Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
nomorerjs
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:24 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:26 pm

For some reason SQ refuses to run ORD-SIN via Asia with a day flight. Both times were evening via low-yielding AMS with no UA feed.

Chicagoans going to Asia want to go West during the day. CX failed on the midnight flight and BR has its lowest US load factor on the midnight flight. KE which owns ORD-ICN gave up on the midnight flight.

Yet UA won’t do a day time ORD-ICN, SQ never tried, and AA is hopeless at ORD.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 4144
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:32 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?

Maybe a return of Finnair? There hasn't been non-stop service to Scandanavia since SAS left town.
 
BA
Posts: 10516
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:00 pm

ER757 wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?

Maybe a return of Finnair? There hasn't been non-stop service to Scandanavia since SAS left town.


Finland is not part of Scandinavia.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
airbazar
Posts: 10380
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Official: Singapore Announces SIN-SEA

Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:54 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
You’re proving my point! So why is it so far fetched that someone would fly AS to connect to SQ to build & maintain status on AS?

For starters it's unlikely that you'll find many AS FF's living outside the West Coast. AS just doesn't have the kind of exposure outside the "Northwest" that an airline like a Delta of United has. The only contribution that AS will bring to this route is AS own Seattle based FF's now are likely to chose SQ over any other option from SEA when they have to fly to Southeast Asia and beyond.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 4144
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 12:52 am

BA wrote:
ER757 wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?

Maybe a return of Finnair? There hasn't been non-stop service to Scandanavia since SAS left town.


Finland is not part of Scandinavia.

I stand corrected - thank you for pointing that out
 
User avatar
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3711
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:52 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?


TG isn't serving the U.S. at all these days and SEA seems like a pretty unlikely destination to dip their toes back in the water, especially now that CX and SQ are in the mix and connection opportunities on either end would be limited (barring an entirely possible AS codeshare if the route was announced). PR would likely suffer from problematic yields in the MNL-SEA market unless they were to bring in an aircraft that made financial sense for the route, which I don't think they currently have, Another Chinese airline wouldn't be terribly surprising, but there are a lot of seats in the market right now and a new entrant might come at the expense of an existing route.
Picked a hell of a week to quit sniffing glue.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:00 am

gunsontheroof wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?


TG isn't serving the U.S. at all these days and SEA seems like a pretty unlikely destination to dip their toes back in the water, especially now that CX and SQ are in the mix and connection opportunities on either end would be limited (barring an entirely possible AS codeshare if the route was announced). PR would likely suffer from problematic yields in the MNL-SEA market unless they were to bring in an aircraft that made financial sense for the route, which I don't think they currently have, Another Chinese airline wouldn't be terribly surprising, but there are a lot of seats in the market right now and a new entrant might come at the expense of an existing route.

Pretty sure PR recently mentioned MNL-SEA as a strong possibility, so I wouldn't rule that one out at all...
 
User avatar
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3711
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:48 am

FA9295 wrote:
gunsontheroof wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?


TG isn't serving the U.S. at all these days and SEA seems like a pretty unlikely destination to dip their toes back in the water, especially now that CX and SQ are in the mix and connection opportunities on either end would be limited (barring an entirely possible AS codeshare if the route was announced). PR would likely suffer from problematic yields in the MNL-SEA market unless they were to bring in an aircraft that made financial sense for the route, which I don't think they currently have, Another Chinese airline wouldn't be terribly surprising, but there are a lot of seats in the market right now and a new entrant might come at the expense of an existing route.

Pretty sure PR recently mentioned MNL-SEA as a strong possibility, so I wouldn't rule that one out at all...


I recall reading this as well. It doesn't strike me as PR's best use of a long-haul aircraft, but with the way things have been going at SEA lately, no new route announcement short of JS launching FNJ-SEA is going to totally blow my hair back. Seeing PR come to town would certainly be an interesting addition.
Picked a hell of a week to quit sniffing glue.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5681
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:43 am

gunsontheroof wrote:
wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?


