Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A350 Deliveries and Routes

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

  • Even if its SEA, there's no need for the A350ULR as the standrad A350 can easily make it non-stop from SIN-SEA

    Comment


    • Personally I would like to see a direct to SEA, whether it is on the -900 or the ULR.

      I wonder if the IAH is a potential candidate for the ULR, replacing the MAN stopover flight. It would cut the flight time substantially from the current 22-24 hours to perhaps 19. ORD would be my other bet.

      Comment


      • The confirmed registration for SQ's 1st A350-900 ULR is 9V-SGE. She is currently performing her 11th Test Flight.



        Comment


        • Originally posted by SQKevin View Post
          The confirmed registration for SQ's 1st A350-900 ULR is 9V-SGE. She is currently performing her 11th Test Flight.



          You can say it is 1st, or it is 5th

          Comment


          • Thanks SQKevin for the pics.

            No special livery for the ULRs.... I supppose the only way to tell it apart from the other 359s is the window arrangements

            Comment


            • Originally posted by CarbonMan View Post
              Personally I would like to see a direct to SEA, whether it is on the -900 or the ULR.

              I wonder if the IAH is a potential candidate for the ULR, replacing the MAN stopover flight. It would cut the flight time substantially from the current 22-24 hours to perhaps 19. ORD would be my other bet.
              I had the exact same thought about IAH, which would allow them to make MAN daily without scheduling hassles. Their MAN-IAH traffic isn't too woeful to necessitate it, but removing Y as an option could cut some of the SIN-IAH traffic I wonder?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by sutrakhk View Post
                You can say it is 1st, or it is 5th
                1st A350-900 ULR in production and 5th to be delivered.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
                  Thanks SQKevin for the pics.

                  No special livery for the ULRs.... I supppose the only way to tell it apart from the other 359s is the window arrangements
                  You are welcome, 9V-JKL.

                  9V-SGE will be the 5th ULR to be delivered, while 9V-SGA will be the 1st ULR delivery. 9V-SGA is still unpainted, so we may still see a special livery. But, then again, we didn't have a special livery or sticker for the 1st B787-10. So let's wait and see.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
                    Thanks SQKevin for the pics.

                    No special livery for the ULRs.... I supppose the only way to tell it apart from the other 359s is the window arrangements
                    The ULRs also have new Sharklets that are less swept backwards compared to the original ones.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
                      I had the exact same thought about IAH, which would allow them to make MAN daily without scheduling hassles. Their MAN-IAH traffic isn't too woeful to necessitate it, but removing Y as an option could cut some of the SIN-IAH traffic I wonder?
                      On the face of it, IAH going non-stop is highly unlikely. SIN-IAHvv traffic is very low, roughly 50-70 per flight. Unless the overwhelming volume/value of SIN-IAH traffic routes via other airlines, this is obviously too low. It is the SIN-MAN and MAN-IAH traffic that makes SQ51/52 work, albeit the present difficulty is how to add capacity to MAN-SIN when SIN/MAN-IAH traffic doesn't warrant the increase.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Dobbo View Post
                        On the face of it, IAH going non-stop is highly unlikely. SIN-IAHvv traffic is very low, roughly 50-70 per flight. Unless the overwhelming volume/value of SIN-IAH traffic routes via other airlines, this is obviously too low. It is the SIN-MAN and MAN-IAH traffic that makes SQ51/52 work, albeit the present difficulty is how to add capacity to MAN-SIN when SIN/MAN-IAH traffic doesn't warrant the increase.
                        Agreed. Interestingly, though small, IAH has more traffic to SIN than ORD, SEA, etc. It's the fourth largest US market from SIN behind NYC, SFO & LAX. However, I understand SQ is targeting the oil industry in Aberdeen by connecting IAH and MAN (hence the codeshare with FlyBe). I can't see them operate a nonstop SIN-IAH alongside the existing SIN-MAN-IAH service. With oil prices rebounding, I'm not sure they'd be willing to quit the MAN-IAH market now, particularly given their current monopoly on the route.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SQ957 View Post
                          The ULRs also have new Sharklets that are less swept backwards compared to the original ones.
                          Indeed the're different but they're not very obvious unless one looks really hard.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Dobbo View Post
                            It is the SIN-MAN and MAN-IAH traffic that makes SQ51/52 work, albeit the present difficulty is how to add capacity to MAN-SIN when SIN/MAN-IAH traffic doesn't warrant the increase.
                            If traffic rights allow, another SIN-MAN-North America route, maybe 3x/4x weekly to start.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Jumbojet Lover View Post
                              If traffic rights allow, another SIN-MAN-North America route, maybe 3x/4x weekly to start.
                              Manchester is a convenient stop off point between Singapore and any one of a number of major cities on the eastern seaboard and Midwest including New York, Boston, Washington, Chicago and Toronto. I don't think it is impossible, but who knows what SQ think.

                              Comment


                              • Just read that the A350ULR comes with its forward cargo hold deactivated. With belly cargo considered an important component in improving the yield of a flight, this sure sounds like a downer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X