How are these 2 airplanes doing at SQ ?

For example currently there are 4 daily departures from SIN to PER, two B78X and two A359R . Are they performing equally? Anybody know their relative CASM ?

Their 787-10s don’t have crew rests so should be lighter, no exactly stretching their legs, it’s a route also flown with A320s and 737s.

Thanks for the insight into SQs 787-10s not having crew rests. Do the A359 Regional have crew rests? The different seating maps surprise me also, 787-10 C36Y301 verses A359R C40Y263. Both planes, on the above mentioned route, have the same fares.

I thought all of their A350s have crew rests and may occasionally use a regional configuration aircraft on longer routes as a last minute sub.

LFW wrote:

Thanks for the insight into SQs 787-10s not having crew rests. Do the A359 Regional have crew rests? The different seating maps surprise me also, 787-10 C36Y301 verses A359R C40Y263. Both planes, on the above mentioned route, have the same fares.

SQ flights out of PER are full regardless of aircraft type, both in passengers and in cargo. In relation to difference in seating between the 787-10 and A359. The A359 flights ( being SQ213/226 and SQ223/214) mainly feed SQ's Europe, some US flights and eastern Asia (Japan, China and South Korea) network along with those just going to Singapore. The 787-10 flights (being SQ215/216 and SQ225/224) feed the local market and their wider Asian network (includes India, SE Asia flights and morning US flights).

SQ also does not suffer from seasonal frequency out of PER as most other international airlines do. On top of SQ's 4 daily flights, Scoot also flies to PER 12 weekly, mostly with 787's but we do see A320's a couple times a week. Compared to last year SQ has about 120 seats more a day compared to a year ago while Scoot was only at 9 weekly this time last year compared to 12 weekly now.

ElroyJetson wrote:

Fuel burn numbers that have been discussed say both planes are virtually equal. My guess is on shorter sectors the 787-10 does better while on longer sectors the A359 does better.

The A350-900 isn't as light as it can be because Airbus chose to take advantage of lighter materials to build a much bigger wing (it has a bigger wing than the 777-300ER which is a significantly larger plane). Is this the reason why it does well on longer sectors?

Just had the pleasure of riding both this past weekend on the ICN-SIN RT route.

Although the A359 was quieter, the 78X felt far more roomier, which is contributed by floor space and the windows being larger. Window seats still are covered by the design of the new business seat, but with the 78X windows I found it easier to look out.

78X is perfect for regional routes for SQ. I think SQ long-haul is better with the 777. Their a359 regionals should convert to the international configuration IMHO.

ElroyJetson wrote:

LFW wrote:

Thanks for the insight into SQs 787-10s not having crew rests. Do the A359 Regional have crew rests? The different seating maps surprise me also, 787-10 C36Y301 verses A359R C40Y263. Both planes, on the above mentioned route, have the same fares.

I think you answered your own question. The 787-10 has a bit more floor space than the A359, so it should be able to hold more pax. In the SQ configuration you mentioned the 787-10 seats 337 pax versus 303 pax for the A359. That is an 11% CASM advantage all things being equal.

Fuel burn numbers that have been discussed say both planes are virtually equal. My guess is on shorter sectors the 787-10 does better while on longer sectors the A359 does better.

If the SQ A359's all have crew rest areas that adds four or five tons of additional weight. Again, advantage 787-10.

The A359 is an excellent long haul plane, but the 787-10 is optimized more for regional routes.

A compromise is not an advantage. All plane configuration is a matter of balancing the compromises that have to be made.

LFW wrote:

Thanks for the insight into SQs 787-10s not having crew rests. Do the A359 Regional have crew rests? The different seating maps surprise me also, 787-10 C36Y301 verses A359R C40Y263. Both planes, on the above mentioned route, have the same fares.

Fares have nothing to do with the operating costs, it has everything to do what they can ask for and thus the passenger is willing to pay.

Yahnih wrote:

Just had the pleasure of riding both this past weekend on the ICN-SIN RT route.

Although the A359 was quieter, the 78X felt far more roomier, which is contributed by floor space and the windows being larger. Window seats still are covered by the design of the new business seat, but with the 78X windows I found it easier to look out.

78X is perfect for regional routes for SQ. I think SQ long-haul is better with the 777. Their a359 regionals should convert to the international configuration IMHO.

Oh geez. This "quieter" nonsense has got to stop. Were you in the same position in both planes while measuring decibels? I have flown the 787-10 several times these last few months and it is certainly quiet, comfortable and pleasant. "Quietness" is utterly subjective at this level of technology.

