SAS Discontinues BKK-SIN-BKK

birka340 · Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:57 pm

From 1st of April SAS Scandinavian Airlines will discontiune their A343 sector BKK-SIN-BKK. The leg CPH-BKK-CPH will remain.

/B

[Edited 2006-03-03 11:58:52]

Knightsofmalta · Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:40 pm

I thought they will be code-sharing on LX's flight between BKK and SIN.

vadheim · Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:13 pm

The SAS BKK-SIN-BKK leg did´nt make sense as long as Star Alliance partner Singapore Airlines offer a premium class nonstop service between Copenhagen and Singapore.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Massimo Pesenti SpotIT

Matt27 · Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:23 pm

How will this effect the schedule?

flying-b773 · Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:12 pm

Its a pity, both SQ and SK could have cooperated for a better schedule...
Its just a pity.. I am losing a A343!! arghh
Til then, hope SAS does well.....
Regards,

cloudyapple · Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:46 pm

With both Thai, Singapore and Swiss flying multiple times on the route it makes sense to trim it back to Bangkok. Also as mentioned the direct flight from Copenhagen by Singapore may also be a reason but neither company operates this route daily.

747400F · Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:33 am

SAS is using TG maintenance to service the plane whilst on the ground in BKK, saving on hangartime at CPH meaing more productivity of the airframes. It will also mean that the CPH-BKK and BKK-CPH times will be unchanged.

andaman · Sat Mar 04, 2006 5:23 am

It seems Finnair will increase the BKK-SIN-BKK flights to daily service for the summer (May-Oct), as HEL-HKG becomes non stop for the same season.

gardermoen · Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:39 am

I wonder if SAS are considering CPH-SIN non-stop? I bet SIN makes a more viable destination than BKK which is primarily leisure traffic.
I have noticed over the years that SAS fares ex-Australia used to always conect via SIN or BKK, but for the past year or so they are only offering connections via Japan or China.

I really hope this is not a sign of things to come, SAS dropping more intercontinental destinations one by one.

zvezda · Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:07 am

Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 5):
Also as mentioned the direct flight from Copenhagen by Singapore may also be a reason but neither company operates this route daily.

Could this be an opportunity for SQ to increase frequency to CPH?

heisan67 · Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:33 am

SAS will not start any CPH-SIN nonstop service for a very long time. I belive there are many other routes more likely to be started prior to this.

BOAC911 · Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:11 am

Possibly CPH-MIA? Wasn't there ome talk of that some time ago.

ANX4fishing · Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:28 pm

Would love to see them discuss CPH - SFO again.

filler

filler

ANX

9v-svc · Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:41 pm

It's going to be a loss for Singaporean spotters but oo welll life goes on. I believe SAS should code share with SQ on it's CPH-SIN flights since they are in the same alliance.

hodja · Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:18 pm

Yeah, SK will never return to SIN again.

SK has cut several major routes during the last 10-15 years including their classic LAX route. Nothing is really sacred.

I think this just goes to show how difficult it is for SK to run a cost effective and competitive operation. Incredibly they're not even able to make a profit on always-booked CPH-BKK.

Anyway, the few bad parts with SQ on CPH-SIN:

1. Only 3 departures pr week - 4 or 5 would help a lot!

2. The timings from CPH aren't great: 11:30 - 06:25; ie. you lose almost a full business day in CPH, and due to the timezones you arrive for an exhausting day in SIN in the morning. SK has a great 22:45 departure from CPH.

SQ departure time from SIN is excellent though!! (01:00-07:30) This schedule beats SK everytime, especially since you avoid the BKK stopover.

[Edited 2006-03-04 10:20:35]

Flying Belgian · Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:23 pm

Knowing the loss SAS is doing on this route, one can already been happy that the CPH-BKK flight remains effective !!

FB.

MAS777 · Sun Mar 05, 2006 2:25 am

If that A340 is going to sit on the tarmac in BKK all afternoon/evening - they may do well by attaching KUL to provide a through service to CPH.

SAS could take full advantage of cheap landing rates and the ongoing discounted rates for new airlines at KUL and try to make some money - esp since MAS may withdraw its ARN service (as discussed on another thread).

hodja · Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:01 am

Quoting MAS777 (Reply 16):
they may do well by attaching KUL to provide a through service to CPH.

