Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A350 Deliveries and Routes

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

  • Originally posted by pokfur View Post
    I think the A35K would be the right fit to replace the 5 super ageing 773s in the fleet. While kind of an odd ball, they do fulfill a rather niche role flying multiple flights to CGK and MNL daily. Perhaps SQ has no real rush to replace them, since the competition on those routes are rather weak. But eventually they'll get too old too and uneconomical. Alternatively, as the 777X gets delivered, SQ may abuse the old (by then) 77W and plonk them on these short routes, a bit like what the 77E SV- series is doing now.
    But A35K does not have F right?

    I personally feel the C seat in A35K is better than the one in B787-10
    visit my blog

    Comment


    • I note on planespotters that it appears 9V-SHI will be skipped.

      Although it would be a temptation to spray paint a T on the end, I suspect it also indicates that 9V-SHO will be skipped.

      All combinations of H, I, O & X would created two-letter landing gear flap codes that cannot be distinguished from their reverse. HI and IH would be identical when turned upside down from each other, as would HO & OH. As X is never used, that wouldn't become an issue anyway.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by lingua101 View Post
        But A35K does not have F right?

        I personally feel the C seat in A35K is better than the one in B787-10
        SQ doesn't have any A35K. What we're discussing is all hypothetical.

        If you're talking about the A359, are you referring to the long-haul seat or the regional seat?

        If comparing the regional seat, I personally think that due to the larger cabin, the A350 fairs better than the 787, even though the actual seats are identical.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by pokfur View Post
          SQ doesn't have any A35K. What we're discussing is all hypothetical.
          A good discussion I might add.

          I think your idea of a regional A35K is interesting and worth considering.
          Perhaps 2 rows of 2013F will probably take up the additional 7m of cabin length vs the A359 leaving the same 40J, 263Y.

          I of the opinion that 35K can be a 77W replacement for SQ. One can almost copy and paste the entire cabin over. Plus the A35K has a 25% fuel reduction over the 77W (figures from CX), its a winner in my books.

          Happy to hear others thoughts.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by sutrakhk View Post
            All current/soon to receieve A35K operators seat more than 300, as follow:

            QR: C46 + Y281 = 327
            CX: C46 + W32 + Y256 = 334
            VS: C44 + W56 + Y235 = 335
            BA: C56 + W56 + Y219 = 331

            The difference between 77W and A35K is that A35K only have 4 pairs of doors, if SQ put 10 or 11 rows between Door 1 and 2, there is still plenty of room to accommodate the PEY and Y seats.
            Thanks for it.
            But none of them have a F-cabin. I was referencing to SQ's LH config for 77W to A35K comparison.
            Also comparing CX's 77G and A35K, the difference is a mere 6 seats.
            Happy to hear your thoughts.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
              A good discussion I might add.

              I think your idea of a regional A35K is interesting and worth considering.
              Perhaps 2 rows of 2013F will probably take up the additional 7m of cabin length vs the A359 leaving the same 40J, 263Y.

              I of the opinion that 35K can be a 77W replacement for SQ. One can almost copy and paste the entire cabin over. Plus the A35K has a 25% fuel reduction over the 77W (figures from CX), its a winner in my books.

              Happy to hear others thoughts.
              Well, given that F is generally going the way of the dodo (and whatever's left is just Suites now), it might be a waste of money to certify and fit 2013F on a hypothetical A35K. Although it makes me wonder whether pulling a KA would be acceptable, by selling long haul J products as F regionally.

              They could split the 77W into regional (no PEY, maybe lesser J, heck even 10 abreast Y while we're at it), and long-haul for flights that still justify an F cabin, at least until the 777X shows up and can sell suites in 1-1-1 or something.

              All routes that have little F demand can just be run by the A350s, maybe SQ can modify the newer J products and sell something like MH's Business Suites (or whatever is it MU were doing) as an F replacement.
              an infrastructure geek

              Comment


              • I'm sure there'll be an uproar if SQ did a KA. KA can justify what it did because it's still a separate airline from CX.

                As it is, there are already routes such as CGK and HKG which are operated by a mix of long-haul and regional aircraft. Imagine boarding an A359 in JCL and getting the 2013 long-haul seats. And then flying F on the hypothetical A35K and still getting that same seat.

