User avatar
CraigAnderson
Topic Author
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:28 am

SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:31 am

Flights start 2 November 2018 as SQ37/38 three days per week, Wednesday, Friday, Sunday; goes daily on 9 November; gets three more flights as SQ35/36 on Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday. SIN-INC-LAX dropped from 30 November.

https://www.ausbt.com.au/singapore-airl ... os-angeles
Last edited by qf789 on Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Updated title for clarity
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 6501
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:08 am

They will also start a 3 weekly A359ULR service to SFO, taking it to 10 weekly on the non-stop SIN-SFO route
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 8421
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:21 am

Given that UA announced they were dropping SIN-LAX and going double daily on SIN-SFO, and both carriers are Star, I have to assume this was choreographed. Although there is no JV, which means they are not allowed to collude on capacity. SQ to SFO is a bit more confusing.
 
ap305
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:31 am

31 flights weekly on the sin sfo route.... Somebody is going to lose money.
Racing, competing, is in my blood. It's part of me, it's part of my life; I've been doing it all my life. And it stands up before anything else- Ayrton Senna
 
mdavies06
Posts: 472
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:28 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:54 am

In the last main thread on this topic in May, I mentioned SQ may not go beyond NYC SFO and LAX with the A359ULR for now. Feel sorry for the other top candidate cities e.g. YVR and ORD for missing out on this. Maybe SQ will consider those ports in a few years time. It is interesting that SQ opted to go beyond 1 daily frequency to each of SFO and LAX on certain days of the week. SQ must be very confident on both
 
User avatar
PolarRoute
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:56 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:28 am

Interesting that they opted to go 10 weekly on SFO instead of NYC, which is supposedly a higher demand city to/from SIN. Perhaps they decided prioritized chasing away UA from SIN-SFO.
 
SQ317
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:16 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:46 am

Note that only 3 of the 10 weekly flights on SIN-SFO are A359ULR - the existing direct flight remains on the regular A359
 
User avatar
Irehdna
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 12:40 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:02 am

Why 24 weekly fights out of SFO? There is no way this city has that much demand to SIN. Additionally, SIN is geographically a very poor place to connect from anywhere in NA.

I feel like this is becoming an arms race between UA and SQ.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 1182
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:30 am

What strange behavior for two "leaders" in the same alliance. UA's nonstop is less expensive than some one-stops (e.g., CI 1stop TPE), and SQ is almost twice as expensive ($1.5K vs. $2.7K) as UA in Y on some days, SFO/SIN. This is shaping up to be a CN3-like bloodbath. What shall we can it... the SIN bloodbath?
 
User avatar
CraigAnderson
Topic Author
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:28 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:41 am

Interesting that there will be a 900ULR doing SIN-SFO along with the 'normal' A350-900. There was talk of SQ introducing a third North American destination for the ULRs but I didn't think SFO was what they meant, seemed more like YVR or ORD or a new non-stop destination compared to SIN-SFO.
 
LH658
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:35 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:46 am

I remember in IAH, ANA, KE, and BR use to all advertise the route to Singapore. I wonder they can launch 3 times a week IAH to SIN, while still keeping the IAH - MAN - SIN.
 
User avatar
vhtje
Posts: 815
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:40 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:17 am

enilria wrote:
Given that UA announced they were dropping SIN-LAX and going double daily on SIN-SFO, and both carriers are Star, I have to assume this was choreographed. Although there is no JV, which means they are not allowed to collude on capacity. SQ to SFO is a bit more confusing.


What restrictions are there on SQ and UA? Can they/do they codeshare on the route? Can frequent flyers earn and burn on each other's metal on the route? I am not familiar enough with the rules pertaining to this. I do remember before IAG/AA/AY were granted their JV, as a BA Executive Club member, I could not earn on AA metal on TATL flights, but as a Qantas frequent flyer, I could. Does the same silly rule apply here? If not forced into a false competition with each other, what level of cooperation are they allowed? Is it the full and usual alliance cooperation level?
I only turn left when boarding aircraft. Well, mostly. All right, sometimes. OH OKAY - rarely.
 
Bluebird191
Posts: 356
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:51 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:36 am

Irehdna wrote:
Why 24 weekly fights out of SFO? There is no way this city has that much demand to SIN. Additionally, SIN is geographically a very poor place to connect from anywhere in NA.

