladies & Gentlemen, we will now demonstrate the use of the safety equipment on this aircraft...
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:26 am

Quoting Gkpetery (Reply 11):
Why can't a A345 not have a first class cabin? Space? It's a big plane.

Weight, not space. The A340-500 is already a very heavy plane for its size.
 
atnight
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:06 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:29 am

Quoting Iowa744Fan (Reply 14):
The problem is that the fuel required for the SQ flights is much higher and represents a larger portion of the max. take off weight of the A345.



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 15):
The problem isn't about the 345 being able to handle a 3 class configuration, it's about finding the optimum configuration for SQ. If they wanted to add a F class, in reality, they'd have to rip out several rows in Y and move everything back. That would reduce the overall capacity. It's already small enough.

Thank you guys for explaining this out.... I guess I wasn't taking that into consideration... I was under the impression that the A345 was designed as an ULR plane, rather than as an optional feature for the aircraft, as I have come to understand, thus the difference between EK and SQ.... I guess that if indeed SQ needs the F cabin for their UL flights, they really have no choice but to buy 777LR and have a single type across their entire fleet, with the A380 as the oddball, since the 777LR would be the only aircraft to be able to have such layout (3 class) and fly so long.... I guess airbus didn't come with a product that can really compete in the UL category.....

Speaking of ULR, which airlines have ULR planes??? Which ones have ordered them? If EK's A345s aren't exactly ULR, and SQ and TG so far the only ones using them for extreme long flights, I don't see anyone (besides QF, eventually SYD-LHR) really needing these planes... any idea who else needs them?
B707 B727 B733/5/7/8/9 B742/4 B752/3 B763/4 B772 A310 A318/319/320 A332 A343 MD80 DC9/10 CRJ200 ERJ145 ERJ-170 Be1900 Da
 
bjornstrom
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:54 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:47 am

I did SQ20 SIN-LAX last week (click for pictures) and those 14:40 hours was nothing - slept for 8.5 hours in Raffles Class. Very quiet plane and the cabin was very nice with the small amount of seats.

All non-stop flights has been full booked for weeks over the christmas season and I would not be surprised if SQ will convert it to two daily flights using 772LR.

As a note: I travel a lot but the jetlag after SIN-LAX was the worst I ever experienced. I had to work at CES in LAS and felt totally messed up for 3-4 days actually.
Eurobonus Gold | BMI Gold | http://my.flightmemory.com/bjornstrom/
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:38 am

Quoting Iowa744Fan (Reply 14):
That is not that issue here. If SQ fitted their A345s in a standard 3 class layout of 250-300 seats, it could easily get off the ground.

Agreed; it's the splashing into the ocean part that makes the flights highly uneconomical  Smile  Smile

Steve
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 690
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:59 am

In order for SQ to increase capacity and add a F class product on their 772LR, they have to put their Y class seating in 2-4-2 configuration (or even 3-3-3 with 35-36 inches between them). I'm not sure how many more pax a 772LR would be able to carry if SQ adds F products on this route.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6936
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:06 am

I've heard this explanation many times but I'm still not convinced. SQ is currently removing F class from even the 777's and it's not like they can't handle it. The fact that some passengers say they wish there was a F class doesn't mean there is enough demand for it to make it viable. these days F class doesn't make money anymore. It's just the prestige of having it more than anything else. Many airlines are doing away with it and moving to a 2 class configuration. SQ's Rafles class is still way better than anyone else's first class on the EWR-SIN and LAX-SIN routes. I suspect the real truth is somewhere in the middle between aircraft capability and passenger demand.
 
iowa744fan
Posts: 906
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:31 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:07 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 18):
Thank you guys for explaining this out....

You are welcome.

Also, airlines that I am aware of with ULR aircraft:

A345:
SQ
EK
AC
TG

772LR (none delivered yet - but orders from):
PK
AI
EK (pax and F)
BR (or did they convert their 772LRs to 773ERs?)
AC (pax and F)

Did AF order any 772LRFs? For some reason I remember reading that they were considering it, but I don't recall if they announced anything.

