Originally Posted by mh3265a

Good to see UA competing internationally out of LAX now. Glad they are still focused on serving SIN with 2 flight options but would love to see other SE Asia destinations from the West Coast like Bangkok or Vietnam.

Originally Posted by halls120

This. Since I can't do IAD-SIN nonstop, I'd rather do 14 hours to NRT and 7 hours to SIN than 5 hours to LAX and 18 hours to SIN.

Originally Posted by Hipplewm

IAD-FRA-SIN on LH (8hrs/12hrs)
IAD-ZRH-SIN on UA/LX (8hrs/12hrs)
IAD-PEK-SIN on CA (This is about 14hrs/6hrs)

Originally Posted by halls120

My employer-supplied booking engine won't let me fly the first two routings, and friends don't let friends connect in PEK.

Originally Posted by UA_Flyer

...
As a DC based flyer, unless UA offers more flatbed transcon flights out of IAD, my best option will still be going through NRT on UA/NH or UA/CA combo with flatbed seats.

Originally Posted by goodeats21

Travelling East Coast to SE Asia via Europe is great, but most times priced prohibitively expensive.
When I redeem awards, it is a great option.

And agree on PEK.

Originally Posted by Hipplewm

IAD-FRA-SIN on LH (8hrs/12hrs)
IAD-ZRH-SIN on UA/LX (8hrs/12hrs)
IAD-PEK-SIN on CA (This is about 14hrs/6hrs)

Originally Posted by hirohito888

Connecting in FRA/ZRH from the east coast will also result in a good 10-12h layover as flights from FRA/ZRH-SIN don't depart until 10pm. Good if you're flying F and in the FCL, but I've done this in C and it's quite boring to hang around in the airport. Going out to the city is fine, but it's FRA....

Originally Posted by eng3

If maximizing horizontal is important to you, you can fly IAD-EWR-HKG-SIN. and try to do HKG-SIN on another carrier.

Originally Posted by Hipplewm

If you stay LH/LX yes, but if you go UA to FRA and Singapore airlines from there - layover is 3-4 hours.

There are tons of routings to stay in ZRH or FRA for 3-5 hours and get to SIN, but you need to be flexible and it appears that his companies booking engine isn't.

I am lucky in that I am my own booking engine, with a ton of help from FT community

Originally Posted by hirohito888

You're correct on connecting with SQ. My company booking engine can book that but it ends up being 2 tickets at an exorbitant price. There's also more incentive for me to fly UA+LH for PQM/PQD, but priorities are different for everyone.

Originally Posted by halls120

I am as well - but going to LAX to connect only makes sense if I'm going to SYD or AKL. As bad as SFO can be at times, it's closer to most Asian destinations.

Originally Posted by hirohito888

Connecting in FRA/ZRH from the east coast will also result in a good 10-12h layover as flights from FRA/ZRH-SIN don't depart until 10pm. Good if you're flying F and in the FCL, but I've done this in C and it's quite boring to hang around in the airport. Going out to the city is fine, but it's FRA....

Originally Posted by Hipplewm

I was giving options, I also know not everyone has ultimate flexibility.

At some point, we just have to realize this move isn't the best for everyone, and then others are singing int he streets.

Hopefully there will be some shifting of flight time to HKG between EWR and SFO to allow for more transfers, or maybe the increased direct capacity will drive down prices a bit (No, I am not drunk LOL)

Originally Posted by spin88

I asked because you typically have a very good grasp of aircraft capacity. ^ Obviously range is load specific, and as the article I linked to states when Airbus was giving range for 315 passengers it was 7750 nm, and the figure you gave for a lesser range was with an extra 10 passengers (for 325 with a range of 7590 nm). SQ has 253 passengers on its A359 (42J/24PE/187 Y (18" seats with 32" pitch)).

The B789 has a range of 7625nm with 290 passengers (28J, 262 Y). United has 48J/204 Y, for a total of 252 passengers.

As such the range for 315 passengers A359 (7750nm) is a better starting point in determining the A350's range, compared to what United can get from its B789; with SQ's configuration then being 25 passengers lighter than United's compared to the standard configuration for which ranges are given.

So w/o taking into account that United's plane has an extra 25 passengers, at a minimum the SQ A359 ought to have a range that is 125nm longer. Given the extra range Airbus claims going 10 passengers lower (an extra 160 nm), my guess is that the SQ configuration has about another 500 nm of range (125 + 160x2.5).

And I might add that the 325 figure from Airbus is very far from what any airline is doing as "typical." OZ has 311 (28J, rest Y), Finn has 297 (48J, rest Y), QR has 283 (36 J, rest Y), CX has 280 (38 J, 28 PE, rest Y).

I have seen no signs that SQ has had to weight restrict the A359 so far by blocking off seats on SFO-SIN, and that also says that the aircraft is slightly more capable than UA's B789. Now SQ may not want to further push the envelope (which I think UA is needing another 350 sm of flight), but I don't see any indication that their A359 can't do LAX-SIN if they wanted to, if UA can do it with a less capable plane.

Originally Posted by UA_Flyer

As a DC based flyer, unless UA offers more flatbed transcon flights out of IAD, my best option will still be going through NRT on UA/NH or UA/CA combo with flatbed seats.