TG isn't serving the U.S. at all these days and SEA seems like a pretty unlikely destination to dip their toes back in the water, especially now that CX and SQ are in the mix and connection opportunities on either end would be limited (barring an entirely possible AS codeshare if the route was announced). PR would likely suffer from problematic yields in the MNL-SEA market unless they were to bring in an aircraft that made financial sense for the route, which I don't think they currently have, Another Chinese airline wouldn't be terribly surprising, but there are a lot of seats in the market right now and a new entrant might come at the expense of an existing route.


It seems like the A350-900 is the aircraft of choice to serve SEA these days, with the exception of JL to use 787-8's. PR could use A359's on the MNL-SEA route. But they do have an increased presence at YVR. I'm really curious to see what's coming next. The SQ announcement seemed a little surprising, even though they have a partnership with AS. I remember seeing an article that either TG or Malaysian was interested in SEA...but that was a few years ago.
 
toobz
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:33 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:30 am

No Finland Is not part of Scandinavia however it is part of the Nordic region. With AYs epanditure into the US as of late, SEA would not be a bad option.
 
TheEuphorian
Posts: 473
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 9:35 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:00 am

wedgetail737 wrote:
Now I wonder who will be next with an A359 or 787 that's going to announce SEA service. Anyone? Possibilities range from PR to maybe even TG (although I wonder if the SQ announcement smashed that idea). Maybe another Chinese airline like China Southern?


Well, TG did serve SEA in the 80s as part of BKK(present day DMK)-NRT-SEA-DFW, and it isnt profitable.

It is possible with the 787-9, but I doubt they will even launch the route.
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:32 pm

FA9295 wrote:
mpdpilot wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
"regardless of the cost"...? So you think that Delta should fly these routes even if it loses them money?


Sorry for the late reply, but yes. I don't know how Delta is able to compete with UA/AA/SQ/CX without those links.

I live in Phoenix for example, you would have to be a super die-hard Delta traveller to not fly UA/SQ to SIN or UA/AA/CX to HKG. And that is not different in LA or NYC.

A little out of scope for this discussion but the fact that Delta doesn't fly to Tokyo from JFK is another one that just doesn't make sense. Hopefully that will change in the future.

They're able to compete with their joint-venture partnership with Korean Air. With two daily SEA-ICN flights (1 by DL and 1 by KE), that opens up the door for a lot more connecting opportunities.

But a lot of times, Delta is not able to compete with them. Their T-PAC hub out of SEA is much smaller than AA's LAX hub and UA's SFO hub; and by comparison, LAX and SFO are larger markets than SEA is, so AA and UA are able to fill up more seats in their planes than DL could at SEA.

This is not to say that Delta's T-PAC hub isn't successful. It clearly is. It's just that they're trying to limit their resources based on market demands. SEA-HKG didn't work because the A332 (which operated on that route for quite awhile) didn't economically work out for them, and their 777-200 had too many seats to fill (and I think the A359 has more seats than the 777-200, so that wouldn't work either).

As for SEA-SIN, it's too long and thin of a route for them to be successful in. Luckily for UA, SFO-SIN is a much larger market, which ultimately gives them an advantage over DL at SEA.


While I agree with what you are saying about the current market, but down the road, I don't see how they will be successful without it.

And remember SEA-SIN is long, but it isn't THAT long. You could fly that route with a 77E even, and the A350/789 are the perfect aircraft for that type of route. As Delta develops SEA, and the connections are stronger, I think it will be quite viable. The only killer for it would be if SQ started the route and codeshared with Alaska. But that would still mean that Delta would need something.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
User avatar
TransWorldOne
Posts: 370
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 12:13 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:50 am

mpdpilot wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
mpdpilot wrote:

Sorry for the late reply, but yes. I don't know how Delta is able to compete with UA/AA/SQ/CX without those links.

I live in Phoenix for example, you would have to be a super die-hard Delta traveller to not fly UA/SQ to SIN or UA/AA/CX to HKG. And that is not different in LA or NYC.

A little out of scope for this discussion but the fact that Delta doesn't fly to Tokyo from JFK is another one that just doesn't make sense. Hopefully that will change in the future.

