ssides
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 12:57 am

SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:39 am

I'm sure they have a good reason for this, but I was curious as to why SQ operates their daily New York-Singapore flight from EWR, but their daily New York-Frankfurt-Singapore route from JFK? Are their runway issues affecting the performance of the A345, or just a better market for SQ's nonstop out of EWR?

Just curious -- thanks.
"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
 
AlitaliaMD11
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:19 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:42 am

Singapore used to do EWR-AMS-SIN like they do JFK-FRA-SIN before the A340-500. I highly doubt that there are runway issues considering Emirates and Thai both fly the A340-500 into JFK and 31L is the longest commercial runway in the U.S. I mean the concorde used it!

I am guessing that Singapore thought that EWR-SIN was a more profitable route then JFK-SIN and maybe EWR-AMS-SIN wasn't doing as well as JFK-FRA-SIN?
No Vueling No Party
 
ssides
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 12:57 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:50 am

Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 1):
31L is the longest commercial runway in the U.S.

Thanks for the info, but 31L is 14,572 ft.

34L at DEN is 16,000 ft.

Of course, I know now that 31L at JFK is plenty long for the A345. I'm assuming that the NYC O&D market is more than sufficient to support two stations.
"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
 
Ex_SQer
Posts: 1351
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 5:43 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:55 am

It's historical. Up till 1997, SQ flew 3/wk SIN-AMS-JFK, and 4/wk SIN-FRA-JFK. When the Singapore-Germay bilateral was revised, SQ could operate daily between FRA and JFK. But, what to do with the AMS frequencies? Because of time zones and optimal (early morning) arrival times into SIN, the NYC-SIN services had to depart around 10pm, and that would mean two flights departing JFK-Europe-SIN at roughly the same time. The other options were (1) cancel the AMS service or (2) route it elsewhere. The decision was made to route it to EWR. When the 345 nonstop service came into play and the AMS service was canceled, they decided to keep it at EWR.
 
haggis79
Posts: 535
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:05 pm

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:57 am

actually, I think most larger European carriers serve JFK and EWR... (LH, AF, KL do and probably a lot more)

ok, SIA is not an European carrier, but I can't see any reason why they shoudn't...
300 310 319/20/21 332/3 343 AT4/7 143 B19 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 742/4 752/3 763/4 77E/W CR2/7/9 D95 E45/70 F50 F70 100 M11 M90
 
AlitaliaMD11
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:19 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:59 am

Quoting Ssides (Reply 2):
Thanks for the info, but 31L is 14,572 ft.

I stand corrected. I remember hearing that it was and maybe at the time it was.
No Vueling No Party
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:04 am

Supposedly EWR-AMS-SIN was less profitable than JFK-FRA-SIN so they chose to start the NYC-SIN nonstop from EWR...Although I'm sure there were other considerations as well.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:35 am

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 6):
Supposedly EWR-AMS-SIN was less profitable than JFK-FRA-SIN so they chose to start the NYC-SIN nonstop from EWR...Although I'm sure there were other considerations as well.

This is the key issue......since EWR-AMS-SIN was not a daily service, SQ could only keep the EWR-AMS leg filled by offering very low fares on this routes (in the Netherlands, there were amazingly cheap fares offered through travel agents, at time as low as Euro 199.00 return before taxes). It was really quite interesting....SQ offered very good service, the only 744 on the route, flights that operated at great times for biz travel (early morning departure out of AMS into EWR before lunch....and a late evening departure out of EWR allowing a full day of business with a noon arrival at AMS) but SQ was literally giving the seats away on the segment.

When SQ had to make decisions regarding the launch of the NYC-SIN nonstop, the nonstop flight went to Newark for two reasons:

1. SQ was very happy to be done with the EWR-AMS service but wanted to keep a flight out of EWR to maintain the following that SQ had developed with the financial crowd in NYC (that actually find EWR more convenient that JFK).

2. SQ developed a very nice and very profitable niche with the JFK-FRA-SIN route.....SQ had little problem keeping the JFK-FRA segment filled with a good mix of FRA and SIN bound pax paying good prices, thus SQ really did not want to give up this lucrative niche.

Thus the 744 onestop service to SIN remained at JFK, and the new A345 nonstop service to SIN operates out of EWR.
 
BDL2DCA
Posts: 309
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:46 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:50 am

Don't forget the two aircraft also offer different classes.

JFK: C, J and Y

EWR: J and Y+

Could be that there was enough J demand out of EWR to warrant the service, but not enough C demand?
146,319,320,321,333,343,722,732,733,734,735,73G,738,744,752,762,763,772,ARJ,BE1,CRJ,D9S,D10,DH8,ERJ,E70,F100,S80
 
Qantas744er
Posts: 1158
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:36 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 5:00 am

Quoting BDL2DCA (Reply 8):
Could be that there was enough J demand out of EWR to warrant the service, but not enough C demand?