I feel like this is becoming an arms race between UA and SQ.


Not forgetting the demand from connecting pax - not all the demand will travel solely between SIN and SFO.
 
CZ326
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:28 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:50 am

*sigh* I never knew the day would come but they are going to dump SIN-ICN-LAX, sadly. That said they were probably carrying mostly leisure traffic so they had to can it after all.
That was the only way for me to connect Australia, Singapore, Korea and United States for a mega trip on one single airline.

I hope SQ will still fly both transatlantic and transpacific routes, that way better for me the next time I fly on another mega trip.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 3916
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:23 pm

vhtje wrote:
enilria wrote:
Given that UA announced they were dropping SIN-LAX and going double daily on SIN-SFO, and both carriers are Star, I have to assume this was choreographed. Although there is no JV, which means they are not allowed to collude on capacity. SQ to SFO is a bit more confusing.


What restrictions are there on SQ and UA? Can they/do they codeshare on the route? Can frequent flyers earn and burn on each other's metal on the route? I am not familiar enough with the rules pertaining to this.


Without an anti-trust immunized JV I believe that scheduling, capacity and pricing discussions are off-limits.

Yes to reciprocal frequent flyer earn and burn.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4779
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:18 pm

vhtje wrote:
enilria wrote:
Given that UA announced they were dropping SIN-LAX and going double daily on SIN-SFO, and both carriers are Star, I have to assume this was choreographed. Although there is no JV, which means they are not allowed to collude on capacity. SQ to SFO is a bit more confusing.


What restrictions are there on SQ and UA? Can they/do they codeshare on the route? Can frequent flyers earn and burn on each other's metal on the route? I am not familiar enough with the rules pertaining to this. I do remember before IAG/AA/AY were granted their JV, as a BA Executive Club member, I could not earn on AA metal on TATL flights, but as a Qantas frequent flyer, I could. Does the same silly rule apply here? If not forced into a false competition with each other, what level of cooperation are they allowed? Is it the full and usual alliance cooperation level?

The restriction on FFs on AA/BA was an oddity due to the restrictions in the bilateral. With Open Skies and the approved JV it went away. You got your QF FF point via the QF/AA agreement which was outside the problem.

Gemuser
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 4600
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:35 pm

It seems like UA and SQ will be duking it out rather than being partners.
 
airbazar
Posts: 8754
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:54 pm

Irehdna wrote:
Why 24 weekly fights out of SFO? There is no way this city has that much demand to SIN. Additionally, SIN is geographically a very poor place to connect from anywhere in NA.

A.net myth on both counts. Sure, SIN is not HKG or ICN but clearly there's demand and clearly people are connecting on both ends or we wouldn't be getting 24 weekly flights. At the risk of re-hashing an old discussion, Indonesia and Malaysia are significant connecting markets for SQ.
 
User avatar
PolarRoute
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:56 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:06 pm

airbazar wrote:
Irehdna wrote:
Why 24 weekly fights out of SFO? There is no way this city has that much demand to SIN. Additionally, SIN is geographically a very poor place to connect from anywhere in NA.

A.net myth on both counts. Sure, SIN is not HKG or ICN but clearly there's demand and clearly people are connecting on both ends or we wouldn't be getting 24 weekly flights. At the risk of re-hashing an old discussion, Indonesia and Malaysia are significant connecting markets for SQ.


+ India,

the nation is located badly for its people and visitors to connect through SIN to/from the US, but SQ have pretty significant reputation throughout the subcontinent, wild enough to hush some of the effects from badly located geography.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:59 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
It seems like UA and SQ will be duking it out rather than being partners.


That has been their relationship for a long time. They started code sharing not that long ago on a limited basis for the first time, but very little partnership beyond that.
 
BENAir01
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:27 pm

Interestingly enough, this looks like it’s going to make the 77W from NRT sit on the ground for 21+ hours at LAX. Also, including direct one stop no change if plane services, this makes SFO 31 flights per week. That’s insane.
Why is flying so expensive? And why is flying well so much more?
 