They're able to compete with their joint-venture partnership with Korean Air. With two daily SEA-ICN flights (1 by DL and 1 by KE), that opens up the door for a lot more connecting opportunities.

But a lot of times, Delta is not able to compete with them. Their T-PAC hub out of SEA is much smaller than AA's LAX hub and UA's SFO hub; and by comparison, LAX and SFO are larger markets than SEA is, so AA and UA are able to fill up more seats in their planes than DL could at SEA.

This is not to say that Delta's T-PAC hub isn't successful. It clearly is. It's just that they're trying to limit their resources based on market demands. SEA-HKG didn't work because the A332 (which operated on that route for quite awhile) didn't economically work out for them, and their 777-200 had too many seats to fill (and I think the A359 has more seats than the 777-200, so that wouldn't work either).

As for SEA-SIN, it's too long and thin of a route for them to be successful in. Luckily for UA, SFO-SIN is a much larger market, which ultimately gives them an advantage over DL at SEA.


While I agree with what you are saying about the current market, but down the road, I don't see how they will be successful without it.

And remember SEA-SIN is long, but it isn't THAT long. You could fly that route with a 77E even, and the A350/789 are the perfect aircraft for that type of route. As Delta develops SEA, and the connections are stronger, I think it will be quite viable. The only killer for it would be if SQ started the route and codeshared with Alaska. But that would still mean that Delta would need something.


Um, hello, SQ IS starting the route and codesharing with Alaska. That's kind of what this whole thread is about so I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not. I can't imagine how you could have missed that. DL is far too conservative to launch a long and thin route like SEA-SIN and with SQ beating them to the punch it is even less likely. I don't understand why you're so insistent that DL will have to continue to serve SIN on their own metal. Mind you, they don't even fly their jets to HKG anymore. With the KE JV in place, I imagine DL will be just fine routing SIN traffic through ICN on KE, just like they do with HKG. DL's SEA hub experiment has proved interesting. We've seen A LOT of domestic growth but international has largely remained stagnant over the
years. We were led to believe that it was due to constrained IAF facilities yet in the meantime we've watched Alaska Airlines international partners swoop in and eat Delta's lunch. Is there enough traffic to go around for everybody without yields going to shit? Only time will tell.
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:11 pm

TransWorldOne wrote:
mpdpilot wrote:
FA9295 wrote:
They're able to compete with their joint-venture partnership with Korean Air. With two daily SEA-ICN flights (1 by DL and 1 by KE), that opens up the door for a lot more connecting opportunities.

But a lot of times, Delta is not able to compete with them. Their T-PAC hub out of SEA is much smaller than AA's LAX hub and UA's SFO hub; and by comparison, LAX and SFO are larger markets than SEA is, so AA and UA are able to fill up more seats in their planes than DL could at SEA.

This is not to say that Delta's T-PAC hub isn't successful. It clearly is. It's just that they're trying to limit their resources based on market demands. SEA-HKG didn't work because the A332 (which operated on that route for quite awhile) didn't economically work out for them, and their 777-200 had too many seats to fill (and I think the A359 has more seats than the 777-200, so that wouldn't work either).

As for SEA-SIN, it's too long and thin of a route for them to be successful in. Luckily for UA, SFO-SIN is a much larger market, which ultimately gives them an advantage over DL at SEA.


While I agree with what you are saying about the current market, but down the road, I don't see how they will be successful without it.

And remember SEA-SIN is long, but it isn't THAT long. You could fly that route with a 77E even, and the A350/789 are the perfect aircraft for that type of route. As Delta develops SEA, and the connections are stronger, I think it will be quite viable. The only killer for it would be if SQ started the route and codeshared with Alaska. But that would still mean that Delta would need something.