B78X: designed for one meal service flights hence its been restricted to routes with 1 meal service. Eg: flts below 6.5hrs
A359R: no crew bunk. And designed for two meal service flights. But also overlapping B78X routes due to it being also regional configured.
Eg: flts below 8hrs

Francoflier wrote:

It's always surprised me that SQ ordered both the -10 and the 359 regional. They seem to be doing the same job with only minor differences...

Did they just want the flexibility of having the option to convert them back to standard 359s down the line?

The A359R is meant to replace their A330/B772A. B787-10 is to replace B773. Hence you get combination of both. Yes, they can convert them back to standard 359s if they opt for.

caljn wrote:

Yahnih wrote:

Just had the pleasure of riding both this past weekend on the ICN-SIN RT route.

Although the A359 was quieter, the 78X felt far more roomier, which is contributed by floor space and the windows being larger. Window seats still are covered by the design of the new business seat, but with the 78X windows I found it easier to look out.

78X is perfect for regional routes for SQ. I think SQ long-haul is better with the 777. Their a359 regionals should convert to the international configuration IMHO.

Oh geez. This "quieter" nonsense has got to stop. Were you in the same position in both planes while measuring decibels? I have flown the 787-10 several times these last few months and it is certainly quiet, comfortable and pleasant. "Quietness" is utterly subjective at this level of technology.

Actually, yes. I was in the same general area, and same exact seat number. I actually have a health condition that makes me sensitive to noise. Also, I’m technically trained in vocal.. so yes I can actually hear and feel there was a subtle difference. I wasn’t saying it was bad, but I’m saying their is a difference. Also.. in my post I said I preferred the 78x. Thanks ~

Also, as many in these boards, I’m quite an avid traveler. I fly almost every week long-haul to medium- haul internationally for work. So, yes, my hobby is to compare plane types and comfortability since usually upon arrival I go straight to work and the only place for me to rest is in the car on the way to the airport and on the plane.

changyou wrote:

A359R: no crew bunk. And designed for two meal service flights. But also overlapping B78X routes due to it being also regional configured.
Eg: flts below 8hrs

Are you sure it’s got no crew bunk or something your guessing ? I see nothing in the master configuration list.

zeke wrote:

changyou wrote:

A359R: no crew bunk. And designed for two meal service flights. But also overlapping B78X routes due to it being also regional configured.
Eg: flts below 8hrs

Are you sure it’s got no crew bunk or something your guessing ? I see nothing in the master configuration list.

Absolutely.
Crew bunks: 359ULH and 359LH
Nil crew bunk: 359Medium or regional

changyou wrote:

Absolutely.
Crew bunks: 359ULH and 359LH
Nil crew bunk: 359Medium or regional

What is the source for this ? It does not show up in @Airnav.

zeke wrote:

changyou wrote:

Absolutely.
Crew bunks: 359ULH and 359LH
Nil crew bunk: 359Medium or regional

What is the source for this ? It does not show up in @Airnav.

From the SIA A350 crew manuals of course.

changyou wrote:

From the SIA A350 crew manuals of course.

Can you be more specific on what you mean by “crew manuals” ?

Well all know the value of opinions but, since it's Christmas, here goes mine. We're talking commercial aircraft cabin noise, in case anyone has lost the plot already. Specifically sitting as far forward as the travel policy will allow.

A380/A350
A340-600
B787/A340-3/5/A330
B747
B767/B777

Your equally subjective narrative on the pros and cons of the above proposition is, I am led to believe, not just of utter and total inconsequence, it is also the very reason for the existence of this board. Which, if anything, is interesting.

And a happy new year.

ElroyJetson wrote:

If the SQ A359's all have crew rest areas that adds four or five tons of additional weight.

A couple of beds weigh 5,000 kg?

ElroyJetson wrote:

LFW wrote:

Thanks for the insight into SQs 787-10s not having crew rests. Do the A359 Regional have crew rests? The different seating maps surprise me also, 787-10 C36Y301 verses A359R C40Y263. Both planes, on the above mentioned route, have the same fares.

I think you answered your own question. The 787-10 has a bit more floor space than the A359, so it should be able to hold more pax. In the SQ configuration you mentioned the 787-10 seats 337 pax versus 303 pax for the A359. That is an 11% CASM advantage all things being equal.

Fuel burn numbers that have been discussed say both planes are virtually equal. My guess is on shorter sectors the 787-10 does better while on longer sectors the A359 does better.

If the SQ A359's all have crew rest areas that adds four or five tons of additional weight. Again, advantage 787-10.

