A350 Deliveries and Routes

[vasqflyer]

Thanks again for the updates SQKevin. I also had the same question on SMU on the configuration. That would be the 21st A350 and I thought the first 20 A350s were configured for longhaul routes only.

I can't guess for sure on SMU but I know for a fact regional and ULR 350s may have a different series than SM* at least what it is indicating.

As far as the next preceding 350's, wow seems late. No delivery til January?

I agree, there were certainly a number of reports that the first 20 350s would be long haul. If SW #22 is definitely going to be the first ULR then I think 21 will be an additional long haul aircraft. I just cannot imagine SQ keeping a single new 350 with a different product for a number of months while the ULR aircraft are delivered.

Another interesting aspect is if SFO will remain with the 900s or the ULR. If it remains with the 900 then an additional long haul 900 would fit with the original SQ plan since SFO direct was not on the cards with the config for the first 20 was planned. If that is the case then, where would the extra ULR capacity go? 1 more daily (Chicago?) or a mix to a number of spots (Boston / Washington / Chicago).

All I know is that next year will be a lot of fun for us!

[SQfanatic]

I agree, there were certainly a number of reports that the first 20 350s would be long haul. If SW #22 is definitely going to be the first ULR then I think 21 will be an additional long haul aircraft. I just cannot imagine SQ keeping a single new 350 with a different product for a number of months while the ULR aircraft are delivered.

Another interesting aspect is if SFO will remain with the 900s or the ULR. If it remains with the 900 then an additional long haul 900 would fit with the original SQ plan since SFO direct was not on the cards with the config for the first 20 was planned. If that is the case then, where would the extra ULR capacity go? 1 more daily (Chicago?) or a mix to a number of spots (Boston / Washington / Chicago).

All I know is that next year will be a lot of fun for us!

As we have indicated at one point, when the ULR comes, SFO will get the ULR. The reason they're sticking with the -900 is because the factor comes out to the weight of the aircraft and fuel/range. When the ULR comes, there will be less restrictions on weight.

[Dobbo]

I think Airbus have obtained a reasonably significant bump on the performance of the non-ULR A359s. I don't know whether this has worked it's way through to the production models, but it should mean that later models can do SIN-SFOvv (possibly LAX) without payload penalty.

Obviously stand to be corrected, but I'm pretty sure this is accurate.

[hviswanathan]

I think Airbus have obtained a reasonably significant bump on the performance of the non-ULR A359s. I don't know whether this has worked it's way through to the production models, but it should mean that later models can do SIN-SFOvv (possibly LAX) without payload penalty.

Obviously stand to be corrected, but I'm pretty sure this is accurate.

YEs that is possible. The earlier model A380 from EK could not do DXB-LAX. The newest series of A380 made it possible for EK to switch from 77W to 380. I remember around 4 years ago initially when there were only a handful of new aircraft, a switch or issue with an aircraft would get flights delayed to LAX or a diversion stop to get some fuel

[9V-JKL]

I think Airbus have obtained a reasonably significant bump on the performance of the non-ULR A359s. I don't know whether this has worked it's way through to the production models, but it should mean that later models can do SIN-SFOvv (possibly LAX) without payload penalty.

Obviously stand to be corrected, but I'm pretty sure this is accurate.

I believe you're referring to the 280T A359 which will be available from 2020. This will give the standard plane a 8,100nm range which will make SFO reachable without payload restrictions.

[Dobbo]

Thanks all. Would the 280T A359 be able to make SIN-LAX non stop without payload restrictions?

[flyguy]

believed the current A350-900 can do SIN-SFO with minimal payoad restrictions. Its only the return flight that the need for quite some weight restrictions due to strong headwinds.

[Tonitan]

There’s talk about KIX switching one flight daily from A333 to A359 from nov 2017. It’s certainly an improvement over the A333!

[SQfanatic]

believed the current A350-900 can do SIN-SFO with minimal payoad restrictions. Its only the return flight that the need for quite some weight restrictions due to strong headwinds.

You are right. It's the return flight, hence why they would still reduce the weight in both directions. This is why when the ULR comes, SFO will be one of the few to use it, along with other US routes.

Also, my father got back on the 350 today morning. Load-wise, typical of what you expect off-peak, light loading, he had two seats to himself (aisle and middle). It was the same when he also went. The DEL sectors were at least 90% full. Otherwise, flying the 350 was inconvenient for my father, he did not enjoy it much like the 77W; it was cramped in Y, same as my mother noted, but service and food were great. (SMJ on SQ31, SMP on SQ32)

[SQfanatic]

There’s talk about KIX switching one flight daily from A333 to A359 from nov 2017. It’s certainly an improvement over the A333!

That might explain more A333 departures and the 359s replacing them. Definitely an improvement at any rate.

[SQ228]

There’s talk about KIX switching one flight daily from A333 to A359 from nov 2017. It’s certainly an improvement over the A333!

I don't see where they would source that A359 from because both KIX flights are out of SIN overnight and BNE is getting all the new arrivals. It would also be a capacity downgrade for KIX.

I think somebody has their wires crossed and is spreading the wrong information. KIX is going A380 on SQ618/9 for a more substantial period than usual. Often it gets sporadic use of the A380 during peak times in Japan, but this is effective 26NOV until at least 17DEC (end of timetable validity), excl. 30NOV, 14DEC.

[SQKevin]

9V-SMT went into cabin fit yesterday. There is now a possibility that both SMS & SMT will roll out onto Flight Line before the end of November. Depending on the pace of pre-flight and flight testing, SMS could be delivered at the end of December and SMT in mid-January. Let's wait and see.

[9V-SKU]

I agree, there were certainly a number of reports that the first 20 350s would be long haul. If SW #22 is definitely going to be the first ULR then I think 21 will be an additional long haul aircraft. I just cannot imagine SQ keeping a single new 350 with a different product for a number of months while the ULR aircraft are delivered.

Another interesting aspect is if SFO will remain with the 900s or the ULR. If it remains with the 900 then an additional long haul 900 would fit with the original SQ plan since SFO direct was not on the cards with the config for the first 20 was planned. If that is the case then, where would the extra ULR capacity go? 1 more daily (Chicago?) or a mix to a number of spots (Boston / Washington / Chicago).

All I know is that next year will be a lot of fun for us!

My money is on Seattle as next and new destination for the ULR.

As per routes online, SIA just expanded their codeshare agreement with JetBlue, including flights between JFK-SEA from Oct. 12 2017.
(http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...from-oct-2017/)

[TheMightyAsian]

SQ #19 9V-SMS is at the flightline in TLS, awaiting her first flight.

[SQKevin]

SQ #19 9V-SMS is at the flightline in TLS, awaiting her first flight.

Yes, rolled out yesterday. Cabin fitting & engine installation took just 4-5 weeks. That a record going by earlier frames. This means that 9V-SMS will definitely be a December Delivery.

If 9V-SMT takes the same amount of time for cabin fitting & engine installation, there will be a good chance of her being delivered by the end of December. This will provide enough aircraft for BNE to go 3 x daily A359 by mid-January 2018.