HeeseokKoo
Posts: 775
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:54 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:39 pm

BENAir01 wrote:
Interestingly enough, this looks like it’s going to make the 77W from NRT sit on the ground for 21+ hours at LAX. Also, including direct one stop no change if plane services, this makes SFO 31 flights per week. That’s insane.

SQ changed NRT-LAX schedule from Dec. 77W will sit at LAX for 4 hours.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 22791
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:42 pm

Here are the LAX nonstop schedules:

SQ36 SIN-LAX 0820-0730 WeFrSu
SQ38 SIN-LAX 2045-1955 Daily

SQ35 LAX-SIN 0915-1905 WeFrSu
SQ37 LAX-SIN 2225-0815 Daily

Added SFO flight:

SQ34 SIN-SFO 1520-1350 WeFrSu
SQ33 SFO-SIN 2010-0540 WeFrSu

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Arion640
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:05 pm

If these routes turn out to be duds, along with EWR, can they just reconfigure to the same A359 config and use the ULR’s as normal A350’s?
319 320 321 333 346 359 388 733 738 744 752 753 763 772 77E 773 77W 788 789 E145 E175 E195 RJ85 F70 DH8C DH8D AT75.

Brexit - It’s time to take back control
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7384
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:36 pm

Arion640 wrote:
If these routes turn out to be duds, along with EWR, can they just reconfigure to the same A359 config and use the ULR’s as normal A350’s?


Yes.
 
User avatar
UPlog
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:45 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:37 pm

Woo-hoo. Hope I manage to snag a flight or two on these LAX nonstops positioning to/from Asia.

No wonder UA bailed on LAX nonstop and decided to double up on SFO. They saw what was coming from SQ.
 
bzcat
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 11:34 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:34 pm

This is a lot of capacity between US west coast and SIN. Although I think the SFO flights probably have a lot of network feed.

LAX-SIN 10x week
LAX-NRT-SIN 7x week
SFO-SIN 10x week [+ 14x week from UA]
SFO-HKG-SIN 7x week

That's 34x weekly from SQ and 14x from UA

The only thing I can think of is that both SQ and UA think they will pull away a lot of connecting traffic that currently flies CX/CI/BR/KE/OZ/NH/JL
 
LAXLHR
Posts: 301
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:07 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:48 am

SIN can connect a lot of destinations (even some slight backtracks). Will grab a ton of Premium traffic to Thailand (yes, such a thing does exit contrary to a.net basement ceo's '-)....along with other nearby destinations like CGK, SGN, KUL, CMB, HKT, REP etc. Some SQ diehards will even go via SIN to India.

UA feeds through SFO so should be ok, but if one carrier has to retreat it will be UA. Remember SFO and SIN are the connecting points beyond decent O&D.

With the regular A350 running to SFO they can still offer Y seats daily, same as LAX with the very popular Narita flight. Over time we could see some slight adjustments here and there but overall its great and cheers to both UA and SQ!.
BA JM EA GK QH PA VS AA SN HP CO W7 WN NW DL QQ UA AC US LH LX OS JL QF QR PG MH CX U2 EK 9W UK TP VY VN PC LO OK OZ UL SQ

707 727 L10 732-NG 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 772 773 787 DC8 DC9 DC10 M80 M11 100 AB3 310 318 319 320 321 332 333 342 343 380
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:58 am

LAXLHR wrote:
UA feeds through SFO so should be ok, but if one carrier has to retreat it will be UA.


Why?

UA has repeatedly talked about how strong their O&D is to SIN particularly up front. You’re expecting them to bow out cede the whole thing to Singapore?
 
Dreamflight767
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:43 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:07 am

Maybe the ULH has more to do with the ability to carry extra (heavier) cargo?

Everybody keeps talking about a slapping match between SQ and UA. But what about this being a strike against other competition. I mean for India and other neighboring countries, TK and AI are in SFO now and of course there's EK. A slew of Chinese (including HX) carries and rumors of TG, MH, and VN trying to enter the market. Air Asia X might try something outta KIX since Hawaii is doing well and isn't there a new carrier out of TPE?

SQ obviously has a tool now to help it strengthen/re-gain it's position.

I don't know...just thinking out loud.
 
infinit
Posts: 1052
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:12 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:09 am

Wow.. that means there's now 4 to 5 daily flights between San Francisco to Singapore.
I think it really shows just how strong a market Singapore is- that it can sustain such a high volume of high yielding O&D and connecting traffic.

