"Three years after a controversial launch, Singapore Airlines is reviewing its options to stem losses on its non-stop, all-business-class flights to New York and Los Angeles.
Company sources say that the national carrier is likely to reintroduce economy-class seats to these flights in a bid to boost revenue."
I always thought these flights were doing well in the all J configuration. Your thoughts?
The world's too large a place not to go wandering.
The two routes, the longest all-business-class flights in the world, have been consistently loss-making for the national carrier since their launch in May 2008. Still, they were kept on SIA's roster for their 'ultra-premium' status, even as business-class demand from the US plunged after the 2008 financial crisis. But historically high fuel prices are now forcing SIA management's hand.
Serves you right, you stupid dumb-arses. CCS and gang - yes I mean you!
Keep up the loss-making A345 for "ultra-premium status". Destroy the "loss-making" PPS programme, where 20 years of deeply-entrenched loyalty would have brought incremental revenue.
Yes, anecdotal evidence suggests that the planes are 80-90% full for the SIN-EWR vv route. But then again, I'm usually travelling Sundays. Mondays, Fridays and Saturdays, which tend to be the highs. I have not heard how the yields average out over the quarter but sources ST have, seems to think that it's negative.
I was not happy when they made the plane an all-J (cos' I was flying mostly PY then), and I understood that the process took a very long time due to the power requirements of the J seat. So I don't understand why ST is highlighting that's it's now a problem to move it back to PY (assuming that one can't survive a 18-hour flight in Y).
SQ senior management n CEO must do a detailed audit on the viability of these A345s with full J seats. Do not think its wise to reconfigure the planes bacl to economy seats. With rising fuel prices and the fact that these 5 A345s burns more fuel; its better to get rid of these 345s and the direct routes, or have newer aircraft replace the 345s like the 777LR which can do the non-stop and have larger capacity for 2 or even 3 classes.
Having just 5 345s is also not efficient for fleet maintenance and also for tech and cabin crew.
Yes, anecdotal evidence suggests that the planes are 80-90% full for the SIN-EWR vv route. But then again, I'm usually travelling Sundays. Mondays, Fridays and Saturdays, which tend to be the highs. I have not heard how the yields average out over the quarter but sources ST have, seems to think that it's negative.
its true. Buddy of mine is a 345 pilot so he's flown just about every day of the week, every season.
With rising fuel prices and the fact that these 5 A345s burns more fuel; its better to get rid of these 345s and the direct routes, or have newer aircraft replace the 345s like the 777LR which can do the non-stop and have larger capacity for 2 or even 3 classes.
Have you considered replacement cost of it? Also, the shorter 77L cabin cannot accomodate the 100J like on the A345.
Has anyone wondered, with 100 J seats, is Js still exclusive anymore?
Another question, given the A345 still has the range to do the non-stop, what would the payload tolerance be light with the re-configuration? I suppose this would answer the questions on how they would fit out the cabin.
Comment