SIA plane among 8 Boeing 787 jets affected by structural issues

[Jumbojet Lover]

Originally Posted by Not You

9V-SCI will be returning to Singapore via Los Angeles with an early morning arrival (0420H) into Changi this coming Saturday, 31OCT20. This marks the first time an SQ 787 lands into LAX.

Wow, amazed that it has the range for LAX-SIN even if it's pretty empty.

[flyguy]

The 787 should be able to do this with reduced weight. As remember when United launched its non-stop LAX-SIN and vv, they were using the 787 but limited the passengers to about 210 out of 256 passengers and no belly cargo from LAX to SIN.

[Not You]

Originally Posted by Jumbojet Lover

Wow, amazed that it has the range for LAX-SIN even if it's pretty empty.

9V-SCI had the range to fly non-stop from Singapore to Victorville. A stop was required in LAX for Boeing Pilots to handover the plane to SQ pilots waiting there.

[reddevil0728]

Originally Posted by Not You

9V-SCI had the range to fly non-stop from Singapore to Victorville. A stop was required in LAX for Boeing Pilots to handover the plane to SQ pilots waiting there.

wouldn't it make more sense for SQ pilots to just pick it up at Victorville?

[yuuka_miya]

Originally Posted by reddevil0728

wouldn't it make more sense for SQ pilots to just pick it up at Victorville?

I can't help but think that the union or our MOH might have had something to say about that.

Picking up the plane at LAX would allow the pilots to be bussed straight from SQ38 (maybe on the tarmac), and they theoretically won't be exposed to whatever is going on in America right now.

[MainlyMiles]

Originally Posted by yuuka_miya

I can't help but think that the union or our MOH might have had something to say about that.

Picking up the plane at LAX would allow the pilots to be bussed straight from SQ38 (maybe on the tarmac), and they theoretically won't be exposed to whatever is going on in America right now.

Interesting question though, did the SQ pilots who flew the plane non-stop from SIN to VCV then have to quarantine for 14 days on return to SIN? If not, I don’t see any difference doing it in reverse.

[Not You]

Originally Posted by MainlyMiles

Interesting question though, did the SQ pilots who flew the plane non-stop from SIN to VCV then have to quarantine for 14 days on return to SIN? If not, I don’t see any difference doing it in reverse.

If I am not wrong Boeing Pilots flew SCI from SIN to VCV.

[Jumbojet Lover]

Originally Posted by flyguy

The 787 should be able to do this with reduced weight. As remember when United launched its non-stop LAX-SIN and vv, they were using the 787 but limited the passengers to about 210 out of 256 passengers and no belly cargo from LAX to SIN.

Yes but United flew the 787-9 on LAX-SIN, the variant of the 787 family that has the longest range and can fly routes such as Perth-London, not the 787-10. The 787-10 that SQ flies was designed as a high-capacity medium-haul aircraft that trades range for payload. United's 787-10 are flown on medium-haul transatlantic flights while their 787-9s are usually assigned to their longest flights like LAX-SIN and SFO-SIN.

[flyguy]

Yes correct as SQ is the 787-10. However it is flown completely empty with no pax and cargo to LAX and as such was able to fly the distance.

[wlgspotter]

Originally Posted by Jumbojet Lover

Yes but United flew the 787-9 on LAX-SIN, the variant of the 787 family that has the longest range and can fly routes such as Perth-London, not the 787-10. The 787-10 that SQ flies was designed as a high-capacity medium-haul aircraft that trades range for payload. United's 787-10 are flown on medium-haul transatlantic flights while their 787-9s are usually assigned to their longest flights like LAX-SIN and SFO-SIN.

Actually, whilst the 787-10 is supposedly designated as “Medium Haul” aircraft, from memory United did use their 787-10 on SFO-AKL vv before Covid-19 caused the flights to be cancelled. The SFO-AKL sector is in excess of 10,000kms, with flights times of 12+ flights, so I would hardly put that down as “medium-haul”...

[9V-JKL]

https://www.instagram.com/p/CG8fLthBED3/

9V-SCI @ LAX

[flyguy]

from Boeing website - "The longest and newest 787 Dreamliner, the 787-10, will fly 330 passengers up to 6,430 nautical miles (11,910 km) -- or more than 90 percent of twin-aisle routes -- with unprecedented efficiency: 25 percent better fuel and emissions than the airplanes it will replace and 10 percent better than the best on offer by the .."

[Jumbojet Lover]

Originally Posted by wlgspotter

Actually, whilst the 787-10 is supposedly designated as “Medium Haul” aircraft, from memory United did use their 787-10 on SFO-AKL vv before Covid-19 caused the flights to be cancelled. The SFO-AKL sector is in excess of 10,000kms, with flights times of 12+ flights, so I would hardly put that down as “medium-haul”...

Good to know. Seems like a very capable and efficient aircraft.

[wlgspotter]

Originally Posted by Jumbojet Lover

Good to know. Seems like a very capable and efficient aircraft.

I must say though that I’m not sure what is the seating configuration of UA’s 787-10, nor what was the load factor like on those flights and whether they were payload restricted or not. But apparently Air NZ has ordered them and there were discussions that NZ was also going to use them on AKL - USA West Coast ie LAX/SFO etc...So yeah it does appear the 787-10 is a very capable aircraft indeed...

[maxc_20]

Originally Posted by wlgspotter

I must say though that I’m not sure what is the seating configuration of UA’s 787-10, nor what was the load factor like on those flights and whether they were payload restricted or not. But apparently Air NZ has ordered them and there were discussions that NZ was also going to use them on AKL - USA West Coast ie LAX/SFO etc...So yeah it does appear the 787-10 is a very capable aircraft indeed...

Yes, the 787-10 is a very capable aircraft for medium to long range, Boeing listed the rage to be 12,594 km, which is more than enough to operate 12-13 hour flights, which already come to fruition when United operate their US-NZ and US-Asia flights with them. However, in SQ's case, they decide to add more seats by sacrificing the galley area (SQ config is 36J301Y, while UA is 44J21W54Y+199Y). I heard SQ config can't handle 2 hot meal services, only 1 hot meal, and 1 hot snack(assuming high/full load of pax).