Um, hello, SQ IS starting the route and codesharing with Alaska. That's kind of what this whole thread is about so I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not. I can't imagine how you could have missed that. DL is far too conservative to launch a long and thin route like SEA-SIN and with SQ beating them to the punch it is even less likely. I don't understand why you're so insistent that DL will have to continue to serve SIN on their own metal. Mind you, they don't even fly their jets to HKG anymore. With the KE JV in place, I imagine DL will be just fine routing SIN traffic through ICN on KE, just like they do with HKG. DL's SEA hub experiment has proved interesting. We've seen A LOT of domestic growth but international has largely remained stagnant over the
years. We were led to believe that it was due to constrained IAF facilities yet in the meantime we've watched Alaska Airlines international partners swoop in and eat Delta's lunch. Is there enough traffic to go around for everybody without yields going to shit? Only time will tell.


I did miss the announcement about SQ. But that doesn't change my opinion that Delta should be serving two of the most important cities in Asia with its own aircraft. I don't work for DL so they will of course do what they think is best, that doesn't mean I can't think they are wrong.

As I said, SQ starting the route would be killer for DL starting this route, but I still think Delta needs to be in the SIN and HKG markets so perhaps in the future as the market changes, they will get in the SEA-SIN or back into SEA-HKG.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:54 pm

mpdpilot wrote:
TransWorldOne wrote:
mpdpilot wrote:

While I agree with what you are saying about the current market, but down the road, I don't see how they will be successful without it.

And remember SEA-SIN is long, but it isn't THAT long. You could fly that route with a 77E even, and the A350/789 are the perfect aircraft for that type of route. As Delta develops SEA, and the connections are stronger, I think it will be quite viable. The only killer for it would be if SQ started the route and codeshared with Alaska. But that would still mean that Delta would need something.


Um, hello, SQ IS starting the route and codesharing with Alaska. That's kind of what this whole thread is about so I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not. I can't imagine how you could have missed that. DL is far too conservative to launch a long and thin route like SEA-SIN and with SQ beating them to the punch it is even less likely. I don't understand why you're so insistent that DL will have to continue to serve SIN on their own metal. Mind you, they don't even fly their jets to HKG anymore. With the KE JV in place, I imagine DL will be just fine routing SIN traffic through ICN on KE, just like they do with HKG. DL's SEA hub experiment has proved interesting. We've seen A LOT of domestic growth but international has largely remained stagnant over the
years. We were led to believe that it was due to constrained IAF facilities yet in the meantime we've watched Alaska Airlines international partners swoop in and eat Delta's lunch. Is there enough traffic to go around for everybody without yields going to shit? Only time will tell.


I did miss the announcement about SQ. But that doesn't change my opinion that Delta should be serving two of the most important cities in Asia with its own aircraft. I don't work for DL so they will of course do what they think is best, that doesn't mean I can't think they are wrong.

As I said, SQ starting the route would be killer for DL starting this route, but I still think Delta needs to be in the SIN and HKG markets so perhaps in the future as the market changes, they will get in the SEA-SIN or back into SEA-HKG.

One problem with Delta starting SEA-SIN is that they don't have the Boeing 787. United has been very successful wolith their Singapore flights because they use the 787, which is a much more efficient aircraft on such long and thin routes. The same thing applies to markets like MNL, TPE, and HKG as well.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5681
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:22 pm

FA9295 wrote:
mpdpilot wrote:
TransWorldOne wrote:

Um, hello, SQ IS starting the route and codesharing with Alaska. That's kind of what this whole thread is about so I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not. I can't imagine how you could have missed that. DL is far too conservative to launch a long and thin route like SEA-SIN and with SQ beating them to the punch it is even less likely. I don't understand why you're so insistent that DL will have to continue to serve SIN on their own metal. Mind you, they don't even fly their jets to HKG anymore. With the KE JV in place, I imagine DL will be just fine routing SIN traffic through ICN on KE, just like they do with HKG. DL's SEA hub experiment has proved interesting. We've seen A LOT of domestic growth but international has largely remained stagnant over the
years. We were led to believe that it was due to constrained IAF facilities yet in the meantime we've watched Alaska Airlines international partners swoop in and eat Delta's lunch. Is there enough traffic to go around for everybody without yields going to shit? Only time will tell.


I did miss the announcement about SQ. But that doesn't change my opinion that Delta should be serving two of the most important cities in Asia with its own aircraft. I don't work for DL so they will of course do what they think is best, that doesn't mean I can't think they are wrong.