And yet every now and then, people here insist that SIN is going to decline in terms of connections to the US with its poor geographical location for connecting traffic to Asia "It's just not possible [insert map here]"
...Not realizing that the remaining 99% of the population that isn't on this site books flights based on connections and fares rather than plotting routes on the map. And the SIN-US non-stops helps at least on the former by reducing the number of stops and time one needs to make when connecting to other ports in the region
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:34 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
UA feeds through SFO so should be ok, but if one carrier has to retreat it will be UA.


Why?

UA has repeatedly talked about how strong their O&D is to SIN particularly up front. You’re expecting them to bow out cede the whole thing to Singapore?

The profit margin would be much lower for UA. That range is at the extreme limit of the 787-9. Bad weather can result in blocked seats and luggage going on another flight. The A350 can just comfortably fly the route even in bad weather without having to block seats with a fairly dense cabin layout. In a price war the A350 can do cheaper flights, or make a higher profit margin. If fuel prices go up the A350 will remain profitable for longer.

For example on the SFO-SIN route in winter the 787-9 could carry only 25T of payload. The 280t A350 could carry 40T. Even if the A350 burns 10% more fuel on the trip the A350 blows the 787 out of the water.

Another way of putting it is the A350 burns less than three quarters of the fuel per ton of payload on that trip. The 787 might not even struggle to make a profit in winter on SFO-LAX.

When the UA's A350's arrive they will be going straight to the singpore route and LAX-SIN will restart 100%
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:43 am

infinit wrote:
Wow.. that means there's now 4 to 5 daily flights between San Francisco to Singapore.
I think it really shows just how strong a market Singapore is- that it can sustain such a high volume of high yielding O&D and connecting traffic.

And yet every now and then, people here insist that SIN is going to decline in terms of connections to the US with its poor geographical location for connecting traffic to Asia "It's just not possible [insert map here]"
...Not realizing that the remaining 99% of the population that isn't on this site books flights based on connections and fares rather than plotting routes on the map. And the SIN-US non-stops helps at least on the former by reducing the number of stops and time one needs to make when connecting to other ports in the region

With aircraft flying further the distance between hubs will increase. With the 787 it allows high frequency between hubs while being fairly profitable. You'll find Singapore and San Francisco will suck up a lot of connecting traffic between North America and Asia.


Currently Hong Kong would be taking the bulk of the traffic. Secondary cities in South Asia cant all have direct flights to North America so Singapore makes a great hub.

The A350 further increases the profit margin between hubs over 7000nm.
 
abrelosojos
Posts: 4234
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:48 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:40 pm

Good for SQ. They had to pick a battle, and they picked the right one. United's planning team seems to have far more faith in their product and sales teams. Let's see.

Saludos,
Alex
Live, and let live.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:17 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
UA feeds through SFO so should be ok, but if one carrier has to retreat it will be UA.


Why?

UA has repeatedly talked about how strong their O&D is to SIN particularly up front. You’re expecting them to bow out cede the whole thing to Singapore?

The profit margin would be much lower for UA. That range is at the extreme limit of the 787-9. Bad weather can result in blocked seats and luggage going on another flight. The A350 can just comfortably fly the route even in bad weather without having to block seats with a fairly dense cabin layout. In a price war the A350 can do cheaper flights, or make a higher profit margin. If fuel prices go up the A350 will remain profitable for longer.

For example on the SFO-SIN route in winter the 787-9 could carry only 25T of payload. The 280t A350 could carry 40T. Even if the A350 burns 10% more fuel on the trip the A350 blows the 787 out of the water.

Another way of putting it is the A350 burns less than three quarters of the fuel per ton of payload on that trip. The 787 might not even struggle to make a profit in winter on SFO-LAX.

When the UA's A350's arrive they will be going straight to the singpore route and LAX-SIN will restart 100%


SFO-SIN has been fine from a performance perspective on the 789. UA has a big hub in SFO and gets a lot of paid business traffic to SIN. And the just added a second daily. It wouldn’t make any sense for them to walk away.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1693
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:49 pm

abrelosojos wrote:
Good for SQ. They had to pick a battle, and they picked the right one. United's planning team seems to have far more faith in their product and sales teams. Let's see.

