SFO-SIN via HKG or ICN; which do you prefer in F?

[Coles]

Which would you suggest in F?
a) SFO-HKG-SIN (774)
b) SFO-ICN-SIN (77W)

Let's ignore for the moment that the 744 leaves very early morning and the 77W leaves early afternoon.

[kkjay77]

77W as I've never ridden her before.

[zvezda]

I prefer via HKG because there is more time to sleep.

[singaporeairlinesboi]

i prefer the 777w. Come on the new seats or an old one?

[zvezda]

Come on the new seats or an old one?

I have no issues with the F seats in Jumbos. I've flown in them since flying F in the 777-300ER and I didn't miss anything except the Do Not Disturb sign.

[jjpb3]

I agree with zvezda about the choice being predicated on what's important for you. If I had to arrive needing to feel refreshed for a meeting, I'd go for the flights that would allow me more uninterrupted sleep.

If the trip were for vacation and I hadn't tried the 77W yet (which I haven't), I'd go for the new experience and begin the adventure earlier, upon boarding.

[zvezda]

The food will be the same and the service will be the same either way. The IFE on the 777-300ER is better, but it's still great on the Jumbo. The seats have advantages and disadvantages. For me, schedule is much more important.

[sporadic]

744 lands at a better time than 77W. But then again, flying F so it doesn't really matter.

[flyguy]

nothing beats the 744 - still is the Queen of the Sky - and smoother through turbulence; and like some say 4 engines are better than 2 over the big pond

[zvezda]

nothing beats the 744 - still is the Queen of the Sky - and smoother through turbulence; and like some say 4 engines are better than 2 over the big pond

No, the 777 is smoother through turbulence than the 747. Also, 2 engines are than 4 due to substantially better dispatch reliability because there are fewer parts and systems that could fail.

[CGK]

The food will be the same and the service will be the same either way.

I disagree about the food and the service being the same. Time of the day and the flight time, make a difference.
But hey, I am so biased against that SQ1 departure time. So my opinion would be very very skewed!


Note: Looking forward to my SQ15 next week!

[flyguy]

still believes the 744 can ride though a turbulence better than a lighter weighted T7 - and dont think its necessarily true that T7 with 2 engines have better desptach reliability "due to less parts" as the reliability for 744s are in the high 90s too - but of course the 744s are older than the T7.
But in anycase, in a T7 if one engine fails over the pacific- its 45% power gone - whereas a 744 can still continue on its way. Oh the A345s are also 4-engined aircraft n dont think reliability is compromised for any 4-engined planes.

[Savage25]

in a T7 if one engine fails over the pacific- its 45% power gone

Whoa! Who taught you that math?

[zvezda]

still believes the 744 can ride though a turbulence better than a lighter weighted T7 - and dont think its necessarily true that T7 with 2 engines have better desptach reliability "due to less parts" as the reliability for 744s are in the high 90s too - but of course the 744s are older than the T7.
But in anycase, in a T7 if one engine fails over the pacific- its 45% power gone - whereas a 744 can still continue on its way. Oh the A345s are also 4-engined aircraft n dont think reliability is compromised for any 4-engined planes.

You don't think? Do you check the actual statistics? Have a look here:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...lity#ID3027362

As for turbulence, the 777 has an active turbulence suppression/compensation system as part of the fly-by-wire that smooths out the ride (vertical only) which the 747 does not have. The 787 will have a more advanced system that works in both the vertical and horizontal directions.

[flyguy]

not sure abt the T& turbulence suppression system - but generally a heavier aircraft do tend to ride it out better and some reports on the A380 flights does seems to confirm that.
As for Savage25 comments on my "maths" - well those who actually know abt aircraft engines and planes would know that on a twin, an engine basically have more power than that on a quad due to uneventful engine-flame out scenario and esp following take-off and that the engines on the T7 can in fact power above its 100% power for a limited time. Hence the 45% loss of power in a T7 when one engine is inoperable.