moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 2:46 am

I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13700
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:56 am

moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.


Tell us the source of these “facts” !!!
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
airbazar
Posts: 9505
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 2:27 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
airbazar wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Which, has nothing to do with the original point I was making. So why you've gone off on that tangent, is anyone's guess.

This entire thread is about where SQ will deploy their 7 A359ULR's and what potential 3rd route they could introduce. Nothing more, nothing less. All of my comments have been within that context. If anyone took it out of context and went on a tangent it was you.

Except that one look at Reply#54 tells a different story, particularly seeing as I wasn't the one to initially reply to you; so that deflection makes even less sense than anything else you've posted.

Anyway, no one's saying they can't fill three nonstops, they obviously can. And while some of that will be transit to India, ASEAN countries, etc; much of it will be O&D. For simple logistical reasons though, they'll never compete on equal footing with other area hubs for transit traffic originating in this side of the world and going to that. Too many factors not in their favor.

Nope. I don't see anything in that reply that deviates from the main topic which is the ability for SQ to gather enough demand for 3 routes to the U.S. out a huge catchment area.
And the silly thing about this argument is that you and me both agree 100%. That last sentence is basically what I've been arguing. LOL
SQ wants to fly non-stop to the US not only for the obvious O&D demand but connections for their FF base. SQ has FF's all over Southeast Asia, especially Malaysia and Indonesia. If you're an SQ FF, in KUL, or CGH, or anywhere within a 90min range of SIN, right now your choices are: at least a 2-stop itinerary or a trip with another airline.

moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.

UA blocks seats on SFO-SIN so I would be shocked if they don't to it on LAX-SIN too which is a longer route.

KarelXWB wrote:
The A340-500 had 64 business class and 117 premium economy class seats between 2004 and 2008. It was changed to all business class later on. According to SQ at that time "there was no demand". It will be interesting to know why they believe there will be demand anno 2018. I rather suspect it was a poor excuse and SQ changed to all business class because premium economy revenue could not cover the high trip cost of the A340.

What I remember was that there wasn't enough demand for Y+ at their price point.
Premium economy was non-existent at SQ and still very new world wide. Most TPAC airlines and especially SQ had very good economy class products and service. Economy passengers were not willing to pay the difference for Y+ vs. the multitude of cheaper 1-stop options. Today however there is a clear difference between basic economy and premium economy and I think the flying public understand that difference much better and will be more willing to pay the difference. Another important factor is that with the A359 being far more economical to fly than the A345, SQ won't be forced to demand such a high premium to fly non-stop. Fuel prices are also half of what they were.
 
danj555
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 7:16 am

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:03 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
gatibosgru wrote:
danj555 wrote:
I don't understand why Singapore Air would need to send their ULRs to NYC in premium (biz only) configs... Like just using simple math.. it's 9,500miles away... and the plane has 11,100miles of range. Why the need to cut seats if range, weight, or fuel aren't a restriction?

I don't think it is a matter of capability rather than demand.

Neither is actually the case.

The aircraft's ZFW had to be lowered to accommodate the amount of fuel needed for the trek to NYC; meaning that SQ couldn't fill it to full cabin capacity even if they wanted to, if fueled to go those distances.

Speaking of distances: while NYC is 9500mi away by Great Circle, that does not take into account the actual routing the aircraft will use, plus winds, plus minimum go-around/hold/diversion contingency, etc. The ESAD required for the flight is closer to 11,000mi effective range-- which the aircraft just happens to top out around. Imagine that. ;)


Hmmm, but wouldn't that be effective range with full load?
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9284
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:34 pm

danj555 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
gatibosgru wrote:
I don't think it is a matter of capability rather than demand.

Neither is actually the case.

The aircraft's ZFW had to be lowered to accommodate the amount of fuel needed for the trek to NYC; meaning that SQ couldn't fill it to full cabin capacity even if they wanted to, if fueled to go those distances.

Speaking of distances: while NYC is 9500mi away by Great Circle, that does not take into account the actual routing the aircraft will use, plus winds, plus minimum go-around/hold/diversion contingency, etc. The ESAD required for the flight is closer to 11,000mi effective range-- which the aircraft just happens to top out around. Imagine that. ;)


Hmmm, but wouldn't that be effective range with full load?

Yes, but “full load” on a A350ulr will be quite a bit smaller (lighter) than “full load” on a regular A350, despite the two planes being dimensionally exactly the same size.

It is not like the 77E vs 77L situation, where the latter plane as a 50t higher MTOW.
 
moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:36 pm

zeke wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.