Not quite, and this is what pissed off SQ, because the a345 could not carry promised loads meaning that they could not also insall First meaning that only Business and Economy were left, wich forced SQ to increase the fares in C and Y

Cheers Leo
You live and you die, by the FMA
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 5:17 am

One nice thing about EWR-SIN is that it allows some more connections. JFK is highly O/D and SQ doesn't really have a partner to feed that flight. At EWR people can connect a bit more. I flew ORD-EWR-SIN and there were three people connecting on to the Singapore Airlines flight. I think it is very nice that they routed it through EWR since UA only serves JFK from LAX, SFO, LHR and NRT. However I think this route is still primarily O/D, but I still liked going SQ with its superior business class to UA which has one stop service to SIN via HKG.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15326
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:01 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 7):
2. SQ developed a very nice and very profitable niche with the JFK-FRA-SIN route.....SQ had little problem keeping the JFK-FRA segment filled with a good mix of FRA and SIN bound pax paying good prices, thus SQ really did not want to give up this lucrative niche.

Anyone know what percentage of the passengers that board in JFK actually fly through to SIN? Outside of the F cabin, I would imagine it's fairly low when there is a nonstop across the rivers. The JFK/FRA segment is never very full and I would think that most of the demand is local only on both JFK/FRA and FRA/SIN rather than JFK/SIN.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:08 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
The JFK/FRA segment is never very full and I would think that most of the demand is local only on both JFK/FRA and FRA/SIN rather than JFK/SIN.

You raise interesting questions......your remark that the JFK-FRA is not very full is interesting, I was under the impression that SQ did well with the JFK-FRA segment and the flight benefitted from STAR alliance support.

I find it so interesting that we sometimes here such diverse things about specific routes and airlines.
 
star_world
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2001 7:52 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:12 am

Quoting BDL2DCA (Reply 8):
Don't forget the two aircraft also offer different classes.

JFK: C, J and Y

EWR: J and Y+

Could be that there was enough J demand out of EWR to warrant the service, but not enough C demand?

Actually, this is a bit misleading - JFK offers First (F), Business (C / J) and Economy (Y), while EWR offers business and economy+. C & J are used pretty much interchangeably to represent business class.

The reason there is no F on the A345 isn't because of a lack of demand out of EWR, that's just how SQ configured their A345s in general.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:21 am

Quoting Star_world (Reply 13):
The reason there is no F on the A345 isn't because of a lack of demand out of EWR, that's just how SQ configured their A345s in general.

As stated, that probably had more to do with performance limitations on the A345 since that is an extremely long route. The plane has two separate galleys for the forward and rear Raffles Class cabin. Those four front rows of Raffles really should be First if only the first class seats weren't so heavy. From taking that flight, I met with a number of people that would have preferred and have been willing to pay for a fully flat bed on the 18 hour journey (myself included even though I was pretty comfortabe in J)
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
madviking
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 11:37 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:24 am

Quoting BDL2DCA (Reply 8):
Don't forget the two aircraft also offer different classes.

JFK: C, J and Y

EWR: J and Y+

That should change it they opt to put the 777LR on this route (once they get some).
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:29 am

Quoting Star_world (Reply 13):
that's just how SQ configured their A345s in general.

To be complete.....SQ really did not have much of a choice with the A345 configuration......F was eliminated because the F suites are quite heavy and if the A345s were equipped with F seats and all of the stuff that must be onboard to provide full F class services, the A345 would struggle with operating the very long SIN-LAX and SIN-EWR routes......as SQ's number one priority and sole reason for purchasing the ULR aircraft was to operate out of SIN to NYC and LA nonstop, SQ made the most logical compromise, eliminate F on these routes and go with a low density J and Y+ layout.

The compromise of not being able to offer F on the ULH flights is one key reason why many expect that, at some point, SQ will move along from the A345 and place an order for 772LRs.....we dont know if and when this will happen, the bigger issue is whether ULH flights are profit centers?
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:35 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 16):
.as SQ's number one priority and sole reason for purchasing the ULR aircraft was to operate out of SIN to NYC and LA nonstop, SQ made the most logical compromise, eliminate F on these routes and go with a low density J and Y+ layout.

60 seats in J is a huge number. More than half the plane is Raffles Class. It is made up of two cabins. With a capacity similar to that of a normal two class 757, the yields must be pretty high in order for these routes to work.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:41 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 17):
the yields must be pretty high in order for these routes to work.

Thats the BIG question.....are the ULH routes profitable? Only the financial people at SQ know for sure, although there are rumors that the ULH business is actually costing money. And, some have suggested that if the ULH flights were making money, SQ would have already placed an order for 772LRs to upgrade these flights (and offer F class). Its unclear what is fact and what is just chat....but being that SQ only took delivery of five A345s (they never took up their options for the second five airplanes) and has yet to place a 772LR order leads me to believe that some of these rumors are very true.
 
LH459
Posts: 793
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:41 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sat Jul 22, 2006 6:58 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
Anyone know what percentage of the passengers that board in JFK actually fly through to SIN?

