Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • soak01
    replied
    No More Y+ on SQ38

    According to the SQ booking website, there will be no more Y+ after 30 August 2007 on SQ38 . As a result Y passengers to LAX will only have the choice of the daily SQ12 (SIN/NRT/LAX) on a 744 or SQ28 (SIN/TPE/LAX) 4 x per week on a 772. So it looks like I'll miss out on the Y+ experience and the new economy on the 773 .

    Does anyone know if the reduction on the SQ28 is due to a lack of aircraft or passenger demand and if there are any plans to increase capacity on the LAX route to compensate for the loss of SQ38. I guess eventually we may see an A380 on the LAX run.

    Leave a comment:


  • MAN Flyer
    replied
    Originally posted by maxmin View Post
    What do you think the chances are of this being complete by mid 2008?
    Slim at the moment, as there is now a chance that the refit may not actually happen after all. 772LR's are apparently being considered.

    Flip a coin methinks.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doraemon
    replied
    Originally posted by iad777 View Post
    This seems reasonable. I hope they keep the current A345 configuration until these aircraft are replaced.

    Do you think the 772LR will open up any new ULH routes?

    It is rather unlikely for SQ to buy 772LR due to its high price and low resale value of A345. Hence, chances of new ULH routes are rather slim at this moment until B787 and A350XWB arrive.

    It makes sense to retrofit the A345 with all new business class seats to improve the yields and also to standard the ULH and LH products. Imagine flying spacebed on non-stop to LAX while the 1-stop flight has the new business class seat...

    Leave a comment:


  • maxmin
    replied
    Originally posted by MAN Flyer View Post
    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....
    Great info MAN Flyer!
    What do you think the chances are of this being complete by mid 2008? Would you care to elaborate on the schedule changes?!

    Leave a comment:


  • WSSS
    replied
    Originally posted by UMD View Post
    SQ should really look at ORD again.
    Agreed. It was just unfortunate that SARS happened and they decided to suspend it.

    Leave a comment:


  • huaiwei
    replied
    Originally posted by Sqstalker View Post
    My national carrier is generally more expensive than yours….so I choose SQ for flts up North. Reasons : Price and quality but not neccessarily just these 2 reasons
    Ah and just two weeks ago, my group was forced to travel on Qantas because SQ was too full, but I was still rather upset despite the cheaper tickets (it's partly sponsored, that's why! ). I believe it is a wide-spread phenomena that buying tickets from an airline's home base will generally be the most expensive, national airline or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • UMD
    replied
    SQ should really look at ORD again.

    Leave a comment:


  • sqforever
    replied
    Originally posted by iad777 View Post
    This seems reasonable. I hope they keep the current A345 configuration until these aircraft are replaced.

    Do you think the 772LR will open up any new ULH routes?

    It's very likely. As talked about in another thread, Toronto is being considered. Other cities like IAD have been mentioned.

    Leave a comment:


  • iad777
    replied
    Originally posted by MAN Flyer View Post
    Which it hasn't done yet, and may now not get after all!.

    There is a counter train of thought now that thinks some 772LR's would be a better idea, and to just leave the 345's as they are until they leave when these arrive.

    There seems to have been a lot of chin and head scratching going on at SQ over routes (with IAH and the others they are looking at...) and fleet ops recently.
    This seems reasonable. I hope they keep the current A345 configuration until these aircraft are replaced.

    Do you think the 772LR will open up any new ULH routes?

    Leave a comment:


  • MAN Flyer
    replied
    Originally posted by MAN Flyer View Post
    presuming it gets final approval.
    Which it hasn't done yet, and may now not get after all!.

    There is a counter train of thought now that thinks some 772LR's would be a better idea, and to just leave the 345's as they are until they leave when these arrive.

    There seems to have been a lot of chin and head scratching going on at SQ over routes (with IAH and the others they are looking at...) and fleet ops recently.

    Leave a comment:


  • UMD
    replied
    Originally posted by zvezda View Post
    Right. The seats from the 777-300ER won't fit.
    The 777-300ER seats are wider due to its side consoles (center consoles) and thus take up more space.