Saludos,
Alex


Clearly SQ has the edge here they have a much btetter product and their FA's offer a more consistent service when compared to UA's FA's. I think both of these airlines will do just fine because the U.S.-SIN-U.S. maarket is huge, however for many years that traffic has been forced to connect at a Northern Asian hub which is now changing. SQ and UA are not trying to tap into a new market what they both are doing is siphoning traffic away from other Northern Asian hubs. I said this in the other thread about UA going daily double SFO-SIN-SFO that UA does not have the right aircraft in the right configuration to fully take advantage of this market shift while SQ does. SQ because they have they have the right aircraft with the right configuration will be able to take advantage and offer customers nonstop flights to SIN from LAX/SFO/EWR and there are some on a.netters who believe SQ could launch ORD-SIN. UA can't take advantage of this not because there market isn't there but because we don't have the right aircraft in the right configuration to fly any of those routes profitably except for SFO-SIN-SFO.

What will be interesting to watch is how other flights on all airlines to hubs like HKG, NRT, ICN, TPE are effect as more nonstop flights are launched between the U.S. and SIN.
 
mdavies06
Posts: 472
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:28 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:31 pm

The US3 are not going to order A350 specifically to target SIN (or KUL, BKK, CGK, SGN) to the US. On the top page of the forum today there is a live thread about a potential widebody TG order and sure enough TG will end up order something which will enable them to fly BKK-SFO nonstop too. The Asian carriers are dead focused on the US market but the US3 will never have the same level of focus on South East Asia. However, UA and DL do have A350 orders outstanding so they do have the option if the market matures itself enough. 787 will receive PIP during its life and it is pretty likely a future variant of 787 will be able to fly LAX-SIN economically one day. Regarding fuel burn, whilst 789 may have a small disadvantage, it doesn't stop QF flying PER-LHR using a 789. In QF case it make sense to go with the 787 network wise as it is smaller and frequency matters for their markets in general (QF operates less flights than most of their competitors already in many markets).
 
jumbojet
Posts: 2480
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:01 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:32 pm

SFOtoORD wrote:
[ And the just added a second daily. It wouldn’t make any sense for them to walk away.


Unless of course, they wind up losing millions on it. It will be interesting to see who's left without a chair when the music stops. I think it will be UA down to one daily SFO-SIN flight with them bringing back the HKG to SIN.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5338
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:36 pm

jumbojet wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
[ And the just added a second daily. It wouldn’t make any sense for them to walk away.


Unless of course, they wind up losing millions on it. It will be interesting to see who's left without a chair when the music stops. I think it will be UA down to one daily SFO-SIN flight with them bringing back the HKG to SIN.


They definitely wont bring back HKG to SIN. UA will probably stabilize at a daily flight from SFO to SIN. SQ will probably have dailies to NYC, SFO, and LAX nonstop and IAH-MAN-SIN will probably keep in the long run. I dont expect all the capacity to stick.
Next flight: IAH-UIO-IAH on UA in Y
 
User avatar
psa1011
Posts: 462
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:37 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:31 pm

I'm goin to be greedy and hope SQ brings back the A380 on SFO-HKG:)
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:51 pm

Polot wrote:
Would the A350 be more profitable if UA only had a small sub fleet? What would it cost UA to quickly get a A359 subfleet in short order? For the rest of the network would the A359 be more profitable than the 789?

Yes the A350 would be more profitable even if they had a small sub fleet. The A350 operating on their three longest routes would generate enough extra profit to cover the costs of extra pilot training and logistics. They would want 10+ aircraft to cover their longest routes so it is not a small sub fleet really. Even on the 6000-7000nm routes you can use the A350 without penalties so 20 aircraft purchase can easily be justified.

You cant really put a price on dropping LAX-SIN. The demand is huge they just dont have an aircraft to do it. Singapore airlines might take loyal customers who live in LAX.

Paying a huge premium to get A350's ASAP would be a hard pill to swallow.

The A350 would not be more profitable than the 789 on the rest of UA's network. So the 789 is the best choice to make up the bulk of their network.
 
jagraham
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:56 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
UA feeds through SFO so should be ok, but if one carrier has to retreat it will be UA.


Why?