Tell us the source of these “facts” !!!


see page 15:
http://ir.united.com/~/media/Files/U/Un ... n-2018.pdf
 
moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:40 pm

zeke wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.


Tell us the source of these “facts” !!!


Image
 
User avatar
NeBaNi
Posts: 439
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:45 am

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:18 am

moyangmm wrote:
zeke wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.


Tell us the source of these “facts” !!!


Image

Well, SQ's A350s have 253 seats in total (not ~310 like UA's A350s are projected to have, according to that graphic), which would place it in the same horizontal line as the UA 787-9 is in that picture, and I imagine with the reduced payload, its range would increase enough that the SQ A350 would lie directly on top of or even to the right of the UA 787-9. So where is this info coming from that SQ is blocking seats, unless you mean a capacity of 253 is a "severely reduced load"?

Edit: I've edited the image to add where the SQ A350 would be. Using the payload-range diagram from the A350 Airport Planning document on the Airbus website, we get a range of 8700nmi (~10000 SM) for a payload of 253pax (~24t based on 95kg per pax+baggage).
ImageUA and SQ by Ne Ni, on Flickr
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9284
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:44 am

You guys are reading waaaay too much into that United slide.
 
moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:35 am

NeBaNi wrote:
Well, SQ's A350s have 253 seats in total (not ~310 like UA's A350s are projected to have, according to that graphic), which would place it in the same horizontal line as the UA 787-9 is in that picture, and I imagine with the reduced payload, its range would increase enough that the SQ A350 would lie directly on top of or even to the right of the UA 787-9.


United figure is based on 280t model, which they would receive if they are having them delivered >2023. SQ's A359 is only 268t or less. If your figure were right, SQ could have flied the LAX-SIN non-stop with their regular A359. Why would they need to wait for the 170-seat ULR to fly that route?
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23553
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:22 am

United utilizes seat hold backs from both SFO and LAX to SIN.
For example LAX tomorrow is 34 and SFO is 18. LAX peaked as high as 70 for period back in Jan/Feb due strongest seasonal jetstream.
One good thing about the SIN nonstops is they book strong and even sell out in premium cabin so hold backs obviously are of lower revenue economy seats.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Planeyguy
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:12 am

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:46 am

Can someone tell me why Singapore Airlines have both the 777x and the A350-900ULR? Is the 777x supposed to replace the 77W?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12222
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 am

Planeyguy wrote:
Can someone tell me why Singapore Airlines have both the 777x and the A350-900ULR? Is the 777x supposed to replace the 77W?

Because the 777X that they have is the 779, which is significantly larger than the A359ULR and doesn't have anywhere near the same range.

So the two could be complimentary for their needs.
The A359ULR and 778 are much closer in range and somewhat more so in size, and SQ has not ordered the latter.


danj555 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
gatibosgru wrote:
I don't think it is a matter of capability rather than demand.

Neither is actually the case.

The aircraft's ZFW had to be lowered to accommodate the amount of fuel needed for the trek to NYC; meaning that SQ couldn't fill it to full cabin capacity even if they wanted to, if fueled to go those distances.

Speaking of distances: while NYC is 9500mi away by Great Circle, that does not take into account the actual routing the aircraft will use, plus winds, plus minimum go-around/hold/diversion contingency, etc. The ESAD required for the flight is closer to 11,000mi effective range-- which the aircraft just happens to top out around. Imagine that. ;)

Hmmm, but wouldn't that be effective range with full load?

Of course it will, but keep in mind that "full load" on an A359ULR is expected to only be 170-ish seats.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
NeBaNi
Posts: 439
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:45 am

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:53 am

moyangmm wrote:
NeBaNi wrote:
Well, SQ's A350s have 253 seats in total (not ~310 like UA's A350s are projected to have, according to that graphic), which would place it in the same horizontal line as the UA 787-9 is in that picture, and I imagine with the reduced payload, its range would increase enough that the SQ A350 would lie directly on top of or even to the right of the UA 787-9.


United figure is based on 280t model, which they would receive if they are having them delivered >2023. SQ's A359 is only 268t or less. If your figure were right, SQ could have flied the LAX-SIN non-stop with their regular A359. Why would they need to wait for the 170-seat ULR to fly that route?