                I'm under the impression that SQ is already developing a new F seat for the 777X. Maybe these can be fitted into the hypothetical A35K. After all, if SQ really orders it, both types might end up arriving around the same time? (tbh I'm not sure of the timeline of the 777X delivery)

                Comment


                • Indeed, but I don't think it'll be a seat, it's more likely to be some kind of a Suite (with separate bed and chair) instead.

                  Given that SQ ordered their 777-9s relatively late, unless they take over some Etihad slots I don't see them getting the 777-9 before 2021.

                  A hypothetical 35K could come earlier, if they opt to convert some of the remaining 359 orders. I'm not sure what could go into a First for the 35K without it being 1-1-1, and with the capacity increase at the back you'd have to copy the 787 seatmap instead?
                  Last edited by yuuka_miya; 10 May 2019, 11:29 PM.
                  an infrastructure geek

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
                    A good discussion I might add.

                    I think your idea of a regional A35K is interesting and worth considering.
                    Perhaps 2 rows of 2013F will probably take up the additional 7m of cabin length vs the A359 leaving the same 40J, 263Y.

                    I of the opinion that 35K can be a 77W replacement for SQ. One can almost copy and paste the entire cabin over. Plus the A35K has a 25% fuel reduction over the 77W (figures from CX), its a winner in my books.

                    Happy to hear others thoughts.
                    2 rows of 2013 F would only take an additional 4-5m of length. Perhaps an additional two rows of 2018 RJ could be added, which gives it a config 8F 48J 263Y. Compared to the current 773, that's still 2 less J seats and 37 more Y seats.

                    The 779 is already poised to be the 77W replacement at SQ, but I believe that a hypothetical longhaul A35K can be used to replace certain 77W routes at SQ whose demand does not warrant a huge capacity increase to the 779.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by pokfur View Post
                      As it is, there are already routes such as CGK and HKG which are operated by a mix of long-haul and regional aircraft. Imagine boarding an A359 in JCL and getting the 2013 long-haul seats. And then flying F on the hypothetical A35K and still getting that same seat.

                      I'm under the impression that SQ is already developing a new F seat for the 777X. Maybe these can be fitted into the hypothetical A35K. After all, if SQ really orders it, both types might end up arriving around the same time? (tbh I'm not sure of the timeline of the 777X delivery)
                      I think that the 2013 F would suffice for regionals to CGK and MNL in the future. An all-new seat would perhaps be more expensive to certify and install on the hypothetical F, and for such short flights I don't think it is necessary. If anything, they could install a slightly improved version of the 2013F that is also slightly smaller - the A350 cabin is narrower than the 777.

                      Comment


                      • 9V-SHF has taken off on her Delivery Flight as SQ8895. She is scheduled to arrive at Changi this evening at 8.45pm local time

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
                          I note on planespotters that it appears 9V-SHI will be skipped.

                          Although it would be a temptation to spray paint a T on the end, I suspect it also indicates that 9V-SHO will be skipped.

                          All combinations of H, I, O & X would created two-letter landing gear flap codes that cannot be distinguished from their reverse. HI and IH would be identical when turned upside down from each other, as would HO & OH. As X is never used, that wouldn't become an issue anyway.
                          How about SHH then?

                          Haha wait, I get it. No matter upside down or right side up it’ll still read as “HH”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by SQ957 View Post
                            I think that the 2013 F would suffice for regionals to CGK and MNL in the future. An all-new seat would perhaps be more expensive to certify and install on the hypothetical F, and for such short flights I don't think it is necessary. If anything, they could install a slightly improved version of the 2013F that is also slightly smaller - the A350 cabin is narrower than the 777.
                            The 2013 F would also have to be certified on the A350, since it is currently only installed on the 77W. By the time the hypothetical A35K arrives, this product would be outdated. Probably more cost effective to get the developers of the next F to also develop a shrunken version for the A35K, like what they did for the 2013 J.

                            Comment


                            • Maybe they will do something to the balance 787. Fit it with PE n first ?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by SQKevin View Post
                                9V-SHF has taken off on her Delivery Flight as SQ8895. She is scheduled to arrive at Changi this evening at 8.45pm local time
                                Is it known yet where the extra planes will be deployed to?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X