UA has repeatedly talked about how strong their O&D is to SIN particularly up front. You’re expecting them to bow out cede the whole thing to Singapore?

The profit margin would be much lower for UA. That range is at the extreme limit of the 787-9. Bad weather can result in blocked seats and luggage going on another flight. The A350 can just comfortably fly the route even in bad weather without having to block seats with a fairly dense cabin layout. In a price war the A350 can do cheaper flights, or make a higher profit margin. If fuel prices go up the A350 will remain profitable for longer.

For example on the SFO-SIN route in winter the 787-9 could carry only 25T of payload. The 280t A350 could carry 40T. Even if the A350 burns 10% more fuel on the trip the A350 blows the 787 out of the water.

Another way of putting it is the A350 burns less than three quarters of the fuel per ton of payload on that trip. The 787 might not even struggle to make a profit in winter on SFO-LAX.

When the UA's A350's arrive they will be going straight to the singpore route and LAX-SIN will restart 100%


If the A359 has such margins, why did SQ take out 50+ seats?
There are no more seats on the A359 than on the 789 United is using

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Singa ... 50-900.php
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:57 pm

SFOtoORD wrote:
SFO-SIN has been fine from a performance perspective on the 789. UA has a big hub in SFO and gets a lot of paid business traffic to SIN. And the just added a second daily. It wouldn’t make any sense for them to walk away.

If fuel prices go up then ultra long haul flights suffer first. Any aircraft oprating at the extreme edge of their range will suffer. Fuel cost per passenger will increase significantly and SFO-SIN could become unprofitable just as easy as LAX-SIN did.

Most of the traffic going to Singapore is probably getting a connecting flight to somewhere else in Asia. So if fuel rices sky rocket they will probably open more LAX to hong kong flights and reduce SFO-SIN flights. So the connecting flight at the other end would simply become longer.
 
JustSomeDood
Posts: 321
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:05 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:40 am

RJMAZ wrote:

Most of the traffic going to Singapore is probably getting a connecting flight to somewhere else in Asia. So if fuel rices sky rocket they will probably open more LAX to hong kong flights and reduce SFO-SIN flights. So the connecting flight at the other end would simply become longer.


SIN is ass as a hub for SEA to the US, HKG, TPE (and even some mainland) works much, much better since they have good connectivity to SEA destinations, especially when not leaving from US west coast.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:17 am

jagraham wrote:
If the A359 has such margins, why did SQ take out 50+ seats?
There are no more seats on the A359 than on the 789 United is using

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Singa ... 50-900.php

The A359 doesnt really seat more people. The cabin is the same length, the economy seats will simply be half an inch wider on the A350. The extra weight over the 789 mostly goes to the extra 500nm range advantage.

UA will still be removing freight and blocking a row or two in winter on the SFO-SIN route. On the LAX route it was a regular occurance with the 789 and often multiple rows of seats blocked in winter. Thats a huge hit in profit.

Singapore airlines with their A359 even on the worst winters day will not have to block rows, even on the LAX route. They can fit all passenger baggage and simply add or reduce any extra freight depending on weather. As they will be using the same aircraft to do LAX and SFO they have the cabin set up to do the longer route. SFO route could more extra freight than the LAX route.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 848
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:26 am

RJMAZ wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
SFO-SIN has been fine from a performance perspective on the 789. UA has a big hub in SFO and gets a lot of paid business traffic to SIN. And the just added a second daily. It wouldn’t make any sense for them to walk away.

If fuel prices go up then ultra long haul flights suffer first. Any aircraft oprating at the extreme edge of their range will suffer. Fuel cost per passenger will increase significantly and SFO-SIN could become unprofitable just as easy as LAX-SIN did.

Most of the traffic going to Singapore is probably getting a connecting flight to somewhere else in Asia. So if fuel rices sky rocket they will probably open more LAX to hong kong flights and reduce SFO-SIN flights. So the connecting flight at the other end would simply become longer.


I don’t think so. They knew about fuel when the announced the 2nd flight SFO-SIN. I also think this will stabilize at 7-10x weekly long term, but I don’t see it going away.
 
