A350 Deliveries and Routes

[A350R]

http://www.city-data.com/forum/aviat...ets-us-25.html

- Washington DC-Baltimore Region
Singapore, Singapore: 19,505
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,228

- Chicago:
Singapore, Singapore: 23,592

- Boston:
Singapore, Singapore: 16,421

- Houston:
Singapore, Singapore: 36,974
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: 13,388
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,237
Perth, Australia: 11,819

- Seattle:
Singapore, Singapore: 16,449
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,950

A guy share on forum regarding O&D. I pick some cities that can be connected 1 stop via SIN.

The most potential city to get a non stop is Houston. SIN-IAH will get a non-stop once there is a 6% improvement in aircraft efficiency (mostly we need to wait for A350ulr-Neo).

Meanwhile the flying into EWR instead of JFK expanded SQ catchment to Washington DC and Boston, as EWR is better integrated with Acela and Amtrak.

Meanwhile if UA or AS are willing to codeshare, SEA or ORD direct will happen.

[davidfusq]

Cathay Pacific today (19JUL18) announced new service launch to the US, as the oneWorld member plans to operate Hong Kong – Seattle service on 31MAR19. Service will be operated by Airbus A350-900XWB aircraft, 4 times a week.

CX858 HKG2355 – 2100SEA 359 x135
CX857 SEA0105 – 0525+1HKG 359 x246

Source: https://www.routesonline.com/news/38...te-march-2019/

Might this sway SQ to offer SIN-SEA service next year?

[Jumbojet Lover]

Might this sway SQ to offer SIN-SEA service next year?

If anything, it might dissuade SQ from starting SEA. CX would offer more connecting opportunities to Asia via HK, and it's already in addition to other Asian airlines at SEA such as ANA, EVA, Asiana, which are in Star Alliance too. Maybe SQ could capitalize on its popularity with Indian nationals who might do SEA-SIN-India, but then SQ should have started flights already if it felt that it had a shot. Probably too late to the game now.

[A350R]

Washington DC-Baltimore Region
Singapore, Singapore: 19,505
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,228

Chicago
Singapore, Singapore: 23,592

Boston:
Singapore, Singapore: 16,421

Houston:
Singapore, Singapore: 36,974
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: 13,388
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,237
Perth, Australia: 11,819

Seattle:
Singapore, Singapore: 16,449
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,950

Los Angeles:
Singapore, Singapore: 104,052
Jakarta, Indonesia: 67,029
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: 37,913
Perth, Australia: 35,235

San Francisco Bay Area:
Singapore, Singapore: 93,592
Jakarta, Indonesia: 32,333
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: 15,527

New York:
Singapore, Singapore: 112,608
Jakarta, Indonesia: 36,971
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: 26,314

Additional USA Singapore/South APAC city pairs O&D.

Obviously more likely an increase non stop frequencies in SIN-SFO, SIN-NYC (EWR or JFK) and SIN-LAX than anything any new destination for next 3 years. Without UA codeshare SQ to ORD unlikely. SIN-DME-IAD in theory is feasible since there is no direct flight. And not sure why there is no direct flight between Moscow and DC. Any reader want to contribute?

Washington DC-Baltimore Region
Singapore, Singapore: 19,505
Jakarta, Indonesia: 12,228
Moscow, Russian Federation: 43,704

[ek&sq]

I recently saw the same numbers posted to Anet. Sadly, the data is from 2011. There's no doubt the market has grown in the 7 years since, especially with stimulus from the nonstop services.

It is useful though, to see a general ranking of the biggest markets, the order of which I doubt has significantly changed, i.e. 1. NYC 2. LA/SF 3. Houston 4. Chicago 5. DC 6. Seattle/Boston

However, I think the biggest market which is currently unserved is YVR-SIN, which was most recently estimated to be 30,000 pax. It's probably the most feasible one too, given its relative proximity and the fact that both SQ and AC possess aircraft capable of performing the mission.