Any others that I am forgetting?

Avion Group (not sure of their code - also all freighters)
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 690
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:21 am

Quoting Iowa744fan (Reply 23):
Did AF order any 772LRFs? For some reason I remember reading that they were considering it, but I don't recall if they announced anything.

IIRC, they were the launching customer for 772LRF
 
singaporegirl
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2000 5:49 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:28 am

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 22):
SQ is currently removing F class from even the 777's and it's not like they can't handle it.

none of our long haul 772ers are equipped with the skysuites (f class seats). only our regional 777s have first class cabins (but they're not skysuites). you can only find our skysuites onboard the 744s.
Ladies & Gentlemen, we will now demonstrate the use of the safety equipment on this aircraft...
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:56 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 18):

Speaking of ULR, which airlines have ULR planes???

here are a few...

PK, AC, AI, EK, QR, BR...and AF have purchased the freighter version of it....look for other carriers to order (such as SQ) if the plane does as expected


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Jacobin777
MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Jacobin777

"Up the Irons!"
 
abrelosojos
Posts: 4050
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:48 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 5:53 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 13):
Seems that folks here say the A345 can't handle F class seats if they put the Raffles on..... however, how can Emirates put the "most amazing" F cabin (suites) in the sky on the A345s, plus Business and Y?? Could you explain the difference??? As far as I know, the A345s of EK have the greatest cabin, something that SQ is still unable to match....

= Are you serious  Smile? I prefer SQ's F to EK's F ... and yes, I have flown both several times.

-A.
Live, and let live.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:22 am

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 22):
I've heard this explanation many times but I'm still not convinced. SQ is currently removing F class from even the 777's and it's not like they can't handle it. The fact that some passengers say they wish there was a F class doesn't mean there is enough demand for it to make it viable. these days F class doesn't make money anymore. It's just the prestige of having it more than anything else.

I don't agree with that statement. On many routes first class does not make money, which is why many airlines have removed it. But there are still some high yielding routes where businesses will pay for passengers to fly in first class. EWR-SIN and LAX-SIN have a lot of business travellers. There are many American companies that have bases, plants or some ties with Singapore. There are some companies that allowpeople to travel in first class if a flight is at least a certain length. This would certainly be the case.

Raffles Class is good, but if a company wants to send someone to Singapore and have them not need two days to recover from the trip upon arrival, then First Class is important.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 22):
SQ's Rafles class is still way better than anyone else's first class on the EWR-SIN and LAX-SIN routes.

No it is not if you include the onestop alternatives. SQ's Raffles Class may be the best flying the route nonstop, but SQ has to battle against many other carriers. United First Class (even though many people complain about UA) is better than Raffles Class. On the LAX-SIN route, SQ has to compete against its own first class, and other airlines like Cathay Pacific, United, JAL, among others with one stop. The fact that the flight is nonstop is appealing, but a first class on a nonstop flight would probably be ideal. On the NYC-SIN sector, SQ competes against United, Lufthansa and British Airways. All of those airlines have real first class products that have fully flat seats.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
atnight
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:06 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:07 am

Quoting Iowa744fan (Reply 23):
Also, airlines that I am aware of with ULR aircraft:

A345:
SQ
EK
AC
TG

I'm sorry to bring this point, but from the information you posted earlier, EK isn't using the A345 as a ULR aircraft, but as a "standard" A345... That's how EK can have a 3 class layout instead of 2 like SQ... How about AC? are their aircraft flying a route long enough to use the A345 in a ULR config? From what I know, the only airlines who use the A345 as ULR, are SQ and TG (that's why you posted SQ can't handle the 3 class layout)...