Not a chance. If they couldn't make SIN work for them (business traffic), no way they'll go for KUL...

andaman · Sun Mar 05, 2006 5:31 am

Still not clear to me why SAS can't make SIN or some other long haul destinations work? What they have done differently than AY for example?
Markets are the same, costs can't be that different, AY is even getting the same A340 wide bodies as SK. I guess AY wouldn't fly SIN-BKK if it wasn't profitable.
As a Nordic traveller I think it would be important to have several strong long haul operators here up north, more competition the better.

copaair737 · Sun Mar 05, 2006 5:36 am

Quoting ANX4fishing (Reply 12):
Would love to see them discuss CPH - SFO again.

I agree with that. It would seem traffic is on the up and up at SFO lately, and with it being a STAR hub and all, it would be awesome to see them fly into SFO with the A340s.

-Copa

hodja · Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:23 am

Quoting Andaman (Reply 18):
Still not clear to me why SAS can't make SIN or some other long haul destinations work?

Simply put:

1) For various reasons, SAS operates with a heavy cost base compared to competing airlines

2) SAS is currently gridlocked with little room for maneuvering in the market.

SAS is simply in no position to open new long haul routes in the near future:

- First they need to become profitable on the routes they've already got (CPH-BKK)

- Current long haul fleet is stretched very thin, meaning fleet will need to be expanded

- Fleet expansion will require huge capital spending

- Which SAS is not able to do, because the company is barely out of the red and still hasn't completed its grand turnaround plan

If SAS pulls through all this and establish a reasonable cost base, I think there's a good chance to see aggressive route & fleet expansion in 2-3 years time.

Or it could go the other way, with LH orphaning their entire long haul route network.

andaman · Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:54 am

OK, thanks Hojda. So it's more about bad management then. I really hope SK won't let LH orphaning their long haul business.

MAS777 · Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:10 pm

Quoting Hodja (Reply 17):
Not a chance. If they couldn't make SIN work for them (business traffic), no way they'll go for KUL...

Interesting but with CPH-BKK-SIN, SK was competing with 2 of its STAR Alliance carriers (TG and SQ). If SK operated to KUL however - they will have no competition on the CPH-KUL sector. I gather there is quite a demand for Scandinavia-Malaysia.

gardermoen · Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:17 pm

There maybe demand for Scandinavia-Malaysia but it it is primarily leisure based, not much traffic in the front end of the aircraft.
Im surprised that BKK stays, after the recent news that the BKK route is a total loss. Thought they would ditch BKK, and go non-stop CPH-SIN.
Perhaps they will look at further expansion into China, like Guanghzou.

BestWestern · Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:26 pm

Having flown both TG and SK long haul business last year, TG operates a significantly inferior product to SK. SK have no worthwhile competition from TG.

Meanwhile SQ provides a superior product.

Lufthansa747 · Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:28 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 24):
SK have no worthwhile competition from TG.

TG operates B747-400 version 2 with 14 lie flat beds in C (old F) on BKK-CPH.

Rather TG has no worthwile competition from SK.

SK973 · Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:23 pm

Just checked the reservation system and it still shows SK973/972 flying BKK-SIN all through APR-NOV... Confused

BestWestern · Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:15 pm

Quoting Lufthansa747 (Reply 25):
TG operates B747-400 version 2 with 14 lie flat beds in C (old F) on BKK-CPH.

Rather TG has no worthwile competition from SK.

Have you flown TG business recently? Its not just the seats, its the entire airline thats rotten. Punctuality is poor, their 747 (and you cannot rely on the promised version actually arriving) aircraft are in poor condition, service is terrible, and the food average. I wont be flying with them again anytime soon.

SK has an excellent business product to and from Asia.

SK973 · Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:45 pm

BestWestern,

Although I haven't flown TG in business (I have with SK) I must say that in Y they are really nice. More seat pitch than other airlines between Asia and Europe. Nice food , great service and comfortable seats. Only thing missing is the PTV...

spk · Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:48 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 27):
Have you flown TG business recently? Its not just the seats, its the entire airline thats rotten. Punctuality is poor, their 747 (and you cannot rely on the promised version actually arriving) aircraft are in poor condition, service is terrible, and the food average. I wont be flying with them again anytime soon.

SK has an excellent business product to and from Asia.

On CPH and ARN routes, TG sells their F cabin as Business class. In this regard, TG's Business class product on this route is actually much better than SK's.

As to the seating on their 747-400, their oldest configuration has already been phased out so now you are guaranteed to get full flat seat if you fly TG Business class on CPH and ARN routes.

Their new Business (Royal Silk) clas is pretty good and those will be rolled out to all major destinations. Currently, FRA, LHR, MUC are already upgraded.