[A350R]

Chicago
Singapore, Singapore: 23,592
Hong Kong, Hong Kong: 83,703
Seoul, South Korea: 175,691
Tokyo, Japan: 211,731

SIN-HKG-ORD is possible technically. Although SIN-HKG-SFO is always profitable, it is rather "anachronism" given that SQ is now able to fly a 3 class plane direct to SFO. It now depends whether SQ want to open up a SIN-HKG-ORD in favor of SIN-HKG-SFO. This will also allow SQ to have a 14 weekly 3 class SIN-SFO complement with 3 weekly ULR premium.

Not sure why SQ is not staring SIN-INC-ORD? Anyway Korea aviation is always restrictive to precision.

[A350R]

BTW, the A350 ULR also come with standard variant of MTOW of 280t. This variant allows SIN-LAX direct at 253 pax, without payload restriction on the passenger side. The below merits some thoughts.

1. SIN-SFO 3 class 14x weekly + 2 class premium 3x weekly
2. SIN-LAX 3 class 7x weekly + 2 class premium 10x weekly

and the valuable 5th freedom rights can be used for
1. SIN-HKG ### IAD, ORD, BOS, SEA
2. SIN-NRT ### IAD, ORD, BOS, SEA

[9V-SKU]

If anything, it might dissuade SQ from starting SEA. CX would offer more connecting opportunities to Asia via HK, and it's already in addition to other Asian airlines at SEA such as ANA, EVA, Asiana, which are in Star Alliance too. Maybe SQ could capitalize on its popularity with Indian nationals who might do SEA-SIN-India, but then SQ should have started flights already if it felt that it had a shot. Probably too late to the game now.

You’re so right:

When Cathay Pacific meets Seattle …
Non-stop services to “The Emerald City” start from March 2019

Thursday, July 19, 2018 — Cathay Pacific will commence a new non-stop service to Seattle on 31 March 2019, becoming the only airline that will directly link Hong Kong with the fastest-growing city on the west coast of the United States.

Cathay Pacific Chief Executive Officer Rupert Hogg said the Seattle route, which will be operated by the airline’s state-of-the-art Airbus A350-900 aircraft, underscores the airline’s expansion strategy to connect new destinations not otherwise served from Hong Kong – and to link its home, one of the most innovative cities in Asia, with tech hubs the world over.

The Cathay Pacific Group is undergoing a period of unprecedented growth, with nine new destinations having already been announced for launch this year.

[A350R]

It is about time for SQ to seriously consider re-routing SQ1/2 (SIN-HKG-SFO) and SQ11/12. While SQ1 is a cash cow, she now stands in the way of additional 3 class flight to SFO. SQ need to consider whether it is better to have SIN-SFO 3 class 14x weekly + 2 class premium 3x weekly. Similarly since Airbus has just offerred the A350 280t weight variant, SQ can fly direct to LAX at 253 pax. SQ should consider starting SIN-LAX 3 class 7x weekly + 2 class premium 10x weekly.

I believe the following re-route is optimal. IAD could be tagged with moscow once ARN can stand on its own feet. Manchester can tag with Boston, after SQ flies direct to IAH. SQ would then be able cover the most important political and financial center of USA and work its way towards non stop.

SIN-HKG-ORD
SIN-NRT-SEA
SIN-DME-IAD
SIN-MAN-BOS

[krispykreme]

It is about time for SQ to seriously consider re-routing SQ1/2 (SIN-HKG-SFO) and SQ11/12. While SQ1 is a cash cow, she now stands in the way of additional 3 class flight to SFO. SQ need to consider whether it is better to have SIN-SFO 3 class 14x weekly + 2 class premium 3x weekly. Similarly since Airbus has just offerred the A350 280t weight variant, SQ can fly direct to LAX at 253 pax. SQ should consider starting SIN-LAX 3 class 7x weekly + 2 class premium 10x weekly.