About the airlines that have ordered the B777LR, PK, AI, EK, BR and AC, why exactly did AC and EK ordered the aircraft if right now they don't seem to have any need routes that can use the A345 capability as it is? Which city pairs could each of these airlines realistically put the T7LR on? I would like to know what information you guys have, because as of this moment, none seem to have the need of such airplane...
B707 B727 B733/5/7/8/9 B742/4 B752/3 B763/4 B772 A310 A318/319/320 A332 A343 MD80 DC9/10 CRJ200 ERJ145 ERJ-170 Be1900 Da
 
SFORunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:23 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:18 am

Quoting Bjornstrom (Reply 19):
I had to work at CES in LAS and felt totally messed up for 3-4 days actually.

Are you sure it was the jet lag and not something else?
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:20 am

Quoting Atnight (Reply 29):
Which city pairs could each of these airlines realistically put the T7LR on? I would like to know what information you guys have, because as of this moment, none seem to have the need of such airplane...

realistically speaking, EK will be able to serve nonstop basically everypart of the world they need to...including places such as EZE, SFO, LAX....this with a much better pax and payload than their A345's...

AC will be able to do the same thing (ie.fly to most places in the world nonstop)...but YYZ-SYD would be a stretch economically (though it would be able to do it physically as its some 800nm miles shorter than SYD-LHR, which is possible, though not economically viable with the 777-200LR)....also, the fuel effiency is better on the 777's than the A340's
"Up the Irons!"
 
bjornstrom
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:54 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:11 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 28):
United First Class (even though many people complain about UA) is better than Raffles Class.

This is not my view at all - I am flying United F next week and found out that they are using SpaceBeds just like Raffles Class. Service on UA will never match SQ even remotely and the Krisworld IFE is unmatched.

Quoting SFORunner (Reply 30):
Are you sure it was the jet lag and not something else?

Haha, good question  Smile I believe that I turned the clock 16 hours instead of 8 hours which kept me awake at night and I felt totally ruined during the afternoon.
Eurobonus Gold | BMI Gold | http://my.flightmemory.com/bjornstrom/
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:19 am

Quoting Bjornstrom (Reply 32):
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 28):
United First Class (even though many people complain about UA) is better than Raffles Class.

This is not my view at all - I am flying United F next week and found out that they are using SpaceBeds just like Raffles Class. Service on UA will never match SQ even remotely and the Krisworld IFE is unmatched.

What? United uses the Spacebed for First Class on their Premium Service 757s between JFK and LAX/SFO.

The real United First Class on internationally equipped planes is far nicer. It has fully flat seats and ample storage space. Also the food quality is higher as it is a first class meal and there are more flight attendants per passenger. The Raffles Class Spacebeds are nice, but they are still an angled seat and lack storage. The one thing that makes Raffles Class better is the AVOD IFE system. United First only has video cassettes that you can choose, so it is sort of on demand, but not like the SQ system. Also the UA PTV is a little on the small side.

United First

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui



Singapore Business

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tango3
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rhys Dudley - TeamJetspotter

If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Sun Jan 15, 2006 11:42 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 33):
The one thing that makes Raffles Class better is the AVOD IFE system.

The other things that are better about SQ Raffles class than UA international F class are the service, the amenity kits, cleanliness, curtains between cabins, and the food. The only thing better about UA F than SQ C is the seat.

Twice in the last week I've given up an F seat on UA for a seat in Raffles class on SQ. The last time I took UA F over SQ C, I kicked myself for weeks for being such an idiot.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:22 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 34):
the amenity kits

What amenity kits? SQ doesn't give out amenity kits in Raffles Class. Items are available in the lavatory or upon request. United First still offers full amenity kits.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 34):
cleanliness, curtains between cabins

I'll give you those two.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 34):
the food

That depends. I think both can serve good food, but I personally think that meals in Raffles Class take too long to be served.

The biggest thing that United First has going for it is that it has a fully flat seat and you can eat meals when you want. The extra space and privacy is an added bonus.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
MarshalN
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:39 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:07 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 33):
Also the food quality is higher as it is a first class meal and there are more flight attendants per passenger.

The number of flight attendants per pax makes no difference whatsoever if the FAs in question aren't good, and UA FAs are generally, well....

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 35):
What amenity kits? SQ doesn't give out amenity kits in Raffles Class. Items are available in the lavatory or upon request. United First still offers full amenity kits.