SQ offers very competitive fares to Asia which are only valid on the JFK flight. From my experience, this flight sells out regularly, but unfortunately there's no way to determine what the breakdown is.
"I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is temporary; the evil it does is permanent" - Ghandi
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:37 am

Quoting Ex_SQer (Reply 3):
SQ flew 3/wk SIN-AMS-JFK, and 4/wk SIN-FRA-JFK

Are we forgetting the ex JFK-BRU-SIN with the 747-300?  wink 

Other SQ route to the U.S. have included:

SFO-HNL-SIN
747-300/747-200

LAX-HNL-SIN
747-300/747-200

LAS-HKG-SIN
777-200

ORD-AMS-SIN
777-200
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:58 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 20):
Are we forgetting the ex JFK-BRU-SIN with the 747-300?

I flew JFK-BRU-JFK with SQ back in the early 1990s.......the BRU stopover was dumped in favor of FRA once SQ could get authority to carry passengers between JFK and FRA. Was that flight with a 743......my memory is that it was a 744 from the outset?
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:03 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 21):

I flew JFK-BRU-JFK with SQ back in the early 1990s.......the BRU stopover was dumped in favor of FRA once SQ could get authority to carry passengers between JFK and FRA. Was that flight with a 743......my memory is that it was a 744 from the outset?

SQ started the route in 1986? with the 747-300..
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:10 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 22):
SQ started the route in 1986? with the 747-300..

I am thinking later, around 1991 or 1992.......going on memory so a SQ expert is going to have to help out. If the route did commence in 1986, it was with the 743 since the 744 was not yet in service (duh!), but I think that you are a bit early with SQ starting service to JFK.
 
abrelosojos
Posts: 4050
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:48 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:20 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 22):
SQ started the route in 1986? with the 747-300..

= SQ had no NYC presence in 1986.

-A.
Live, and let live.
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:08 am

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 24):
= SQ had no NYC presence in 1986.

Lets try 1994 with the 747-400...  wink 
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:22 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 25):
Lets try 1994 with the 747-400...

Make in 1992 in a 744 and you have a deal....I only know this because I flew the route with SQ in 1992 when I first starting spending a lot of time in Belgium and I was very pleased that SQ had launched the route.

Well, SQ is gone and I am still in Belgium, atleast there is CO!
 
Cory6188
Posts: 2612
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:29 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:38 pm

My dad is a dentist, and one of his patients is a ticket agent for SQ at EWR. He was talking with her about her job, and she said that the EWR-SIN flight has done rather well since its inception, and J is sold out every day, without a doubt, no questions asked. She explained that often times, if you try to book less than a week in advance, you can't even get a seat in Raffles no matter how much you pay (which means major bucks for SQ). Now, granted, take this with a grain of salt, but her impressions seemed to be overwhelmingly positive.
 
OB1783P
Posts: 310
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 9:49 pm

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:32 pm

In any case, and that goes for SQ, AI, AF and everyone else, the two airports are not interchangeable for travelers from outside the city: coming from Central Pennsylvania, EWR is an option, but JFK is just too brutal a drive for me (especially on the way back, after a long flight). If I lived in Connecticut or something, it would be the reverse I suppose.
I've flown thousands of miles and I can tell you it's a lot safer than crossing the street!
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:07 pm

Quoting Haggis79 (Reply 4):
actually, I think most larger European carriers serve JFK and EWR... (LH, AF, KL do and probably a lot more)

The following European airlines do:

BA
VS
AF
LX (EWR is operated by Privitair)
LH
AZ
LO
OK
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
sq452
Posts: 994
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:49 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:12 am

JFK also offers a First Class product, where as EWR doesn't, and believe it or not it matters to some people who are in love with F (like my dad).

Im really surprised TG didn't pick EWR for their non stop to BKK for the connection purposes. However, as B6 continues to grow at JFK, it does help feed into the int'l airlines  bigthumbsup 

EWR makes a ton of sense for SQ because of the connections with CO and CO Express (although the arrival time of the SQ flight and customs processing gives you a time crunch for getting flights to some markets as the last flight has already departed in a lot of cases).

SQ also has an agreement with CO as well as a number of other airlines. When I called SQ and booked my flight, they asked where I was coming from and I was able to get to EWR to and from DCA without paying any additional money. The agent told me that SQ and CO have an agreement which allows that.

Both times I have done trips on SQ out of EWR it was always packed, and a lot of the people on my flight connected/came from other flights.
SIN > CVG > BOS
 
jetdeltamsy
Posts: 2688
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 11:51 am

RE: SQ - Why Split Operations At EWR/JFK?

Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:42 pm

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 9):
Quoting BDL2DCA (Reply 8):
Could be that there was enough J demand out of EWR to warrant the service, but not enough C demand?

Not quite, and this is what pissed off SQ,

How would you know this? Pissed of who at SQ?
Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.