BestWestern · Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting Spk (Reply 29):
As to the seating on their 747-400, their oldest configuration has already been phased

Whoppie dooo. We now only have four different layouts, some with appalling seat pitch.

Quoting Spk (Reply 29):
On CPH and ARN routes, TG sells their F cabin as Business class. In this regard, TG's Business class product on this route is actually much better than SK's.

As I said above - Business class product is more than just the seat. Sitting in an F seat, with poor everything else is a waste of space, (and devalues TG's F product also).

zvezda · Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:09 am

Quoting Andaman (Reply 18):
Still not clear to me why SAS can't make SIN or some other long haul destinations work? What they have done differently than AY for example?

1) SQ don't fly to HEL.
2) SK labour costs are very, very high.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 27):
Have you flown TG business recently? Its not just the seats, its the entire airline thats rotten. Punctuality is poor, their 747 (and you cannot rely on the promised version actually arriving) aircraft are in poor condition, service is terrible, and the food average. I wont be flying with them again anytime soon.

My experience has been the same. TG is not high on my list of preferred carriers. Admittedly, I've flown TG just several times in C class, never in F or Y.

andaman · Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:25 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 31):

1) SQ don't fly to HEL.
2) SK labour costs are very, very high.

1) Can't be because of SQ alone, there are so many companies flying to SIN, many of them with a stop in BKK and still in the business.
2) Generally the labour costs in Finland and Sweden are rather similar, SK's Danish/Norwegian employees have so much better deal?

Rottamo · Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:12 am

Quoting Andaman (Reply 32):
1) Can't be because of SQ alone, there are so many companies flying to SIN, many of them with a stop in BKK and still in the business.

SAS is not offering direct flight. Travel times:

Copenhagen Singapore SQ 351 11h 55min
Singapore Copenhagen SQ 352 12h 55min

Copenhagen Singapore SK 973 13h 55min
Singapore Copenhagen SK 972 14h 35min

That might affect to yields.

And only Finnair is providing direct flights from Helsinki, that helps also.
And Finnair probably have some connecting traffic from Stockholm because Copenhagen is in wrong direction from Stockholm.

Quoting Hodja (Reply 20):
If SAS pulls through all this and establish a reasonable cost base, I think there's a good chance to see aggressive route & fleet expansion in 2-3 years time.

Competition situation hardly improves in the future. After 2-3 years there might be 2-3 Ryanair bases in Sweden and one in Denmark. And Easyjet is also expanding.

After all, BA has lost money in Europe 6 straight years.

Rottamo

cityairline · Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:28 am

Back to the topic, do you think SQ will increase flights to CPH now? I mean, they got the chance to that now...
It would be fun to see 4 or 5 flight a week.

Smile

andaman · Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:28 am

Quoting Rottamo (Reply 33):

And Finnair probably have some connecting traffic from Stockholm because Copenhagen is in wrong direction from Stockholm.

Passangers from ARN, GOT and OSL are important to AY's Asia service and the numbers are growing.
Just heard one older Swedish lady saying how nice it is to have service in Swedish on AY's planes, as it is the second official language also on board. Of course the language is not any big issue here but a nice little extra for some.

EurofleetLHR · Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:18 am

I guess at the end of the day, it all falls down to how much money the BKK-SIN-BKK route generates for SK, as it is probably one of the routes with the highest number of different airlines flying it. (possibly an idea for a future thread ???).

I flew SIN-BKK on an SK A340 2 years ago, and the Business Cabin was less than 25% full - not a particularly good load factor. Business travellers usually opt for an airline that flies regularly between the cities they want on the shorter routes, so with 1 flight in each direction a day, it was very unlikely to attract much business traffic; added to that, the timings were not ideal for anyone to use them to help do a days business !

Star Alliance competition was also tough, with SQ & TG operating multiple daily flights SIN-BKK-SIN and v.v., too.

Plus the costs of keeping the sectors (crews having to stay an additional night after getting back to BKK, etc.) would have an affect on the balance sheet.

SQ also fly CPH-SIN, without the 2hr transit stop in BKK, so SQ would be a faster journey time.

It's always sad to see any airline drop routes, if only they flew them just to keep A.Netters happy !!!!!!!!!

zvezda · Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:41 am

Quoting CityAirline (Reply 34):
Back to the topic, do you think SQ will increase flights to CPH now? I mean, they got the chance to that now...
It would be fun to see 4 or 5 flight a week.

It would be even better to see SQ downgauge CPH to the B787-8 and increase frequency to daily. That would drive up yields while reducing CASM.

hodja · Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:13 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 37):
It would be even better to see SQ downgauge CPH to the B787-8

But the B787 hasn't even been built yet? Wink

hodja · Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:16 am

Quoting Rottamo (Reply 33):
SAS is not offering direct flight.