I haven't flown SQ for a while now, but this surprises me. You sure they didn't just miss you?
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:11 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 35):
I think both can serve good food, but I personally think that meals in Raffles Class take too long to be served.

Last week I told an SQ stewardess when I boarded that I planned to sleep during the flight so I wouldn't be having a meal. She offered to serve me the meal during boarding and did exactly that. They served all the courses and cleared dessert as we were taxiing. I've never, ever had a problem eating on SQ exactly when I wanted to. UA flighties have told me: "We'll serve the meal when we're ready." SQ also clear the meal within a few minutes (at the most) of the passenger finishing. UA are content to leave it there for 20 to 30 minutes. I once saw a banana peel remain on the aisle-side armrest in UA international F for 2 hours 40 minutes. I cannot imagine one staying 2 minutes 40 seconds in SQ C class.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 35):
The biggest thing that United First has going for it is that it has a fully flat seat and you can eat meals when you want.

I concede the seat. UA's F meals are not bad as airline food goes, but they don't come close to SQ's Book the Cook service.

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 36):

The number of flight attendants per pax makes no difference whatsoever if the FAs in question aren't good, and UA FAs are generally, well....

... sitting on the jumpseat reading People magazine.
 
bjornstrom
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:54 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Mon Jan 16, 2006 2:11 am

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 36):
I haven't flown SQ for a while now, but this surprises me. You sure they didn't just miss you?

SQ does not offer amenity kits in Raffles Class anymore. You get a couple of socks though  Smile

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 33):
What? United uses the Spacebed for First Class on their Premium Service 757s between JFK and LAX/SFO.

Ah, thats the one im taking: LAX-JFK on their p.s. service.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 33):
The real United First Class on internationally equipped planes is far nicer. It has fully flat seats and ample storage space.

Ok - on what routes / aircraft does United offer this service - not domestic im sure.
Eurobonus Gold | BMI Gold | http://my.flightmemory.com/bjornstrom/
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:14 am

Quoting Bjornstrom (Reply 38):
Ok - on what routes / aircraft does United offer this service - not domestic im sure.

United offers a fully flat first class suite on all 747 flights and on all international 777 flights. There is a small subfleet of 777s in a high density configuration for operations to Hawaii.

There are some domestic routes that see 777s and 747s. It varies widely, but there is a chance to get a 777 or 747. Trunk routes between UA hubs like SFO-ORD, SFO-DEN, SFO-IAD, LAX-DEN, LAX-ORD, LAX-IAD, ORD-DEN, SEA-DEN, SEA-ORD, DEN-IAD, sometimes see flights with international equipment. It all depends on the current schedule.

The Premium Service flights between LAX/SFO-JFK have a subfleet of 757s configured with the standard international business class (with the exception of leather seat covers and no PTVs, but rather portable entertainment units) and the Singapore Airlines Spacebeds in first class (but with leather seat covers again and no PTV).
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
Pieinthesky
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:30 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Mon Jan 16, 2006 11:31 pm

I would also go for SQ in Raffles before UA in F any day of the week. The seat may be 'flat' but the rest of their long haul product is awful, topped off by the doddering old Gum-Chewing-Grannies.
 
asianguy767
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 11:17 pm

RE: SQ SIN-EWR/LAX

Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:12 am

A SQ A345 pilot I spoke to tells me that SQ will sell and lease back its A345 to Airbus. But lease back 10 instead of the current 5. Duration of lease wasn't disclosed. While SQ may opt for the B777LR in the long run I think for now they may want to stick with the A345 so that they can start a 2nd JFK flight and SFO ASAP. I understand one of the extra 5 A345 may be an AC machine. We'll know more when an announcement is made at the Asian aerospace in Singapore next month.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A330freak, alggag, asqx, Boeing778X, cesar666cu, ChrisFallon77, CONTACREW, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], hkcanadaexpat, hOMSaR, IslandRob, Kedham, laxman, Seabear, seemyseems and 167 guests