As I said, SQ starting the route would be killer for DL starting this route, but I still think Delta needs to be in the SIN and HKG markets so perhaps in the future as the market changes, they will get in the SEA-SIN or back into SEA-HKG.

One problem with Delta starting SEA-SIN is that they don't have the Boeing 787. United has been very successful wolith their Singapore flights because they use the 787, which is a much more efficient aircraft on such long and thin routes. The same thing applies to markets like MNL, TPE, and HKG as well.


In terms of flying equipment, DL has the A359. They could easily make that trip. Afterall, SQ is using the A359 for that trip.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10380
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:35 pm

wedgetail737 wrote:
In terms of flying equipment, DL has the A359. They could easily make that trip. Afterall, SQ is using the A359 for that trip.

:shakehead:
306 seats for DL vs 253 seats for SQ.
It's not a given that DL's A359 can make it.
DL is realy in a weird situation where the A330 doesn't have the range or efficiency for LH routes and the A359 is a bit too large for some LH routes. They still have the 763ER slotted between those 2 but obviously that can't do SEA-SIN.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:39 pm

airbazar wrote:
:shakehead:
306 seats for DL vs 253 seats for SQ.
It's not a given that DL's A359 can make it.


DL has configured their 359 deliveries to date with a lower MTOW (269 t?), and allowed the 77L to continue flying the ULH or near-ULH missions. With the maximum MTOW of 275 t the frames could definitely make the route in DL configuration. I can't help but think that the later batch of deliveries (the ones DL has deferred) will be the new 280 t weight variant, maxed out, and will take over from the 77L on ATL-JNB and LAX-SYD.

DL is realy in a weird situation where the A330 doesn't have the range or efficiency for LH routes and the A359 is a bit too large for some LH routes. They still have the 763ER slotted between those 2 but obviously that can't do SEA-SIN.


Almost like they could use some of those 20 787-8s they cancelled. Not having those on the way is making their SEA plans a bit more complicated.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3436
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:46 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Also, I have to wonder if LAX can sustain a 10x weekly A359ULR nonstop service, given that the tech sector is closer to SFO and also would justify the SEA route.


Singapore has more than just tech. It's a major world financial center and has one of the busiest ports in the world, both of which could drive some strong ties to L.A (particularly the Pacific shipping/logistics connection).
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
HELyes
Posts: 1637
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 4:26 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 9:47 pm

ER757 wrote:
BA wrote:
ER757 wrote:
Maybe a return of Finnair? There hasn't been non-stop service to Scandanavia since SAS left town.


Finland is not part of Scandinavia.

I stand corrected - thank you for pointing that out


Yes officially Finland and Iceland are not part of Scandinavia. You often hear Scandinavia used as a synonym for the whole Nordic region: DEN ICE FIN NOR SWE + the autonomous parts.

Yes Finnair could return to SEA but hardly anything more than summer service..
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:05 pm

seabosdca wrote:
airbazar wrote:
:shakehead:
306 seats for DL vs 253 seats for SQ.
It's not a given that DL's A359 can make it.


DL has configured their 359 deliveries to date with a lower MTOW (269 t?), and allowed the 77L to continue flying the ULH or near-ULH missions. With the maximum MTOW of 275 t the frames could definitely make the route in DL configuration. I can't help but think that the later batch of deliveries (the ones DL has deferred) will be the new 280 t weight variant, maxed out, and will take over from the 77L on ATL-JNB and LAX-SYD.

DL is realy in a weird situation where the A330 doesn't have the range or efficiency for LH routes and the A359 is a bit too large for some LH routes. They still have the 763ER slotted between those 2 but obviously that can't do SEA-SIN.


Almost like they could use some of those 20 787-8s they cancelled. Not having those on the way is making their SEA plans a bit more complicated.


I totally agree about the 787's, I think that was poor choice on Delta's part.

