drewguy

+1. With a stop in NRT from east coast/ORD locations you don't add that much flying time - sure, the stop adds some time, but that may be a good tradeoff. Indeed, it would probably be more flying time East-SFO-SIN than East-NRT-SIN.

blahter

The stop is important, to me at least. NRT-JFK is ~14/15 hours. I get cabin fever after about 10-11 hrs. Even in SQ R.

Eadward

I've done EWR to SIN both on the SQ business plane and connecting. Not sure if there is a better between them but its a heck of a long time in a plane. You better be able to sleep on the plane and have a fully charged iPad. Its long.

AlreadyThere

Nah, you don't need a charged iPad for EWR-SIN -- you can plug it in on the plane! Before they switched to all business, I did the SQ nonstop in both business and premium economy (better than UA J). Oddly, they didn't have first class on the route at the time. Losing the extra hours of a stop made the long haul worthwhile.

Not sure I'd do it in regular economy, though, where the opportunities to walk around during the flight are more limited.

DA201

I disagree. Yes, there would need to be local support for the flight, but a decent amount of the traffic can and will come from cities such as Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, Austin, Raleigh, Miami, etc. where the only way to SIN currently is with 2 stops. Only 19 airports currently serve Asia in the US, and 8 of them are on the west coast. 1 stop in SFO is much better than 2 stops. Also, travelers may prefer to transfer at an airport in the US rather than at NRT, HKG, or PVG.

Fanjet

You do relialize that people can-- and do-- travel to SIN from the east coast the other way, right? Flying PHL-LHR-SIN isn't an unheard of routing. Or using the ME3s to fly nonstop from the east coast via the UAE. Even SQ operates JFK-FRA-SIN. And I'd personally rather fly the whole journey in a real business class seat, than have the first six hours of it in a domestic F seat.

DA201

This is true, but even still, all of the people I know who have flown to SIN from the east coast have connected either in HKG or NRT. I know it can be done, but I just do not know anyone who does that. Also, just looking up some random dates from a couple of cities, I found that the cheapest fares all have two stops and connect through Asia, ME3s fares are way more expensive than UA or AA and the cheapest fares have 2 stops. Also, the cheapest fare from a European carrier is double UA's cheapest fare and still has 2 stops. And the connecting times on all of the foreign carriers (except QR) were all ridiculous.

ycc777

I'd think that adding a flight from ORD-TPE to make use of the code share with EVA is a better choice. EVA has broad network to SE Asia and China. From the look of the daily UA SFO-TPE, it's always full even during off-peak. There seem to be a demand for a second flight.

SGDCGuy

I do IAD-SIN-IAD about 5-6 times a year, mostly through NRT but sometimes via ORD-HKG. Would I take an IAD-SFO-SIN routing? Sure, but only if the UA pricing remains below the SQ, European or ME3 routes. The UA product does not justify the same pricing.

I used to take the non-stop SQ flights to EWR and once to LAX to get to IAD/DCA when I was based in Singapore. SQ was clearly aiming at point-to-point customers (finance for former, tech for the latter). The onward connections were terrible because of the landing times. Hence whatever time you made up on the flight was wasted on the ground connections at EWR and LAX (not to mention the countless tarmac delays at EWR and the CBP clearance process). Don't get me wrong, I loved being able to sleep and get work done on the plane. However, I think non-stop US-Singapore flights depend on point-to-point business for profitability (which is why SQ is bringing back the flights with more fuel efficient planes).

Hence an SFO-SIN direct flight makes some sense due to the tech business that might want the point-to-point flight and it avoids competition with the SQ nonstop flights. But I am not certain whether there is enough business there to justify a non-stop.

Anyway, I think UA should targeting the DL flights which go through NRT. If they could ever figure out a SIN-ORD direct flight (or SIN-IAH) that would make sense from an onwards connection point of view, they would take away a lot of the DL business that comes with their better connectivity to the middle of the country.

luckypierre

Worth including SQ 62 SIN-DME-IAH in this discussion about service. I have wondered about loads since the collapse last fall in oil prices.

bldr1k

I would love a SFO-SIN nonstop! The connection through HKG or NRT makes the trip a lot harder (even in coach).

My next choice would be SFO-BLR.

Air Houston

Agree that an important part of the equation would be people in secondary cities that would need two stops to get to SIN. UA could likely pick up a decent number of passengers from those options. I will often consider an airline where I have no special privileges to avoid a two stop itinerary.

flybit

I am not sure sitting in a lounge in HKG or NRT is really breaking up the trip for most people flying in Business Class. I guess if your in Y the stop might be welcomed?, but only if you get a lounge?
I prefer flight of 12 hrs vs Europe of 7 hrs. On a 12 hr flight I have time to sleep and enjoy a meal, and watch a movie. To Europe its not a long enough flight to sleep on so I wish the plane could circle Europe to add at least 2hrs to the flight

joder

Exactly this...

ClayPot

14+ hours sitting is better than 14+ hours lying flat???