A350 Deliveries and Routes

[Unionruler]

Personal take on NA Strategy (if I were running the show with some historical bias, not what I believe is likely to happen):

A359 ULR
SIN-ORD 4x weekly
SIN-YYZ 5x weekly
SIN-EWR 5x weekly
SIN-LAX Daily

Ideally, if the routes perform, purchase 1 more ULR frame and increase to daily

A359
SIN-MAN-IAH 5x weekly
SIN-MAN-EWR 2x weekly
SIN-SFO Daily
SIN-SEA 5x weekly

77W
SIN-HKG-SFO Daily

A380
SIN-NRT-LAX Daily
SIN-FRA-JFK Daily

[Unionruler]

Would you think SEA and YVR are likely going to be new destinations?

SQ should have done either of those years ago using ordinary A359 frames *sigh*

[happyflyer]

I'm curious to know why you think HKG will work as a hub for USA? Nevermind the fact that SQ only has 3 more weekly slots to USA.
With CX struggling somewhat against Mainland Chinese carriers, how will that work for SQ? Where/who will feed SQ flights?

Simple. It is because he is from HKG. He has been talking about replacing all HKG-SIN A350/A380 flights by B737Max8 in local forums.

[Dobbo]

I doubt anything will materialise, but a better relationship with UA would clearly be to SQ's advantage in developing its non-stop and one-stop American network.

I don't know the relationship with Canada, but I'm surprised there isn't a direct (this could be one stop) route between SIN and either YYZ or YVR.

[SQ002]

New A350-900ULR route postulations (assuming SQ does not deploy the A350-900ULR to SFO)

SIN-ORD, daily, year-round

Chicago is a major finance and commerce hub in the US that's missing from SQ's route map. It would be a great connection from the Midwest to the heart of the growing ASEAN community. United has been trying to grow its domestic network from ORD against AA. Having a Star Alliance partner providing the fastest route to Singapore sure doesn't go against that cause.

SIN-YYZ, daily, year-round

Canada's major finance and commercial hub, connecting opportunities via Air Canada. But it may not be a large enough market overall to sustain the premium that an ULR flight demands. Air Canada is also unlikely to want to codeshare given their own ambitions. Who knows, they may be eyeing YVR-SIN using their shiny 787s.

Just for laughs...

SIN-ORD/YYZ-MIA, 5x weekly to ORD/YYZ with 3 frequencies continuing to MIA, year-round

Helps fill the aircraft flying from SIN to the first destination, gives SQ the honour of being the first airline from greater East Asia to fly to Miami. IF SQ can get carriage rights for YYZ-MIA, gives Canadian snowbirds another option to fly south.

SIN-ICN/NRT-MIA, 3x weekly, year-round

Give Miami's its coveted link to East Asia and SQ bragging rights to first East Asian airline in MIA!!

Would you think SEA and YVR are likely going to be new destinations?

[Jumbojet Lover]

SQ's rejigged North American Network

Wow, Jumbojet Lover! That's a lot of serious thought going into that proposal you have.

I didn't want to steal the thunder from MetropolitanAirlines's radical proposal, but I guess I'll throw my hat in the ring now.

From NYC
EWR-SIN, daily A350-900ULR, year-round
JFK-FRA-SIN, daily A380 for Northern Summer, daily Boeing 777-300ER for Northern Winter.

SQ and United may not have much of a relationship, but it would be mutually beneficial for SQ to serve EWR nonstop from Singapore, by virtue of the fact that they're both in Star Alliance and there are self-connecting passengers (like myself). In fact I would propose that SQ hammers out a codeshare agreement with United on selected destinations to/from EWR. These would be destinations not served non-stop by UA from LAX/SFO (i.e. Montreal, Rochester, Syracuse, Columbus OH...), thereby eliminating the conflict of interest of UA wanting to push passengers to their own SIN flights, OR destinations from which it would take less time to travel to SIN via EWR over LAX/SFO (i.e. Washington D.C., Boston...). This might have some impact on their codeshare flights with Jetblue, but I believe that there are sufficient frequent flyers of both Jetblue and United that remain loyal to their respective airlines not to make both sets of codeshares fall apart. For example, a Boston-based Jetblue Mosaic member would continue to fly Jetblue to JFK to connect to the JFK-FRA-SIN flight, while a United MileagePlus Premier from BOS would now be able to fly BOS-EWR, EWR-SIN.

For JFK, it's easier to see them utilizing the 777-300ER, especially in the off-peak season when I've been on flights that appeared to be less than 50% full. The challenge is the SIN-FRA sector. If slots are not an issue at FRA, SQ could introduce a second terminator SIN-FRA flight with similar timings to the JFK-bound flight.

From LAX
LAX-SIN, daily A350-900ULR, year-round
LAX-NRT-SIN, daily A380, year-round

I think it's hard to see SQ maintaining both LAX-ICN-SIN and LAX-NRT-SIN in addition to the non-stop LAX-SIN. There would be a large increase in capacity by SQ which might weaken the viability of both one-stop flights. I don't see LAX-ICN-SIN being kept over the more established LAX-NRT-SIN. It would revert back to A380 for a more conservative capacity increase. Keeping it 777-300ER would be insufficient for demand. Having Suites offered out of LAX will also be good aspirational marketing and reinforces SQ as the premium airline of choice from LAX to Asia.

The only caveat is if the 777-300ER services via NRT and ICN make good money on bellyhold cargo which makes the flights feasible even with lower passenger revenue. Air cargo is often overlooked and can help to sustain a flight that is marginally profitable. With the air cargo industry rebounding at the moment, this could well be the case for those two SQ flights which might lead to SQ keeping them as they are!

From SFO
SFO-SIN, daily A350-900, year-round
SFO-HKG-SIN, daily 777-300ER, year-round

I've thought of reasons for and against SQ switching the non-stop flight to the A350-900ULR and ultimately thought SQ should not make the switch. Presuming the A350-900ULR has similar operating costs as the base A350-900, I would say SQ is better off keeping the standard A350-900 on the non-stop route and deploying the ULR version on a new route which can only be served by the ULR. I've seen US Dpt of Transportation stats on SQ's SFO-SIN flight and the load factor is very healthy, so switching to a lower capacity A350-900ULR would mean unfulfilled demand. The A350-900ULR cabin configuration may be too premium heavy for SFO and SQ may not be able to command enough of a premium to make it feasible.

From IAH
IAH-MAN-SIN, 5x weekly A350-900

No changes needed here, let the route mature. It's probably a tad too far for the A350-900ULR too and small of a market to go non-stop to SIN.

New A350-900ULR route postulations (assuming SQ does not deploy the A350-900ULR to SFO)

SIN-ORD, daily, year-round

Chicago is a major finance and commerce hub in the US that's missing from SQ's route map. It would be a great connection from the Midwest to the heart of the growing ASEAN community. United has been trying to grow its domestic network from ORD against AA. Having a Star Alliance partner providing the fastest route to Singapore sure doesn't go against that cause.

SIN-YYZ, daily, year-round

Canada's major finance and commercial hub, connecting opportunities via Air Canada. But it may not be a large enough market overall to sustain the premium that an ULR flight demands. Air Canada is also unlikely to want to codeshare given their own ambitions. Who knows, they may be eyeing YVR-SIN using their shiny 787s.

Just for laughs...

SIN-ORD/YYZ-MIA, 5x weekly to ORD/YYZ with 3 frequencies continuing to MIA, year-round

Helps fill the aircraft flying from SIN to the first destination, gives SQ the honour of being the first airline from greater East Asia to fly to Miami. IF SQ can get carriage rights for YYZ-MIA, gives Canadian snowbirds another option to fly south.

SIN-ICN/NRT-MIA, 3x weekly, year-round

Give Miami's its coveted link to East Asia and SQ bragging rights to first East Asian airline in MIA!!

[SQ002]

Introduce SIN-HKG-LAX, replacing SQ 868 and SQ 857, with B77WR
Introduce SIN-HKG-JFK, replacing SQ 872 and SQ 891, with B77WR

.

A long-time dream of mine is to have SQ develop a mini-hub in HKG and open up flights to many US destinations via HKG.

However, my dream isn't coming true anytime soon. Not only because of the fifth freedom right limitations, but also CX is doing very aggressively in the US market. I doubt SQ would want to take the risk to step into further US market competition with CX at HKG.

I look forward to SQ opening up more fifth-freedom routes to the US at HKG, though. But I am also grateful in the mean time that they are still hanging in on SQ1/2.

[CarbonMan]

Wow, Jumbojet Lover! That's a lot of serious thought going into that proposal you have.

Indeed I would think that centralizing all of SQ's ops at JFK is the way to go, as far as operational cost-savings are concerned. Should either the a380 or the new a359ULR encounter technical problems, it would also easier to move pax from one flight to an alternative. However, I think SQ has other thoughts in mind, and EWR is still a strong choice for the a359ULR, just as it was when they were flying the a345.

[Jumbojet Lover]

Relocate all SQ flights at JFK to Terminal 5, so that passengers can connect with High Quality Jetblue, replacing rogue United.

For one, United has 0 flights from JFK. They pulled out completely in 2015. Thus an SQ passenger at JFK wishing to connect to United today would need to transfer airports to LGA or EWR. I, for one, have given up flying Star Alliance domestically (United) when connecting from SQ in NYC simply because the hassle is not worth transferring airports. I simply fly Delta from T4 or take the Airtrain to T5 for Jetblue.

[9V-JKL]

By establishing a scissor hub at HKG for American services, and preferably entering a JV with Hong Kong Airlines, I am sure it will allow Singapore Airlines to further tap into both America and China market., also it allows Singapore Airlines to replace Cathay Pacific to become the preferred airline for Chinese, Hong Kongers and Taiwanese for American routes.

I'm curious to know why you think HKG will work as a hub for USA? Nevermind the fact that SQ only has 3 more weekly slots to USA.
With CX struggling somewhat against Mainland Chinese carriers, how will that work for SQ? Where/who will feed SQ flights?

[SQ228]

A380-800 to replace B777-300ER on the following flights:
SQ211/212
SQ241/242
SQ217/218
SQ288

I simply don't know enough about Asia-US operations, so I'm not going to make any comment about those suggestions. I'll stick with what I'm more familiar with.

Yes, SQ217/8 to MEL should be an A380 more often, although I am uncertain about loads on SQ218 as that is my personal blackspot when it comes to flights to/from MEL. As a regular SQ217 flyer, I haven't seen an empty seat on it for at least 5 years.

Your suggestion regarding SYD might be a little excessive, however. All 5 daily flights, including the one via CBR served by an A380? I reckon they might fill them for a few weeks in the peak seasons, but on a regular basis, given the new seating capacity which will soon be retrofitted into all A380 craft, by my rough calculations, you've added over 600 seats per day onto the same route!

Also, although I'm sure the runway would be technically capable, it would be rather hilarious seeing an A380 moving about at CBR...

[SQfanatic]

That is not likely to happen as SQ only has three more weekly slots between HKG and a US destination, and if they were already maintaining SQ2 anyway, then a 3x weekly service to LAX or JFK probably isn't worth running.

I liked MetropolitanAirlines's statement about the SQ US route strategy. What you forgot to add is what impact would this have on SFO (At least SQ2/1 via HKG). I am sure SQ2/1 would stay as is because having flown that many times, it's always full no matter what season (At least SFO-HKG-SFO).

[a340-313x]

Introduce SIN-HKG-LAX, replacing SQ 868 and SQ 857, with B77WR
Introduce SIN-HKG-JFK, replacing SQ 872 and SQ 891, with B77WR

That is not likely to happen as SQ only has three more weekly slots between HKG and a US destination, and if they were already maintaining SQ2 anyway, then a 3x weekly service to LAX or JFK probably isn't worth running.

[yflyer]

My bet would be on JFK rather than EWR, and with the introduction of more direct services to the US using A350-900ULR, here's my proposed network change for SQ:

Scrap SIN-ICN-LAX, replaced by Asiana Airlines codeshare
Scrap SIN-NRT-LAX, replaced by All Nippon Airways codeshare

Maintain SIN-FRA-JFK, B77WR to replace A380-800
Maintain SIN-MAN-IAH

Introduce SIN-LAX direct, using A350-900ULR
Introduce SIN-JFK direct, using A350-900ULR
Introduce SIN-ORD direct, using A350-900ULR

Relocate all SQ flights at JFK to Terminal 5, so that passengers can connect with High Quality Jetblue, replacing rogue United.

Introduce SIN-HKG-LAX, replacing SQ 868 and SQ 857, with B77WR
Introduce SIN-HKG-JFK, replacing SQ 872 and SQ 891, with B77WR

A350-900 will replace A380-800 on SQ856/861
TR978/979 and TR980/981 will be scrapped, replacing with Silkair B737 Max 8

A380-800 to replace B777-300ER on the following flights:
SQ211/212
SQ241/242
SQ217/218
SQ288

A380-800 to replace A330-300 on the follow flights:
SQ876/877

By establishing a scissor hub at HKG for American services, and preferably entering a JV with Hong Kong Airlines, I am sure it will allow Singapore Airlines to further tap into both America and China market., also it allows Singapore Airlines to replace Cathay Pacific to become the preferred airline for Chinese, Hong Kongers and Taiwanese for American routes.

It also reduces intra competition amongst Star Alliance carriers as well.

Thoughts and discussions welcomed.

A very bold and ambitious prediction/proposal, and some out-of-box, maybe even controversial, thinking, but a very logical and well reasoned point of view, Metropolitan Airlines!

[flyguy]

believed SIN-NRT-LAX will alway remain, and for SQ to use HKG as a "hub" to US is not really viable as there are already fairly intense competion on the HKG to US routes and CX is a major player and doubt SQ will be able to wrestle much traffic from CX.