The A359 is an excellent long haul plane, but the 787-10 is optimized more for regional routes.

The A350 has slightly more expensive seats and we do not know about cargo. So your numbers could be off.

MartijnNL wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

If the SQ A359's all have crew rest areas that adds four or five tons of additional weight.

A couple of beds weigh 5,000 kg?

The crew rest is a module[s] added to the crown of the aircraft. It is a bit more than just “a couple of beds.” I’m not sure if it is 4-5 tons but the weight it adds is not negligible.

Thank you Polot and ElroyJetson for the extra information.

Do SQ actually have a A350R? Here in Wellington we see tge A350 which has replaced the old 772R aircraft. Christchurch also get the A350 that replaced the SQ 772ER. We both see the sane A350's which offer the Long Haul product of Business, Premium Economy and Economy. To date we seen virtually every A350 in the 9V-SM* fleet. These aircraft operate long haul out of SIN. As an example 9V-SMJ operated SQ247 SIN-MEL-WLG- MEL-SIN rotation recently. It arrived into SIN from FRA and on return to SIN it operated to MAN. If there are A350-9 dedicated regional configs what are the A/C rego's

MartijnNL wrote:

A couple of beds weigh 5,000 kg?

There are two modules one in the front and one in the rear. The modules include all the same emergency equipment as the cabin like oxygen, smoke hoods, emergency escapes, seat belts, and have doors and stairs on them. They have lights, air conditioning, curtains, mattress, intercom, IFE etc.

Naturally the floors have to be strong enough to hold the weight of the crew even in turbulence.

GW54 wrote:

Do SQ actually have a A350R? Here in Wellington we see tge A350 which has replaced the old 772R aircraft. Christchurch also get the A350 that replaced the SQ 772ER. We both see the sane A350's which offer the Long Haul product of Business, Premium Economy and Economy. To date we seen virtually every A350 in the 9V-SM* fleet. These aircraft operate long haul out of SIN. As an example 9V-SMJ operated SQ247 SIN-MEL-WLG- MEL-SIN rotation recently. It arrived into SIN from FRA and on return to SIN it operated to MAN. If there are A350-9 dedicated regional configs what are the A/C rego's

The regional ones don’t have PEY

GW54 wrote:

Do SQ actually have a A350R? Here in Wellington we see tge A350 which has replaced the old 772R aircraft. Christchurch also get the A350 that replaced the SQ 772ER. We both see the sane A350's which offer the Long Haul product of Business, Premium Economy and Economy. To date we seen virtually every A350 in the 9V-SM* fleet. These aircraft operate long haul out of SIN. As an example 9V-SMJ operated SQ247 SIN-MEL-WLG- MEL-SIN rotation recently. It arrived into SIN from FRA and on return to SIN it operated to MAN. If there are A350-9 dedicated regional configs what are the A/C rego's

The regional A350’s are registered 9V-SH*

Oh geez. This "quieter" nonsense has got to stop. Were you in the same position in both planes while measuring decibels? I have flown the 787-10 several times these last few months and it is certainly quiet, comfortable and pleasant. "Quietness" is utterly subjective at this level of technology.[/quote]

No, its is not. And thanks to carry on electronic devices you can get a fairly objective insight. If I switch from a 747, where I had to confirm I am ok with potential potentially ear damaging volume to understand my audio book to an A330, where I can be at or one notch below that threshold, there obviously is a difference.

Without a reference of sort you have no way of possibly telling the difference, but the exhausting effect of loudness is cumulative and doesn't care about your subjective experience.

Now the 787 certainly isn't like flying inside a bag of screws (777/747), but it is still louder than the same gen Airbus.

Best regards
Thomas[/quote]


777/747 "bag of screws"? Kind of disrespectful to 2 legendary frames. And evidently you haven't traveled a 777 recently, because your characterization is incorrect.

GW54 wrote:

Do SQ actually have a A350R? Here in Wellington we see tge A350 which has replaced the old 772R aircraft. Christchurch also get the A350 that replaced the SQ 772ER. We both see the sane A350's which offer the Long Haul product of Business, Premium Economy and Economy. To date we seen virtually every A350 in the 9V-SM* fleet. These aircraft operate long haul out of SIN. As an example 9V-SMJ operated SQ247 SIN-MEL-WLG- MEL-SIN rotation recently. It arrived into SIN from FRA and on return to SIN it operated to MAN. If there are A350-9 dedicated regional configs what are the A/C rego's

9V-SH* should be Regionals.
9V-SG* are ULRs.
9V-SM* and now 9V-SJ* should be standard.