I believe the following re-route is optimal. IAD could be tagged with moscow once ARN can stand on its own feet. Manchester can tag with Boston, after SQ flies direct to IAH. SQ would then be able cover the most important political and financial center of USA and work its way towards non stop.

SIN-HKG-ORD
SIN-NRT-SEA
SIN-DME-IAD
SIN-MAN-BOS

You do realize SQ 1/2 is very premium heavy between HKG and SFO.

Especially for hi-tech working bee that wants to avoid UA like a plague

[SQ228]

It is about time for SQ to seriously consider re-routing SQ1/2 (SIN-HKG-SFO) and SQ11/12. While SQ1 is a cash cow, she now stands in the way of additional 3 class flight to SFO. SQ need to consider whether it is better to have SIN-SFO 3 class 14x weekly + 2 class premium 3x weekly. Similarly since Airbus has just offerred the A350 280t weight variant, SQ can fly direct to LAX at 253 pax. SQ should consider starting SIN-LAX 3 class 7x weekly + 2 class premium 10x weekly.

I believe the following re-route is optimal. IAD could be tagged with moscow once ARN can stand on its own feet. Manchester can tag with Boston, after SQ flies direct to IAH. SQ would then be able cover the most important political and financial center of USA and work its way towards non stop.

SIN-HKG-ORD
SIN-NRT-SEA
SIN-DME-IAD
SIN-MAN-BOS

SIN-DME-IAH was broken up because it was failing. Adding ARN was sort of a rescue move to help keep DME, while also being able to add ARN. Getting SIN-IAD passengers to fly via DME is a kind of surreal humour to me given the current state of politics in Washington

[9V-JKL]

BTW, the A350 ULR also come with standard variant of MTOW of 280t. This variant allows SIN-LAX direct at 253 pax, without payload restriction on the passenger side.

I am curious how you arrive at the conclusion that a 280T regular A350 can fly SIN-LAX without restrictions.
Airbus is claiming a 1% fuel improvement which equates about another 100nm range. SIN-LAX is about 280nm further than SIN-SFO... The math doesn't work out for me....help me....

[A350R]

I am curious how you arrive at the conclusion that a 280T regular A350 can fly SIN-LAX without restrictions.
Airbus is claiming a 1% fuel improvement which equates about another 100nm range. SIN-LAX is about 280nm further than SIN-SFO... The math doesn't work out for me....help me....

Airbus has extended the range of the A350 in several steps. The first was certifying with a higher Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW) than announced in 2014. Instead of a maximum of 268t, the aircraft was certified with 275t. This increased the range from 7.750nm to close to 8,000nm.

Later the MTOW extended to 280t, when the longer range A350-900ULR was announced. The range of the standard A350-900 was now 8,100nm. The A350-900URL version extends the fuel capacity in addition, from 141,000l to 165,000l, so flights up to 9,700nm can be made (though with reduced seat numbers).

https://leehamnews.com/2017/10/25/ai...harklets-a350/

The 280T variant is just out, and first configure for ULR. It could be configured for normal rated 314 seats, and this range at still air should be around 8500nm (after adjusting the fuel tank sensor for more fuel as per ULR). If we bring the number of pax down to 253, then SIN-LAX direct is possible.

[9V-JKL]

The 280T variant is just out, and first configure for ULR. It could be configured for normal rated 314 seats, and this range at still air should be around 8500nm (after adjusting the fuel tank sensor for more fuel as per ULR). If we bring the number of pax down to 253, then SIN-LAX direct is possible.

You can't use still air range to calculate it.... No airline does. You need to consider winds, reserve fuel, alternate airports, payloads......

[SQ228]

You can't use still air range to calculate it.... No airline does. You need to consider winds, reserve fuel, alternate airports, payloads......

Yes, like you, I'm seeing a lot of very dry, mathematical calculations occurring here, which would be fine if we were all robots. Raw numbers are one thing, but they don't account for personal preferences, brand loyalty or government employees required to fly on national carriers. Passengers also have this annoying habit of weighing different quantities...