Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A350 Deliveries and Routes

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

  • Hi FN-GM and SQ228

    Thanks for the comments - I'll try and pick up on them in this response.

    Originally posted by FN-GM View Post
    When going from MAN > BNE (via SIN) I stay awake until I get on the BNE flight. Right away I sleep for a few hours (power nap) and they stay awake until landing. When I get in I then go straight to bed.

    Going back BNE > MAN (via SIN) I get the afternoon BNE flight stay awake for that flight. and then sleep for 9 hours on SQ52. I am then ok for the day in MAN.

    This method seems to work best for me.
    From my perspective, I like arriving mid-morning (going either way) so I have a bit of the day and evening before crashing! I don't really get affected by jetlag, so my view is perhaps coloured by that!

    So, going from Australasia to the UK, I like a late afternoon/early evening departure which connects well into bank of departures ex-SIN to Europe (I think this is similar to FN-GM.

    Going from the UK to Australasia, the night departures are preferable to me, essentially because it is easier to sleep on the long sector to SIN. Thereafter, I treat the second sector ex-SIN to going to bed as a long day (so if I can doze on the aircraft that's fine, if not, I'm not overly concerned).


    Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
    I think there is merit in offering an evening departure as Dobbo suggests, but the SQ methodology is always making the first flight daily and then adding a second timing after that and I can't see that changing.

    Just to imagine, if the second timing was combined with an added US leg, the flight heading over from MAN to the US port would have to be red-eye in order to turn around and arrive in MAN at night, would it not? And if this is so, either the arrival into MAN from SIN would need to be very late at night, or the arrival into the US brutally early?

    The risk is ending up with the mess that BCN was in back in the days of GRU with some days offering 2 departures to SIN timed close together with other days having no departure at all.
    I think this hits the nail on the head. A transit flight to the Americas makes good commercial sense, but makes scheduling a night departure ex-MAN tough. I don't see how this could work unless it is a standalone MAN terminator, or if the scheduling on the Americas side was less than ideal.

    Comment


    • What has happened to 9V-SMu? Hasn’t flown for more than a week

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ell3 View Post
        What has happened to 9V-SMu? Hasn’t flown for more than a week
        It was AOG in Jakarta on 26FEB18 and flew SQ957D back to SIN a full day later (for some reason not reflected on FR24 history) where it has remained on ground ever since. At present, 9V-SMU is scheduled to resume service on SQ856|12MAR (subject to change).
        Singapore Airlines - A great way to fly...

        Comment


        • Interesting that on Jetphotos, the first A350-900ULR (msn 216) is uploaded as 9V-SGE. At this stage in production, should it not be a French test registration anyways?
          https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8880506

          Singapore Airlines - A great way to fly...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by 9V-SPL View Post
            Interesting that on Jetphotos, the first A350-900ULR (msn 216) is uploaded as 9V-SGE. At this stage in production, should it not be a French test registration anyways?
            I think someone used it out of nostalgia. It was the last of the ULH A340s.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 9V-SPL View Post
              Interesting that on Jetphotos, the first A350-900ULR (msn 216) is uploaded as 9V-SGE. At this stage in production, should it not be a French test registration anyways?
              https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8880506

              Believed there is some inside news, meaning that the ULR would use 9V-SG_ series again.

              As MSN 216 would conduct testings in Airbus and join SQ later this year, so I think the 7 ULR would be 9V-SGA till 9V-SGG, which tally with the 787-10 with earlier production testing frame as 9V-SCB and later one got 9V-SCA

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ell3 View Post
                What has happened to 9V-SMu? Hasn’t flown for more than a week
                Finally some activity with 9V-SMU. It went for an air-test earlier this afternoon (12MAR18) as SQ8895. The issue must've been serious enough to have kept it grounded for close to 2 weeks and warrant an air-test I suppose.
                Singapore Airlines - A great way to fly...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 9V-SPL View Post
                  Finally some activity with 9V-SMU. It went for an air-test earlier this afternoon (12MAR18) as SQ8895. The issue must've been serious enough to have kept it grounded for close to 2 weeks and warrant an air-test I suppose.
                  9V-SMU was AOG in CGK due the flight control problem. It was ferried back to Singapore on Special conditions and was grounded till Airbus figured out what actually went wrong. SQ was really unhappy that a brand new aircraft is giving a lot of problem.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by banx007 View Post
                    9V-SMU was AOG in CGK due the flight control problem. It was ferried back to Singapore on Special conditions and was grounded till Airbus figured out what actually went wrong. SQ was really unhappy that a brand new aircraft is giving a lot of problem.
                    Well, I’m sitting in the ANA lounge at Haneda now waiting to board SQ633 and it’s 9V-SMU. Awesome to see it’s finally flying after two weeks on the ground! Shall enjoy the feel of sparkling new interior.

                    Comment


                    • A350-900ULR third destination

                      One of the most meaningless "duh" statements to come out of him and for it to be reported.

                      When asked about plans for the new Airbus 350-900ULR - which SIA will be the first airline in the world to operate - the carrier's chief executive Goh Choon Phong said on Monday (March 26) that there is potentially one more destination that the carrier has "firm plans" for.
                      http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...tra-long-range

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by CarbonMan View Post
                        One of the most meaningless "duh" statements to come out of him and for it to be reported.



                        http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...tra-long-range
                        I'm so sick of waiting to hear. Either they switch SFO to ULR or they pick another. If it's the SFO option, that's going to be quite a letdown, except for the people holding Y tickets after the changeover date!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SQ228 View Post
                          I'm so sick of waiting to hear. Either they switch SFO to ULR or they pick another. If it's the SFO option, that's going to be quite a letdown, except for the people holding Y tickets after the changeover date!
                          I'll wager its NOT SFO

                          Comment


                          • Regional version to be 250T

                            The regional versions of the A350 will be certified at 250T MTOW.

                            Engine thrust to be reduced to 75,000lb

                            https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...n-2018-447149/

                            The Star Alliance carrier is the launch customer for the lower weight A350-900 variant, which will be certificated to a 250t maximum take-off weight compared to the 278t of the standard A350-900.Its Rolls-Royce Trent XWB engines will be derated to 75,000lb-thrust (334kN), allowing cyclic engine maintenance intervals to be extended, but will otherwise be identical to other A350-900s.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
                              The regional versions of the A350 will be certified at 250T MTOW.

                              Engine thrust to be reduced to 75,000lb

                              https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...n-2018-447149/
                              So very similar to their use of the 772.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
                                The regional versions of the A350 will be certified at 250T MTOW.

                                Engine thrust to be reduced to 75,000lb

                                https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...n-2018-447149/
                                The article also has an interesting comment on the A350 Regional being more comfortable for longer routes...
                                /Desert Traveller

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X