A350-900 ULR Singapore Airlines
Apr 30, 2018, 2:27 pm
#17
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: MM, Krisflyer, QFF, VFF
Posts: 441
If SIA change the seat configuration it will be because they want to, and possibly due to weight management, not because its a 'new' aircraft.
Apr 30, 2018, 5:52 pm
#19
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: MNL / SFO / NYC
Programs: IHG Spire | Marriott Plat | UA Plat | AA Plat Pro
Posts: 533
They haven't announced it, I must have entered JFK instead of NYC on habit as a response to the question posted. It could very well be EWR as a nod to the previous incarnation of this direct flight (and EWR is a United hub).
May 2, 2018, 4:20 pm
#20
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Singapore
Programs: KF, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 182
Great strides being taken in aviation.
However am I the only one thinking we need to pull back the focus solely on range and start considering speed again? Like the Concorde?
People here and others are horrified at the though of spending 18+ hours in an aircraft non-stop, when they really don't need to if speed was increased.
There is a myriad of other advantages, say if a 15 hour flight was reduced down to less than 10 hours. For example, ROI per aircraft would increase (from running more sectors), less staffing costs per flight, potentially lower catering requirements etc. I don't think fuel burn would decrease unless new tech comes into play.
However am I the only one thinking we need to pull back the focus solely on range and start considering speed again? Like the Concorde?
People here and others are horrified at the though of spending 18+ hours in an aircraft non-stop, when they really don't need to if speed was increased.
There is a myriad of other advantages, say if a 15 hour flight was reduced down to less than 10 hours. For example, ROI per aircraft would increase (from running more sectors), less staffing costs per flight, potentially lower catering requirements etc. I don't think fuel burn would decrease unless new tech comes into play.
Speed is good but useless if it results in losses. The demand for Concorde was poor as price was double the normal business class fares. And was incurring losses even then.
Economics still trumps science.
May 2, 2018, 6:23 pm
#21
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Singapore
Programs: QF LTG, SQ EGTP, Bonvoy LTG
Posts: 4,847
None of the current technologies allow a profitable flight with speeds greater than Mach 1.
Speed is good but useless if it results in losses. The demand for Concorde was poor as price was double the normal business class fares. And was incurring losses even then.
Economics still trumps science.
May 3, 2018, 4:42 am
#22
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,645
Well the one of the biggest plane speed improvements is at the Airport.
They have talked about trying to shave an hour off the Trans Tasman airport door to airport by doing all the border at one end rather than half at each end. Most likely all in NZ as the Aussie carries what the flights domestic at the Aussie end as there is a lot more swapping of planes between domestic and internation duty.
If the US staffed the TSA properly and had enough machines they could get wait times for all <10min oppose to better give your self an hour or more to be safe, Then people could arrive at the airport later, so spending more time with family, on holiday or an extra hour at the office before going to the airport.
There is an hour saved on the flight without having to change the planes.
They have talked about trying to shave an hour off the Trans Tasman airport door to airport by doing all the border at one end rather than half at each end. Most likely all in NZ as the Aussie carries what the flights domestic at the Aussie end as there is a lot more swapping of planes between domestic and internation duty.
If the US staffed the TSA properly and had enough machines they could get wait times for all <10min oppose to better give your self an hour or more to be safe, Then people could arrive at the airport later, so spending more time with family, on holiday or an extra hour at the office before going to the airport.
There is an hour saved on the flight without having to change the planes.
May 5, 2018, 3:18 am
#23
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Singapore
Programs: KF, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 182
Wonder if the value of speedy flights has reduced as well in the corporate sector. If paying external parties by the hour for travel time then yes - almost certainly speedier is better. But if it's a regular salaried middle or senior management - who is not getting paid any extra for being on flight - maybe not. Furthermore, 20 years ago - get on a plane and be out of the loop for x hours and unproductive. Today a flight can be just another place to work remotely. A laptop or tablet to do some "wprk" - often a wifi connection to keep in touch. .... Except in Y where your laptop screen has been crushed by an overzealous recliner, but that's a different market anyway .....
May 5, 2018, 3:44 am
#24
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
I took the previous flight EWR-SIN once. It was one of the worst experiences of my life. Nearly 20 hours in complete darkness with nothing to do And that was in J. I felt for the poor people behind me. I’d much rather break up a trip somewhere.
May 5, 2018, 3:58 am
#25
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Enroute to ? & likely flying in ' A ':)
Programs: TPPS, UA, EK ...; Marriott BONVOY , HH, GP, GC..
Posts: 4,217
I liked the all J to EWR .
Not sure about this AC though .
Do not even like A350 SL .. dislike it when there is no metal choice on routes
Prefer BOEING with the nice windows
Prefer BOEING with the nice windows
May 14, 2018, 9:17 am
#26
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 6
Hi all! I've taken the previous iteration, and loved it for business travel (plus I like to jut get it over with).
Having done some web searching to no effect, does anyone know when it will start? Because I have an October trip to Singapore I am currently planning...
Thanks!
Having done some web searching to no effect, does anyone know when it will start? Because I have an October trip to Singapore I am currently planning...
Thanks!
May 14, 2018, 7:22 pm
#27
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: United, AA, KrisFlyer
Posts: 179
Hi all! I've taken the previous iteration, and loved it for business travel (plus I like to jut get it over with).
Having done some web searching to no effect, does anyone know when it will start? Because I have an October trip to Singapore I am currently planning...
Thanks!
Having done some web searching to no effect, does anyone know when it will start? Because I have an October trip to Singapore I am currently planning...
Thanks!
May 30, 2018, 5:22 am
#29
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: MM, Krisflyer, QFF, VFF
Posts: 441
May 30, 2018, 6:08 am
#30
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,378
Ewr-sin
What was the timing of it previously? Ex-ewr seems weird (10am-5pm)
Ex-sin matches sq26, midnight-6am (which makes you wonder what's going to happen to sq26?)
Before, ex-ewr was midnight-6am (sq21)
Ex-sin was 10am-6pm(sq22)
What was the timing of it previously? Ex-ewr seems weird (10am-5pm)
Ex-sin matches sq26, midnight-6am (which makes you wonder what's going to happen to sq26?)
Before, ex-ewr was midnight-6am (sq21)
Ex-sin was 10am-6pm(sq22)
Last edited by paperwastage; May 30, 2018 at 6:15 am