United Evaluating U.S. to Singapore Nonstop

Closed Thread Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Dec 8, 2015, 10:32 pm

#16

blackllotus

Join Date: Jun 2015

Location: San Jose, CA

Posts: 253

Quote:

Originally Posted by smxflyer

They considered it on the 789 for summer 16 supposedly but would take too much of a penalty. They are evaluating the A359ULR but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Can you explain what you mean by "take too much of a penalty"?

Dec 8, 2015, 10:54 pm

#17

riphamilton

Join Date: Mar 2013

Location: BDL/NYC/BOS

Programs: UA/*A Gold, Global Entry, Marriott Plat, Hilton+IHG Gold, Hertz PC, DL

Posts: 1,752

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackllotus

Can you explain what you mean by "take too much of a penalty"?

not the OP, but in order for the aircraft to be able to carry the fuel necessary for the route, there would have to be a tradeoff (reduction) of pax/cargo.

great circle mapper puts SFO-SIN at 8446 statute miles; B789 range (according to wikipedia) is 8786mi with 280 pax. UA's 789 seats 252. the 789 has the longest range of the three announced dreamliner variants.

LAX-MEL (also a UA 789) is currently the longest dreamliner route of all airlines at 7921mi. a reason this may be significant is that UA has collected plenty of long range fuel burn data over the past 13 months LAX-MEL has been operating.

Dec 8, 2015, 11:04 pm

#18

sincx

Join Date: Sep 2008

Posts: 812

Quote:

Originally Posted by riphamilton

If UA can pull off nonstop SFO-SIN with a standard 789, that will be impressive.

CO has always liked to push the range on its planes, so maybe the pioneer of the transatlantic 757 has something new up its sleeves.

Dec 8, 2015, 11:19 pm

#19

MSPeconomist

A FlyerTalk Posting Legend

Join Date: Sep 2009

Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM

Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM

Posts: 100,417

Quote:

Originally Posted by username

I think SQ did both LAX and JFK nonstop with the 345 and had to stop due to fuel prices, right? It was all Business Class, right?

I can't access that article...would UA do it from EWR or SFO?

I can see it opening up new markets such as one stop service to KUL, PER, DPS which can be cool.

Also, I am guessing UA has a decent amount of corporate contracts for people going to SIN?

SQ did EWR and LAX nonstop to/from SIN, mostly using the polar route from EWR so that it was considered a TATL flight for RTW purposes. At the end they had specially configured all business class aircraft (a full load of coach passengers would have weighed too much and the cost of carrying all that fuel demanded premium prices) but earlier I think there were at least some premium economy (or whatever it would have been called then) seats too.

Dec 9, 2015, 2:59 am

#20

docbert

Join Date: Jul 2007

Location: San Francisco/Sydney

Programs: UA 1K/MM, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Something, IHG Gold, Hertz PC, Avis PC

Posts: 8,162

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSPeconomist

... but earlier I think there were at least some premium economy (or whatever it would have been called then) seats too.

"Executive Economy". Originally they had about 100 seats of it (as well as first + business), but in the end the 18+ hours was just too long for economy and they dropped it in favor of the all business class layout they used until they retired the A345's.

I suspect United will have the same problem - 18 hours is a damn long time to be stuck in an economy seat. Going via HKG/NRT may take longer, but for most people in Y it's going to be the preferred option.

Dec 9, 2015, 3:26 am

#21

Join Date: Nov 1999

Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium

Programs: UA 1K MM

Posts: 6,484

I too agree with above sentiments on product quality of course, but SQ has only 3-4 flights per day to SIN from the West Coast, and no one else does. Maybe 1200 seats per day. And those planes are full, at high prices, even with 1 stop in there. I dare say that no matter how good SQ's service is, people aren't taking those flights just for kicks. I expect that even with an inferior product, there could be enough overflow passenger demand for UA to consider this interesting to explore.

Dec 9, 2015, 4:23 am

#22

docbert

Join Date: Jul 2007

Location: San Francisco/Sydney

Programs: UA 1K/MM, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Something, IHG Gold, Hertz PC, Avis PC

Posts: 8,162

Quote:

Originally Posted by TA

I too agree with above sentiments on product quality of course, but SQ has only 3-4 flights per day to SIN from the West Coast, and no one else does.

Huh? Numerous other airlines fly West coast to SIN with one stop, just like SQ does. United being the obvious example (SFO-NRT-SIN, SFO-HKG-SIN), but also ANA, Delta, Asiana, Cathay, Eva, Philippine, multiple Chinese airlines, and probably a few I've forgotten...

Dec 9, 2015, 4:37 am

#23

dsgtc0408

Join Date: Mar 2009

Location: sometimes SIN, sometimes JFK/LGA

Programs: UA 1K, 1.6MM bis

Posts: 767

I think TA's point was that no airline currently does US West Coast to SIN non-stop. And if it does happen, it would presumably be limited to UA/DL/SQ to start because of cabotage /Fifth Freedom requirements.

I wonder what it would be like if Scoot (TZ) took up such a routing (I realize what they fly is the 788, not the 789).

Dec 9, 2015, 5:14 am

#24

dkmatter

Join Date: Jul 2011

Location: West Coast

Programs: UA 1K 2MM, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Platinum

Posts: 264

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsgtc0408

I wonder what it would be like if Scoot (TZ) took up such a routing (I realize what they fly is the 788, not the 789).

They fly the 789 now as well. I flew a nice new one on Saturday, SIN-SYD.

Dec 9, 2015, 5:21 am

#25

Join Date: Nov 1999

Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium

Programs: UA 1K MM

Posts: 6,484

Quote:

Originally Posted by docbert

Yes, I didn't make the point very clearly. My point is that I believe a lot of people are flying SQ as the defacto "nonstop" option, given their natural connections schedule. Not too many are ending in HKG or ICN I believe, given the ticket prices. For < 23 hour duration 1 stop, SQ (and maybe CX, NH, UA as next comparable) are the only choices (OZ, KF distant possibility). There could be good demand for a 17.5 hr nonstop, even if poorer service...

Dec 9, 2015, 6:10 am

#26

username

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: May 2001

Posts: 10,971

It is strange that SQ does not seem to want to put too much resource on regular TPACs. They are now code-sharing with EVA on some routes. Is it due to traffic rights or it does not make sense for them business-wise?

Dec 9, 2015, 6:15 am

#27

luckypierre

Join Date: Apr 2000

Location: san antonio, texas

Programs: 3.2MM AA, 1.4MM UA,StwdLftPlt

Posts: 1,586

What equipment does the article say UA will use?...I don't think they own any 200LRs and to do it in an 87-9 would really be pushing it. Then again, routine fuel stops for nonstops is a well practiced UA operating strategy.