Because I'd like them to.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
SQ B747-400 withdrawal thread
Collapse
X
-
What if I write a really nice letter?
But seriously, isn't it possible that they are putting 747 on SQ1/2 as demand rises, and at the same time, SQ11/12 could still be seeing low capacity so it gets a 777 ?
Anyway, I've been warned before to not mention any other AC than a 747 on this thread. So that's that!
Comment
-
The withdrawal is happening as planned. But there may be a switch of equipment used for SQ1/2. Yes, yields might be the main reason. Presently SQ1/2 using 77W are solidly booked, while SQ11/12 have lighter load. It's not feasible at the moment to change SQ1/2 into A380 for several reasons (sorry this old man can't remember everything... ) Thus, by using 744 for SQ1/2, the loads and yields should reach a better optimum level. And having 77W for SQ11/12, it would optimize the usage for this particular route.
But remember, SQ decision makers always have different views and opinions. Lets wait and see.
Comment
-
From my experience of SQ11/12, SQ11 has been 65-70% full in Y on LAX-NRT sector, with seats next to you being empty, but on NRT-SIN, the loads were generally better. On SQ12, however, the loads on my flights are always full, even recently, with few op-ups due to overbooking. SQ1/2 had been 60-65% full when 744s were on that route, so as much as I'd like the idea, I doubt that route will see a 744 again, but it's possible. Either way, word is 77Ws freed from ZRH will replace 744s on SQ11/12. I think by Feb, SQ could be down to 4 744s in their fleet with SYD finally getting dwngauged permanently. Once SQ makes a decision about the FRA-JFK sector, the last of the jumbos will leave, which could be by March 2010 as previously planned.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SQ LPP View PostThe withdrawal is happening as planned. But there may be a switch of equipment used for SQ1/2. Yes, yields might be the main reason. Presently SQ1/2 using 77W are solidly booked, while SQ11/12 have lighter load. It's not feasible at the moment to change SQ1/2 into A380 for several reasons (sorry this old man can't remember everything... ) Thus, by using 744 for SQ1/2, the loads and yields should reach a better optimum level. And having 77W for SQ11/12, it would optimize the usage for this particular route.
But remember, SQ decision makers always have different views and opinions. Lets wait and see.
Comment
-
-
switching SQ1/2 back to a 747 would not be good for SIA, why upgrade to a new aircraft with new interiors and then downgrading it back to what they used to have (b747). Its like letting a kid lick a lolly pop but not actually giving it to them to finish.
Comment
-
its more bec of load factor and capacity of the aircraft - as there were some time esp the last year or so when capacity drops that a 77W with 270 seats will do, then when it picks up - the 77W is not able to take on more pax - hence back to the 744 with its 380 seats which is more ideal - and the A380 is too big with its 480 seats.
Comment
Comment