But they do! (or did)

It's the same flight. However, it's not non-stop.

CXA330300 · Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:57 am

Could it be possible (although probably unlikely) that they may take off BKK to start another possibly better-performing long-haul route, such as HKG (finance and business traffic), JNB (cooperation with SAA), or YYZ (cooperation with AC)?

cityairline · Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:27 am

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 40):
Could it be possible (although probably unlikely) that they may take off BKK to start another possibly better-performing long-haul route, such as HKG (finance and business traffic), JNB (cooperation with SAA), or YYZ (cooperation with AC)?

I think they flew to HKG a couple of years ago, but there were to few pax...
But I dont know how it is now...

spk · Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:08 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 30):
Quoting Spk (Reply 29):
On CPH and ARN routes, TG sells their F cabin as Business class. In this regard, TG's Business class product on this route is actually much better than SK's.

As I said above - Business class product is more than just the seat. Sitting in an F seat, with poor everything else is a waste of space, (and devalues TG's F product also).

The seat is very important and the difference between a real full flat F seat with PTV and SK's C seat (even the new one) is significant.

I don't see how you can generalize TG's service as terrible. My experience is opposite. I am not impressed with SK's service although it's not bad.

Lufthansa747 · Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:40 pm

4 Different TG configs? What are you talking about? There is 7442 (80" lie flat F, 50" C) and the new 7443 (10 F suites, lie flat C).

SK business stinks compared to any major, that's just my opinion.

TG has excellent food, much better crews, much better seats, comparable PTVs - where exactly does SK win?

RedChili · Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:13 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 24):
TG operates a significantly inferior product to SK

I don't have any personal experience from the business cabin, but in economy, I would take TG above Sk any day! In my view, TG is far superior to SK in economy.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 27):
Punctuality is poor,

I can't speak for their whole network, but at ARN, TG is probably one of the most punctual airlines. They're at least far ahead of airlines like CO, BA and IR, which are notoriously delayed.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 31):
1) SQ don't fly to HEL.

That is not really relevant, as AY depends heavily on connecting traffic. I would guess that the number of point-to-point passengers on HEL-SIN is very small.

For AY, it also helps that the only other Oneworld flight between BKK-SIN is a daily CX flight. QF actually codeshares on AY's flight between BKK-SIN. TG or SQ would never put their code and their passengers onto SK between those cities.

Quoting Andaman (Reply 32):
2) Generally the labour costs in Finland and Sweden are rather similar, SK's Danish/Norwegian employees have so much better deal?

One part of the deal is that each long-haul flight needs to be staffed by a certain percent of Norwegian, Swedish and Danish crew. This means that SK has to fly their crew from all over Scandinavia to CPH before the flight. This naturally adds to the costs. For AY, I would guess that most crew members probably live in the Helsinki area and have to pay for their own transportation to the airport.

EmiratesCPH · Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:14 am

The SK withdrawn from SIN is a much awaited move for SQ.

According to SQ/CPH they are going to increase with atleast one frequence. bringing weekly frequencies to 4..

Flying Belgian · Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:22 am

Can we also assume that SK will re-organize its Asian network to cope with EK's arrival on the CPH market ?

I'm sure EK will attack SK with slashed fares to BKK, SIN as well.

FB.

EmiratesCPH · Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:36 am

Not sure if it is only for the EK start that SK are re-organizing the network. BKK-SIN has been a problem for many years...

Anyhow I believe its better for SK to watch out for EK, but I think airlines like LH, AF, KL and TG + SQ, who are tapping the Danish and Nordic market will really "feel" EK now...

zvezda · Wed Mar 08, 2006 3:54 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 44):
One part of the deal is that each long-haul flight needs to be staffed by a certain percent of Norwegian, Swedish and Danish crew.

As an occasional UA passenger, I'm glad that I don't have to pay for the burden of having crew from every part of the USA on every flight. Is this stupid rule imposed by the governments or by the union?

RedChili · Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:15 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 48):
Is this stupid rule imposed by the governments or by the union?

It's an agreement between the unions and SAS. Since CPH is the long-haul hub for SAS, the unions in Norway and Sweden are worried that their members will not be able to fly on the creamy routes to Bangkok, Tokyo, Washington, and all other intercontinental destinations. So they negotiated this deal with SAS at that time when SK had a monopoly in Scandinavia and could charge whatever fares they wanted to.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net