enzo011 wrote:JohanTally wrote:FromCDGtoSYD wrote:
SQ operates to LAX with the standard longhaul A350, the 777-200LR is also basically a flying fuel tank and QF operate the 787 with way less seats than other operators. Where do you draw the line for what counts and what doesn’t.
SQ also operated NYC with the 3 class A350 in the past.
The NYC flights that used the 3 class A350 were essentially cargo flights with less than 100 passengers because the ULR has an inop forward cargo hold. Singapore has just started truly opening to foreigners this week.
Surely you need to exclude the 787 that are not "standard" and have less seats to make the flight? So exclude the Qantas flights as they have fewer seats than expected in the 789. That leaves us with the longest flight on an A380 - DXB to AKL. The other flights have not flown yet so not sure why they are included as yet. Then comes the SIN-LAX flight on a standard A359.
Anyone can play that game and squint and make yourself feel good about your favoured OEM.
JL NH and EY have less seats than QF in many of their 789s and AA is about to take delivery of 244 seaters. The SQ A359ULR doesn't have a single Y seat so a QF 789 has 46.5% more seats total. Also we're comparing an already smaller aircraft with a 10% lower MTOW that has more Y seats than the SQ ULR has including all cabins. The QF is a lower density aircraft but hardly unique like a SQ ULR.