Do you have more information about Delta's A359's being delievered with a lower MTOW? I have heard this around, yet I have also heard that the A350 is scheduled to take over LAX-SYD in March. While LAX-SYD is shorter then SEA-SIN, as I mentioned, SEA-SIN isn't that long, and could even be flown with a 77E (though less efficiently). This Delta's 350s are not ready for such a long flight keeps coming up but I haven't heard any evidence of this. Sure they aren't 350ULRs but that isn't needed for SEA-SIN, SQ isn't even using there 350ULRs on the route.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:39 pm

mpdpilot wrote:
Do you have more information about Delta's A359's being delievered with a lower MTOW? I have heard this around, yet I have also heard that the A350 is scheduled to take over LAX-SYD in March. While LAX-SYD is shorter then SEA-SIN, as I mentioned, SEA-SIN isn't that long, and could even be flown with a 77E (though less efficiently). This Delta's 350s are not ready for such a long flight keeps coming up but I haven't heard any evidence of this. Sure they aren't 350ULRs but that isn't needed for SEA-SIN, SQ isn't even using there 350ULRs on the route.


They were delivered at 268 t, and at the time we were told by knowledgeable people that they would be marginal on LAX-SYD with a full passenger load. I believe they can be uprated to 275 t, at which weight they should do just fine on LAX-SYD. Perhaps Delta has elected to pay for the upgrade after getting real-life fuel burn data; I can easily believe the fuel savings over the 77L on such long sectors would pay for some gold-plated paper from Airbus.

I still expect later deliveries to be 280 t, which should allow them to do everything Delta is doing with its 77Ls (except BOM-ATL with cargo, if that starts as rumored).
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

Re: Unconfirmed: Next SQ non-stop trans-Pacific destination...SEA

Thu Nov 08, 2018 2:27 am

seabosdca wrote:
mpdpilot wrote:
Do you have more information about Delta's A359's being delievered with a lower MTOW? I have heard this around, yet I have also heard that the A350 is scheduled to take over LAX-SYD in March. While LAX-SYD is shorter then SEA-SIN, as I mentioned, SEA-SIN isn't that long, and could even be flown with a 77E (though less efficiently). This Delta's 350s are not ready for such a long flight keeps coming up but I haven't heard any evidence of this. Sure they aren't 350ULRs but that isn't needed for SEA-SIN, SQ isn't even using there 350ULRs on the route.


They were delivered at 268 t, and at the time we were told by knowledgeable people that they would be marginal on LAX-SYD with a full passenger load. I believe they can be uprated to 275 t, at which weight they should do just fine on LAX-SYD. Perhaps Delta has elected to pay for the upgrade after getting real-life fuel burn data; I can easily believe the fuel savings over the 77L on such long sectors would pay for some gold-plated paper from Airbus.

I still expect later deliveries to be 280 t, which should allow them to do everything Delta is doing with its 77Ls (except BOM-ATL with cargo, if that starts as rumored).


Interesting, thank you for the clarification.

I wonder how the A359 does with the altitude of JNB. But that is probably a bit off topic.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
peanuts
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:17 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:38 pm

Why does DL have to be SQ? Or vice versa?
If we follow DL's strategy and fleet planning I don't believe DL will lose much sleep over SIN. Yes, they have additional competition at SEA. No, they are not playing catch up. They play by their own play book, mostly. DL is settling pretty good into SEA along with AS.
I'd be shocked if DL did SEA-SIN in the next 5 years.
 
leftcoast8
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 12:59 am

Re: Updated: Next confirmed SQ non-stop Trans-Pacific destination: SEA

Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:22 am

YVR already has plenty of 1-stop connections to Singapore through the plethora of Chinese carriers, not to mention Korean, EVA, China Airlines, Cathay, JAL/ANA, etc. To be honest I'm not sure Vancouver really needs the nonstop flight to Singapore. SQ wants to compete with Emirates for Western WA-India traffic. Vancouver-India traffic is already covered with AC's nonstop flight and the Chinese carriers, plus BA/LH (it's actually cheaper to connect in Europe than to take the nonstop YVR-DEL!)

Although I wonder why Canada and Singapore don't have very strong ties, considering Vancouver is the country's Pacific gateway. Maybe because Singapore pivots more towards SE Asia, and most of the business demand from YVR is to China (which already has very good connections to Singapore)

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