A345's to be refitted with 100 x new JCL seats only

[SQflyergirl]

You guys are probably right.
By the way, I still can't figure out how the A380 upper deck fuselage width is wider than the 77W's, but the J seats on the A380 can be wider with the same 1-2-1 configuration?

I think you mean the A380 upper deck is narrower than a 777...

But I was also thinking the same. I suspect that there is actually some "creative accounting" at hand. The A380 seats don't have the bin/tray next to the PTV screen, so the seat-back is definitely "wider".

How can the seats be wider? Note the gap between the D and F seats on the 77W. That gap isn't there on the 380, the two center seats are stuck together. Different management of available real estate i guess.

[StarG]

I think you mean the A380 upper deck is narrower than a 777...

Yeah I meant to write that.
Yup, didn't notice that the A380 J is missing the console thingy next to the seat. Now it makes sense.

[UMD]

But the removal of the center console between C/D is sort of made up by additional 4 inch wider on each seats except for row 11A/K and 12A/K. SQ official data shows that the new C seats on 380 are 34" wide instead of 30" wide.

4 additional inch x 4 seats - that's at least 16 additional inches (40 cm) space taken by the seats. I never really measure it but I know the center console on 77W is less than 40 cm wide. Therefore, although SQ removes the center console, still SQ needs to somehow find more space in the cabin to fit these seats in.

Well, I will try to see this tomorrow morning how SQ can fit wider seats in a narrower cabin when I am on one of these C seats. I will also see how wide the side bins are.

[UMD]

I just checked the specs from both Airbus and Boeing sites:

A380:
Lower Deck Max. Cabin Width: 6.58 m
Upper Deck Max. Cabin Width: 5.92 m
http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfam...fications.html

A345:
Max. Cabin Width: 5.28 m
http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfam...fications.html

B777
Cabin Width: 5.8 m
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777...technical.html

So does this mean the upper deck of A380 is wider than that of B777 or is it because a different definition is used by both Airbus and Boeing? I remember Chew at one of his interview also mentioned that the upper deck of A 380 is wider.

[PhilH]

So does this mean the upper deck of A380 is wider than that of B777 or is it because a different definition is used by both Airbus and Boeing? I remember Chew at one of his interview also mentioned that the upper deck of A 380 is wider.

I think one key aspect is the curvature of the fuselage and the difference between cabin width at floor level (what I suspect is quoted above) and at shoulder level, which is what is needed for seat planning. We know the A380 upper deck starts to curve inwards quite a bit at shoulder level and in fact there are side bins the same as on the 747 upper deck. Also, we know that SQ economy layout upstairs is 2-4-2 while on the 777 it is 3-3-3 even though on the above figures, the A380 upper deck is wider.

So, I think at floor level the A380 upper deck is wider than the 777. At shoulder level, it is probably quite a bit narrower (don't forget the 777 is probably wider at shoulder level than at floor level).

The A345 is substantially narrower than either, so I would really expect a 1-1-1 layout, unless they save some further space from the A380 design.

[StarG]

I never really measure it but I know the center console on 77W is less than 40 cm wide.

The console/tray beside the IFE monitor are also present on the window seats of the 77W, not just the center.

[zvezda]

So does this mean the upper deck of A380 is wider than that of B777 or is it because a different definition is used by both Airbus and Boeing? I remember Chew at one of his interview also mentioned that the upper deck of A 380 is wider.

I think at floor level the A380 upper deck is wider than the 777. At shoulder level, it is probably quite a bit narrower (don't forget the 777 is probably wider at shoulder level than at floor level).

Correct.

The A345 is substantially narrower than either, so I would really expect a 1-1-1 layout, unless they save some further space from the A380 design.

At shoulder and elbow level the A340-500 is roughly about the same width as the upper deck of the WhaleJet. It's possible that the same seats would fit with only the sidebins changed.

[EWR]

Or 'approximately' 100 seats anyway. Due to commence from year end presuming it gets final approval.

Also some interesting changes to the 'schedule' currently being considered. This could be a record breaking process indeed if it goes ahead....

Due to commence year end? 2007? that's really soon... Does anyone have a source on this?

[flyboy777]

Very nice! I wonder if the layout will be 1-2-1 or 1-1-1...

It has to be 1x2x1. The new business class was designed with the Upper Deck of the A380 in mind which has an almost identical cross section to the Airbus A300/A310/A330/A340 cross section.

[hofo_mofo]

Le sigh...I know its far away and everything, but I was already planning my next vacation for the end of the school year next year (April 2008). I was planning on flying from Montreal to EWR so that I could fly on the worlds longest nonstop flight, on a class, which isnt quite business, but sounds just as good. I mean this sounds really stupid, but I really want to cross all 5 oceans, and well after flying with SQ for the first time this past May, with the exception of maybe CX, i am not willing to try anyone else lol...I know you pay more for exec economy, but its still a good price, and with the strong loonie against the green back, I'm dancing (sorry) But if this is the case, I might be able to afford the J class fare, who knows...but the time in which the flight leaves EWR and arrives in SIN is perfect, as it will allows me to connect right away to BKK or DPS.

Well look if it is not to be, oh well...but hey, if in May 2008 they still have that flight unchanged, bonus for me, else I will probably fly out of LAX (although I am flying back into LAX with the 77W), SFO (if they release the whale into the wild) or hey, they may have a YYZ-SIN route somehow...who knows

[emperorsr]

Darn.

When I fly to NYC it's on the 345. If on business and someone else's tab it's one thing, but if on your own, C is in excess of SGD 10 grand +. PE was the best compromise for price and comfort. And frankly beats the new Y product in the A380 and 77W IMHO.

So, if the whalejet is taking over the SIN-FRA-JFK route, then it seems the only way to go to NYC if traveling on Y and if you are hell bent on flying SQ. Then again, knowing SQ, they would increase the fare with the new plane. After the novelty of the A380 subsides, you are still left with a product with a 32 inch seat pitch and thinner seat backs for a flight over 19 hours. And this time you don't have the option of going to the PE 'lounge' to grab your own snacks and drinks and mingle with other pax. Sigh. I've had very good times fly PE on the A345.

So it will be a time to mourn should this conversion happen sooner than later. It clearly shows what everyone knows, that SQ is (justifiably so) a premium carrier whose focus is on the clientele that provides the profit margins: the premium business traveler.

Other options if you are going ex-SIN to NYC, would be to....

Fly TG. Their Y class on their 345 is 36 inches in pitch. You get to stopover in BKK which aint a bad thing. Don't bother going for their PE coz the price difference between that and their C class is only about 600 bucks!

Or Fly TG on their version of the Spacebed for 1/2 the price of SQ. Sure it ain't SQ but hey, it's still C and TG's C pax get treated well in BKK. And you do get a nice amenity kit, that is, if you yell way before hand that is what you are expecting so that they won't tell you that they've run out!

Still depressing though. Sigh. One day, the average Singaporean won't be able to afford SQ unless they are traveling 4 to go on rates that won't earn them mileage. Sigh.

[sqforever]

Darn.

When I fly to NYC it's on the 345. If on business and someone else's tab it's one thing, but if on your own, C is in excess of SGD 10 grand +. PE was the best compromise for price and comfort. And frankly beats the new Y product in the A380 and 77W IMHO.

So, if the whalejet is taking over the SIN-FRA-JFK route, then it seems the only way to go to NYC if traveling on Y and if you are hell bent on flying SQ. Then again, knowing SQ, they would increase the fare with the new plane. After the novelty of the A380 subsides, you are still left with a product with a 32 inch seat pitch and thinner seat backs for a flight over 19 hours. And this time you don't have the option of going to the PE 'lounge' to grab your own snacks and drinks and mingle with other pax. Sigh. I've had very good times fly PE on the A345.

So it will be a time to mourn should this conversion happen sooner than later. It clearly shows what everyone knows, that SQ is (justifiably so) a premium carrier whose focus is on the clientele that provides the profit margins: the premium business traveler.

Yes, SIA is a premium carrier but they still care a great deal about Y pax. Its more of the route-as in, the nonstop flights were primarily commenced to serve business pax who need a quick flight to get them halfway around the world. I have not been on this flight so I can't comment much on Exec. Y but I wouldn't mind sticking with the new Y. It may be 32 in. pitch but the design gives the feeling of 2+ more inches and the whole service is upgraded. I don't think thinner seat cushions would affect comfort either, its more of an improvement in terms of space and weight. And especially being on the whalejet it'll be a very quiet cabin and will make the flight more relaxing with its various innovations/improvements. yes, there will prob. be a surcharge but it shouldn't last too long as the 77W surcharge is already being ended IIRC. The biggest negative I see with the removal of Executive Economy class is that there would no longer be the snack/socialising bar with the heated floors but SIA feeds pax well at least.

[emperorsr]

Yes, SIA is a premium carrier but they still care a great deal about Y pax. Its more of the route-as in, the nonstop flights were primarily commenced to serve business pax who need a quick flight to get them halfway around the world. I have not been on this flight so I can't comment much on Exec. Y but I wouldn't mind sticking with the new Y. It may be 32 in. pitch but the design gives the feeling of 2+ more inches and the whole service is upgraded. I don't think thinner seat cushions would affect comfort either, its more of an improvement in terms of space and weight. And especially being on the whalejet it'll be a very quiet cabin and will make the flight more relaxing with its various innovations/improvements. yes, there will prob. be a surcharge but it shouldn't last too long as the 77W surcharge is already being ended IIRC. The biggest negative I see with the removal of Executive Economy class is that there would no longer be the snack/socialising bar with the heated floors but SIA feeds pax well at least.

Well I have flown on both. And Exec Y is clearly a better product in terms of just the seat alone, and I'm not talking about the seat pitch either. Y on TG is just 1 inch behind the PE product on SQ so that's not the issue. Flying on the 77W, as I told SQ later, the seats were SO uncomfortable by comparison. I was told, Oh that's why everyone gets those nice cushions and blankets.

Don't get me wrong. I love my carrier and there is nothing like the feeling of being in an SQ plane or seeing the sarong kebayas walking en masse in a foreign airport. I swear it's prob a big motivating factor to feel pride in Singapore...still, with other airlines picking up the slack with PE products, one can't help but feel that there is a need in the market for the mid level product.

BTW I am new here and am still trying to figure out some terms. I assume that you were saying that the surcharge for the 77W has ended? Er, I checked for flights to Paris last night and it is holding steady at SGD 2005, way beyond any other airline. Has it really ended? SQ is not known to bring fares southwards. Even while some airlines reverse fuel surcharges to match the market, SQ does not.

And what does IIRC and COS mean...sorry, SQTalk virgin here....:-)

[SQflyergirl]

And what does IIRC and COS mean.

If I recall correctly and

Class of Service or COS - Colorado Springs (depending on how it was used)

[emperorsr]

Yes, SIA is a premium carrier but they still care a great deal about Y pax.

oh PS...I did speak to SQ about their business objectives. They won't be cornered into admitting it. Basically I got a 'No Comment' when I asked them if their profit center is the business and premium traveler and product upgrades are mainly geared for them. But they snickered when pushed a little further like little schoolgirls whose secret was outed. The benefits a Y pax gets comes from the improvements made for C and F. And there is nothing wrong with that. But to think that SQ 'cares' for Y pax is too big a claim. If you take away the stellar inflight service, one can say TG serves better food and seat pitch on their 747, CX gives really nice amenity kits to Y pax, ANA takes superb care of the elderly and child pax etc etc (notice I am only quoting Asian carriers haha).

The seat 'improvement' on the 77W Y does give a 'feeling' of space. But think about this. If you shave off the base cushion of your sofa at home to 3 inches in thickness, would it feel as comfy as one that is 25 inches? Do the finger prod test and you can actually feel the frame of the seat. On shorter flights this is ok. On long haul to the US...OMG.

And if we are stuck with flying via FRA, well hmm, when you get to the other side, it would be JFK. EWR is a better airport. Less chaotic. Less anal. The US being what it is right now, you can imagine what JFK as an airport is like. EWR still has TSA working the place, but it is still relatively calmer.

I still think Y pax are getting the short end of the stick here...sigh.