DarthShatner
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:57 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:34 am

RJMAZ wrote:
notconcerned wrote:
As noted above by others, UA/AA ordered 787 for their multi-hub network which is vastly different than SQ single-hub network. SQ can order A350ULR just to fly SIN-EWR/LAX/SFO, but UA needs a plane and configuration that can to do LAX/SFO-SIN/SYD/PVG etc. profitably.

I disagreed with the other.

They gambled on the 787 hoping it could do LAX-SIN. An aircrafts actual performance often varies slightly from the original design spec. The 787-9 simply didnt exceed spec by the amount required to do the route profitably. It simplified the network around the 787 but it was high risk on LAX-SIN.


Qantas seems to be making the 789 work on Perth-London, which is just under 400klm longer than LAX-SIN. United has a few seats more on their plane than Qantas does, but if they really wanted to fly the route I'm sure they could find a way to make it work.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:59 am

DarthShatner wrote:
Qantas seems to be making the 789 work on Perth-London, which is just under 400klm longer than LAX-SIN. United has a few seats more on their plane than Qantas does, but if they really wanted to fly the route I'm sure they could find a way to make it work.
Perth to London is relatively wind free and fairly consistent year round compared to SIN-LAX. That part of the pacific gets very strong winds in winter. Every 1000kg of payload makes a difference at these extreme ranges. 10 less passengers would probably add around 100km of extra range. If you are on the limit already and get a strong head wind and now need to fly 500km further then you need to bump 50 passengers.

It would be interesting to hear if Qantas has any blocked seats when the weather is bad. If you have to block seats or put baggage on the one stop flight then Qantas will have to put up prices to keep it profitable. If the increased prices then kills demand the route will get cancelled.

UA came out guns blazing with billboards saying LAX-SIN. 18 months later the route is cancelled. It can change very quickly.
 
jagraham
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 4:14 am

RJMAZ wrote:
DarthShatner wrote:
Qantas seems to be making the 789 work on Perth-London, which is just under 400klm longer than LAX-SIN. United has a few seats more on their plane than Qantas does, but if they really wanted to fly the route I'm sure they could find a way to make it work.
Perth to London is relatively wind free and fairly consistent year round compared to SIN-LAX. That part of the pacific gets very strong winds in winter. Every 1000kg of payload makes a difference at these extreme ranges. 10 less passengers would probably add around 100km of extra range. If you are on the limit already and get a strong head wind and now need to fly 500km further then you need to bump 50 passengers.

It would be interesting to hear if Qantas has any blocked seats when the weather is bad. If you have to block seats or put baggage on the one stop flight then Qantas will have to put up prices to keep it profitable. If the increased prices then kills demand the route will get cancelled.

UA came out guns blazing with billboards saying LAX-SIN. 18 months later the route is cancelled. It can change very quickly.


Are you sure it's the plane? Or is SQ throwing that many seats at the route? Or is it because SIN is SQ's hub and it has lots of connections?
 
MRYapproach
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:10 am

Re: SQ resumes direct SIN-LAX on A359ULR from Nov 2, adds 3 weekly SIN-SFO A359ULR

Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:36 am

RJMAZ wrote:
infinit wrote:
Wow.. that means there's now 4 to 5 daily flights between San Francisco to Singapore.
I think it really shows just how strong a market Singapore is- that it can sustain such a high volume of high yielding O&D and connecting traffic.

And yet every now and then, people here insist that SIN is going to decline in terms of connections to the US with its poor geographical location for connecting traffic to Asia "It's just not possible [insert map here]"
...Not realizing that the remaining 99% of the population that isn't on this site books flights based on connections and fares rather than plotting routes on the map. And the SIN-US non-stops helps at least on the former by reducing the number of stops and time one needs to make when connecting to other ports in the region

With aircraft flying further the distance between hubs will increase. With the 787 it allows high frequency between hubs while being fairly profitable. You'll find Singapore and San Francisco will suck up a lot of connecting traffic between North America and Asia.


Currently Hong Kong would be taking the bulk of the traffic. Secondary cities in South Asia cant all have direct flights to North America so Singapore makes a great hub.

The A350 further increases the profit margin between hubs over 7000nm.


For sure. SFO-TPE is 3-4 flights/day, so why not SIN? SFO-TPE supports 3 airlines flying 77Ws, and fares are very stable. Clearly, no one is losing money on SFO-TPE.

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