    However, in terms of the cushion width, the 380 seats are wider by 5 inches ( except for those seats on 11 A/K and 12 A/K which have the cushion width of 30 inches ).
    Last edited by UMD; 14 December 2007, 12:55 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Singapore_Air
    replied
    Originally posted by emperorsr
    isn't telling a member to 'deal with it' a little caustic on a personal level? or is this a classic case of cyber misunderstanding, seeing that your tone cannot be heard or felt?
    I apologise if you were offended. It was a sweeping statement to the world because my point is the world is a greedy place and humans have been conditioned to become beyond selfish these days so I found your point regarding SIA being greedy a truism.

    Also with regards to your view on the B77W seats, I respectfully disagree. After flights from HKG to FRA via SIN, I found the B77W as comfortable as Economy Class can get (read: I found them comfortable). And while I find that my arse can suffer on a B744 Y in SQ, I didn't feel any problems at all after SQ326.

    Leave a comment:


  • MAN Flyer
    replied
    Originally posted by emperorsr
    SQ IS our national airline. not supposed. not in inverted commas. and ask any Singaporean, our pride in our national airline IS strong, even as it is getting more elitist by the day. we may fly other airlines, but we still like knowing that they look to sq as an industry leader (and yes even if this means going up the premium scale). aint that an interesting relationship?
    While SQ is obviously Singapore based and is rightly a source of pride for most Singaporeans, I'm afraid it owes it's success to being a truly global operator that earns most of it's revenue flying foreigners around the globe. As a result this is what their primary objective is and will remain so into the future.

    They have undoubtedly got greedy and arrogant over recent years, but I suppose with aircraft flying around that are full most of the time this is unfortunately somewhat inevitable.

    We don't like it any more than you do, but the simple choice is to fly them or fly someone else. Those of you based in Singapore usually have the luxury of choosing another airline instead due to Changi's excellent network.

    Leave a comment:


  • upright man
    replied
    Originally posted by emperorsr View Post
    YES YES YES!!! I don't understand all the people who glow about the new Y on the 77W and the A380. They may not have sat on the Premium Y seats. Maybe they are comparing to some older seats on TG or Ethiopian air. Maybe I am just spoilt by the A345. But seriously, the seat pitch is the same as the 747s, cushioning is thinner so logic will tell you that the metal innards of the chair can be felt if you sit there too long, and when you slide forward, you are bound to hit on the guy in front of you. If that seat is in your home in front of your computer, you would not sit on it for too long. Sat in that seat from SIN - CDG. Around 12 hours. I am 1.73m and even sat in the bulkhead row. OMG. Leg room or no, I should get SQ to pay for my massage therapy for the bad back and sore behind.
    .
    I have just one thing to add : you are right about the new Y - when I was sitting in the cramped Y seat of the A380, I was just wishing that SQ had removed one row of seats, liberating 32 inches and given 32 rows an extra inch each - that may just hit the sweet spot, or it may not, who knows ?
    But for sure a 32 inch pitch is really uncomfortable for a long flight.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sqstalker
    replied
    Originally posted by emperorsr View Post
    Sorry, but it is upsetting how greedy the airline is becoming.
    I cannot help but to agree with Singapore_Air that any company will need to maximise profits from its current strengths. Call it greed if you will….but they are getting their planes filled and profits ringing in.They are answerable to their shareholders. Unfortunately, some Singaporeans, may not realise that your small population doesn’t help add much to the profit of your National Flag Carrier.. ie Your airline relies on international passengers for most of its profits.

    Naturally, if i were SQ I would , cash in on my ‘best’ customers. Whine all you want but this is the hard facts of life. But you do have a choice.
    Like I do here @ Down Under. My national carrier is generally more expensive than yours….so I choose SQ for flts up North. Reasons : Price and quality but not neccessarily just these 2 reasons

    Finally, find me a carrier that gives you *comfortable Y seats from SIN to Paris. I’d like to try it out
    Last edited by Sqstalker; 11 December 2007, 04:00 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X