There could be a number of reasons:
1. The airport planning document doesn't mention for which MTOW the payload-range diagram is. In that iteration of the document, towards the beginning, the maximum MTOW for the A350-900 is given as 280t for the WV013 variant, so I assume the payload-range diagram is for that variant. As you say, none of SQ's A350s are that variant, so that could be a reason for SQ needing to wait for the ULR.
2. SQ's business class seats might weigh a lot heavier than United's, and SQ, given its premium service reputation, might stock more food/ drink options and give passengers more amenities, so the DOW needed to accommodate 252pax in UA's 787 may be lower than that needed for 253pax in SQ's A350. Admittedly, UA has more J seats (48 vs. 42), but SQ has more premium (J+PY) seats (48 vs. 42+24=66).
3. SQ has a small fleet of A350s right now, and it already has one-stop service to LAX. Rather than using an already small fleet to tie up 3 aircraft for a non-stop LAX flight, SQ might have decided to wait until the ULRs arrive to start that nonstop. The ULR also offers some fuel burn improvements via changed wing twist, new wingtips, etc, which provide the most benefit over the longest missions. Also, LAX is a premium market, so SQ might be tackling this with a two-pronged approach: one-stop via NRT for the price sensitive passengers and non-stop for the premium passengers.
 
moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:55 pm

NeBaNi wrote:
There could be a number of reasons:
1. The airport planning document doesn't mention for which MTOW the payload-range diagram is. In that iteration of the document, towards the beginning, the maximum MTOW for the A350-900 is given as 280t for the WV013 variant, so I assume the payload-range diagram is for that variant. As you say, none of SQ's A350s are that variant, so that could be a reason for SQ needing to wait for the ULR.
2. SQ's business class seats might weigh a lot heavier than United's, and SQ, given its premium service reputation, might stock more food/ drink options and give passengers more amenities, so the DOW needed to accommodate 252pax in UA's 787 may be lower than that needed for 253pax in SQ's A350. Admittedly, UA has more J seats (48 vs. 42), but SQ has more premium (J+PY) seats (48 vs. 42+24=66).
3. SQ has a small fleet of A350s right now, and it already has one-stop service to LAX. Rather than using an already small fleet to tie up 3 aircraft for a non-stop LAX flight, SQ might have decided to wait until the ULRs arrive to start that nonstop. The ULR also offers some fuel burn improvements via changed wing twist, new wingtips, etc, which provide the most benefit over the longest missions. Also, LAX is a premium market, so SQ might be tackling this with a two-pronged approach: one-stop via NRT for the price sensitive passengers and non-stop for the premium passengers.


Even at 268t, A359 is a much heavier plane than 789. I suppose it is more capable than 789 under similar payload (~250 pax + bag), but based on SQ 359 vs UA 789, it seems like this is not the case.
 
DaufuskieGuy
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:35 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:53 am

does SQ plan to use the ULR on SFO as well as LAX? also with 3 and soon 4 new non stops US SIN, has that materially impacted connecting traffic to the point where connecting routes would be reduced? I'm guessing probably not
 
Taco2sDay
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 12:27 am

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Wed Mar 07, 2018 2:07 am

I’m surprised no one has mentioned DTW-SIN, dies the fan club finally realized the world does not revolve around DTW.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9505
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:27 pm

DaufuskieGuy wrote:
does SQ plan to use the ULR on SFO as well as LAX? also with 3 and soon 4 new non stops US SIN, has that materially impacted connecting traffic to the point where connecting routes would be reduced? I'm guessing probably not

They always planned to use the ULR to SFO. Whether they'll change their mind or not, is a different story. But I also don't think SQ expected UA to rain on their parade so their plans could have changed from the time when they ordered the ULR. I think there's potential for 4 non-stop routes from SIN to N.America, at most.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:47 pm

moyangmm wrote:
zeke wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.


Tell us the source of these “facts” !!!


Image


You're reading too much into that graph.

Airbus and Boeing claim similar range, but only when both aircraft are configured in a nominal cabin configuration (787 @ 290 seats, A350 @ 310 seats). The UA has just 252 seats, thus less payload and the range goes up.

If you would move down the A350 in the 240-260 seat category on that chart, the range would go up as well.

The payload/range charts that are available at both manufacturers show a better picture of the performance.

moyangmm wrote:
I was wondering why A359 is not as capable as the 789. On paper it seems like even regular A359 has more range than the 789, while in reality this is not the case. UA can fly 789 LAX-SIN without blocking seats whereas SQ's 359 cannot do with severely reduced load.


That is incorrect. UA does block seats on that sector.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23553
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:29 pm

20-hour SIN-NYC starts "end of this year"

Singapore Airlines to launch world's longest non-stop flight
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/in ... 921810.cms

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12222
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Intro of Singapore AIr A350ULR Routes?

Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:20 pm

LAXintl wrote:
20-hour SIN-NYC starts "end of this year"

Singapore Airlines to launch world's longest non-stop flight
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/in ... 921810.cms

So more publicity, but nothing really new. :x

So odd that they're still playing coy about which gateway that they'll use.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos