SFO-SIN Route Performance
Oct 4, 2018, 8:46 pm
#31
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K/MM, AA GLD
Posts: 1,709
Actually, SQ codeshares with UA on some domestic flights now (and possibly with B6 also? I seem to remember that). So, here's hoping the relationship is thawing. (The codeshares are ex-IAH, which is probably why they picked UA, but, still, baby steps. 
Still, between UA preferring to put people on NH and SQ preferring to have people fly SQ metal TPAC, it's hard for me to see there being a huge market for UA codeshares on short-haul SQ flights (or for UA fares that allow the use of those same SQ flights; the codeshare isn't really necessary).
Still, between UA preferring to put people on NH and SQ preferring to have people fly SQ metal TPAC, it's hard for me to see there being a huge market for UA codeshares on short-haul SQ flights (or for UA fares that allow the use of those same SQ flights; the codeshare isn't really necessary).
example SFO-KUL: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=S...993*.USD.70993
Last edited by rob_flies_ua; Oct 4, 2018 at 9:02 pm
Oct 4, 2018, 10:14 pm
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,520
Just wanted to point out that even though UA isn't putting its code on SQ flights beyond SIN, the rules for some of the deep discount TPAC fares to some places covered by the ANA JV are allowing connecting through SIN on SQ and Jetstar (and I could've sworn I saw a third carrier, but can't remember/find it now, probably MI), combinable with the usual NH flights through NRT/HND.
example SFO-KUL: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=S...993*.USD.70993
example SFO-KUL: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=S...993*.USD.70993
Dec 2, 2020, 3:18 am
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,925
I've flown this route a dozen times this year. I have no empirical data, but I'm thoroughly impressed with how well it's doing. It's always fairly full. R space is very hard to get. The 789 is a pleasure to fly, even in E+. I meet people going to Bangkok, Manila, Maldives, Jakarta, Chennai, Mumbai, KL and of course Singapore. They're adding the 2nd daily SIN-SFO flight in October (AM & PM) and hopefully PE & Real Polaris soon (not sure when). Once that happens, anyone who cares about any kind of lifetime status on UA will be hard pressed to give up the 17K+ BIS miles and fly SQ. UA may have found another TLV here...
Dec 2, 2020, 6:16 am
#34
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,611
Others may feel differently, but I would not make any decisions based on lifetime status unless it was within reach in the next year or two. I certainly wouldn't choose UA in Y over SQ in PE for a 17 hour flight on that basis. (And in fact, I don't really see myself voluntarily flying that route in Y or PE - I'd find a way into J either on an award, via upgrade, or by purchasing a deep discount J fare.)
Dec 2, 2020, 9:24 am
#35
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2018
Programs: UA LT GS | UA LT Club | Marriott LT Titanium
Posts: 1,250
I'd disagree. I stumbled into LT status and now that I have it, I find myself more loyal to those brands than ever before. I think airlines realize this and won't dilute their LT programs.
As for SQ on this route, I think they're close to being done. Covid derailed UA's SFO assault on SQ.
- 2x daily HKG
- 2x daily SIN
- 1x daily DEL
- 1x daily BLR
Post-covid, those UA routes will return in force. Combined with SQ's financial woes, I'd expect SQ to kill the SFO-HKG 5th freedom and continue to regress from there.
As for SQ on this route, I think they're close to being done. Covid derailed UA's SFO assault on SQ.
- 2x daily HKG
- 2x daily SIN
- 1x daily DEL
- 1x daily BLR
Post-covid, those UA routes will return in force. Combined with SQ's financial woes, I'd expect SQ to kill the SFO-HKG 5th freedom and continue to regress from there.
Dec 2, 2020, 10:42 am
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles, California
Programs: United, American, Delta, Hyatt, Hilton, Hertz, Marriott
Posts: 14,837
Im glad someone discovered this thread.
I became a huge fan of LAX/SIN and SFO/SIN just to get LT status. I loved LAX/SIN and was sorry to see it go. I too noticed that LAX/SIN was always a little lighter than SFO.
It was also the case that UA needed four aircraft (rounding up!) when they had two departure cities. Twice daily SFO/SIN could be managed, all else being equal, with three B789s. Im grabbing at straws here because Id love to see the LAX flight come back. Singapore had two daily flights from LAX for a while. What are the chances that the decision to by UA to abandon LAX was at least partially driven by better aircraft utilization with twice daily flights from SFO?
I became a huge fan of LAX/SIN and SFO/SIN just to get LT status. I loved LAX/SIN and was sorry to see it go. I too noticed that LAX/SIN was always a little lighter than SFO.
It was also the case that UA needed four aircraft (rounding up!) when they had two departure cities. Twice daily SFO/SIN could be managed, all else being equal, with three B789s. Im grabbing at straws here because Id love to see the LAX flight come back. Singapore had two daily flights from LAX for a while. What are the chances that the decision to by UA to abandon LAX was at least partially driven by better aircraft utilization with twice daily flights from SFO?
Dec 2, 2020, 10:54 am
#37
Join Date: May 2007
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 5,571
Im glad someone discovered this thread.
I became a huge fan of LAX/SIN and SFO/SIN just to get LT status. I loved LAX/SIN and was sorry to see it go. I too noticed that LAX/SIN was always a little lighter than SFO.
It was also the case that UA needed four aircraft (rounding up!) when they had two departure cities. Twice daily SFO/SIN could be managed, all else being equal, with three B789s. Im grabbing at straws here because Id love to see the LAX flight come back. Singapore had two daily flights from LAX for a while. What are the chances that the decision to by UA to abandon LAX was at least partially driven by better aircraft utilization with twice daily flights from SFO?
I became a huge fan of LAX/SIN and SFO/SIN just to get LT status. I loved LAX/SIN and was sorry to see it go. I too noticed that LAX/SIN was always a little lighter than SFO.
It was also the case that UA needed four aircraft (rounding up!) when they had two departure cities. Twice daily SFO/SIN could be managed, all else being equal, with three B789s. Im grabbing at straws here because Id love to see the LAX flight come back. Singapore had two daily flights from LAX for a while. What are the chances that the decision to by UA to abandon LAX was at least partially driven by better aircraft utilization with twice daily flights from SFO?
As an Angeleno with family in SE Asia, of course I'd love to see LAX-SIN return (or LAX-HKG for that matter), but I'm not counting on it anytime soon.
Dec 2, 2020, 4:52 pm
#38
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,611
IMO, aircraft utilization probably had a fairly minor role in the decision to move the LAX-SIN flight to a second daily SFO-SIN. It's mainly about economics: UA simply has more pricing power at its fortress TPAC hub than it does at the hyper-competitive free-for-all that is LAX. The aircraft utilization benefit was probably the cherry on top.
SQ was flying twice daily nonstops from LAX and SFO (though I don't think SFO was 7 days a week). They were also operating a connecting route to SIN from each.
Dec 2, 2020, 5:32 pm
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,925
Others may feel differently, but I would not make any decisions based on lifetime status unless it was within reach in the next year or two. I certainly wouldn't choose UA in Y over SQ in PE for a 17 hour flight on that basis. (And in fact, I don't really see myself voluntarily flying that route in Y or PE - I'd find a way into J either on an award, via upgrade, or by purchasing a deep discount J fare.)
Dec 2, 2020, 5:34 pm
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,925
I'd disagree. I stumbled into LT status and now that I have it, I find myself more loyal to those brands than ever before. I think airlines realize this and won't dilute their LT programs.
As for SQ on this route, I think they're close to being done. Covid derailed UA's SFO assault on SQ.
- 2x daily HKG
- 2x daily SIN
- 1x daily DEL
- 1x daily BLR
Post-covid, those UA routes will return in force. Combined with SQ's financial woes, I'd expect SQ to kill the SFO-HKG 5th freedom and continue to regress from there.
As for SQ on this route, I think they're close to being done. Covid derailed UA's SFO assault on SQ.
- 2x daily HKG
- 2x daily SIN
- 1x daily DEL
- 1x daily BLR
Post-covid, those UA routes will return in force. Combined with SQ's financial woes, I'd expect SQ to kill the SFO-HKG 5th freedom and continue to regress from there.
Dec 2, 2020, 5:52 pm
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,925
IMO, aircraft utilization probably had a fairly minor role in the decision to move the LAX-SIN flight to a second daily SFO-SIN. It's mainly about economics: UA simply has more pricing power at its fortress TPAC hub than it does at the hyper-competitive free-for-all that is LAX. The aircraft utilization benefit was probably the cherry on top.
As an Angeleno with family in SE Asia, of course I'd love to see LAX-SIN return (or LAX-HKG for that matter), but I'm not counting on it anytime soon.
As an Angeleno with family in SE Asia, of course I'd love to see LAX-SIN return (or LAX-HKG for that matter), but I'm not counting on it anytime soon.
Dec 2, 2020, 6:48 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles, California
Programs: United, American, Delta, Hyatt, Hilton, Hertz, Marriott
Posts: 14,837
I had a feast traveling to SIN and back in 2018 and 2019. If I had an upgradeable fare and the SFO segment cleared, LAX always cleared too. I think that more than once, they deducted just one GPU for both legs, which surprised me. Back then I was accumulating GPUs faster than I could use them.
Dec 2, 2020, 7:54 pm
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saipan, MP 96950 USA (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands = the CNMI)
Programs: UA Silver, Hilton Silver. Life: UA .57 MM, United & Admirals Clubs (spousal), Marriott Platinum
Posts: 15,141
Others may feel differently, but I would not make any decisions based on lifetime status unless it was within reach in the next year or two. I certainly wouldn't choose UA in Y over SQ in PE for a 17 hour flight on that basis. (And in fact, I don't really see myself voluntarily flying that route in Y or PE - I'd find a way into J either on an award, via upgrade, or by purchasing a deep discount J fare.)
I am acutely aware of this pitfall. I bought a lifetime spousal United Club membership, with promises that it would be my oasis in the airport, only to have that contract unilaterally abrogated with a new requirement for same-day UA or *A travel. I got Lifetime United Clubbed!
Lifetime Member Edition: UC access changes Nov 1, 2019 (same day BP on UA or partner)
I was well on the way toward attaining Marriott Lifetime Titanium Elite (formerly Marriott Rewards Lifetime Platinum Premier Elite) status when they discontinued new lifetime qualification for that level.
I was savagely Bonvyed!
On the other hand, if one is willing to take the risk that the program will remain beneficial I am confident that UA will not kill the One Million Miller (1 MM) golden goose there remains another reason for caution:
Value of lifetime benefits versus "cost" to get them.
It has been oft-repeated FlyerTalk (FT) wisdom not to spend inordinate sums of money for goals many years in the future. Yet I see nothing wrong with choosing longer routing, such as LAS-IAH-HNL-GUM vice LAS-LAX-HNL-GUM, or vacations to places like SIN, with long-term goals in mind.
That is what FT is all about. Mileage runs are not completely extinct, especially for the thrifty, or the young whose bodies can still withstand 17 hours in Y. For some, this is a fun hobby.
Make decisions as fully informed as possible.
I sincerely hope you do not get Lifetime United Clubbed nor Bonvyed.
Last edited by SPN Lifer; Dec 3, 2020 at 8:46 am
Dec 2, 2020, 9:46 pm
#44
Join Date: May 2000
Location: IAH
Programs: UA 1K 2.7MM, Marriott Titanium/LT Plat, IHG Spire
Posts: 3,317
They're at totally different price points. Obviously J would be a lot more comfortable no matter which airline you're on. I'm not a fan of SQ's program since their miles are hard coded to expire in like 3 years. As it was mentioned in another thread, PY isn't available on UA yet. I think that would be the bare minimum to survive a 17 hour flight.
Dec 2, 2020, 11:24 pm
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,243
Sorry, going O/T for a moment, but I've done this flight several times in Y, often just a few days apart. I've survived it by trying to go on more open flights and snagging my own row. One time it was the very last row of coach, but it was all mine. I also take my own blanket and pillow and spread UA's "blankets" across the seats to make them a bit more comfortable. It's just fine.