Start of another round of cost-cutting?

[boing]

The A380? But why? SQ is probably one of the few airlines for which the A380 makes a lot of sense and can be operated profitably. Singapore is a major financial hub with good premium demand that warrants the A380 capacity, especially to constrained airports like LHR, FRA and PEK. It's the best aircraft for the moment that meets SQ's needs. There's no secondhand market for the aircraft, which makes even more sense for SQ to hold onto them and squeeze more value out of the assets until they are fully depreciated.

To put it simply, A380 is an expensive airplane to fly and maintain. It is only to make money if a route is able to sustain consistently near full loads year round and not many of SQ's routes make that list. I can safely say LHR, ZRH, PEK , PVG and maybe DEL make that list. I am not even taking into account yield per route.

Just to give you an idea, an A380 requires 190 tons of fuel +/-5 tons for an European sector. A350 is able to accomplish that with less than 90 tons. Yes, A350 carries less pax, but it is easier to fill them up and they are also able to carry more cargo than A380. Most planes also have the ability to derate the engines and MTOW to incur lower ATC and airport charges. With four engines, it also requires/costs more maintenance.

There is a reason many airlines are accelerating their A380 retirements and cancelling outstanding orders. As for fuel tankering, it's not so much about turnaround time but costs. I was told fuel price in SG is one of the lowest in the region. After factoring in fuel hedging, I am sure SQ management takes into account everything before deciding to tanker a flight.

[yuuka_miya]

^^ I'd think they're waiting for the 777X.

And if SQ can fill the A380s in the meantime, why rush?

[flyguy]

That will be around 2022 now for the first of the 777X to arrive.

[SQ228]

I suppose their plan may have been to refurbish them with a new interior layout that substantially increases the number of seats, so that during peak season the A380 can produce more yield for the same fuel and maintenance costs to offset the lossmaking months when they can't expect to fill so many seats. It's not hard to see why they went for refurbishing the Series 2 fleet first, because if they don't come close to selling that entire upper-J cabin, the loss becomes greater.

As the number of problems with the A380 keeps rising though, it's impossible not to take them into account and the refurb program is now massively behind schedule. If I worked in SQ operations and had anything to do with pax rebooking, the A380 would be my least favourite aircraft right now, what with all the constant delays, layout swaps and the sheer scale of the problems unleashed when things go wrong compared with the rest of the fleet. At some point it becomes necessary to wonder if SQ might be considering scaling back the refitting process, especially for some of the older ones that seem to keep developing more issues compared with the later builds.

[SQ025]

Well not too sure about that although few years ago SQ did do a bad job of fuel hedging and as a result lost a considerable amount. Dont think other airlines esp the budget carrier like Air Asia are wrong in their calculaion of fuel burn and tankering as they are more careful on costs.

Well, fuel hedging is betting on the future devlopment of the fuel price. Its like predicting share prices. If someone would have the formula, iam interessted...

I think its easier to calculate whether it makes sense to fly with more fuel and rather not refill at the destination. I would not agree that it is compareable with what AirAsia is doing with an A320. They would maybe also like the idea of avoiding higher fuel prices in certain countries, but the A320 can simply carry enough fuel to make it HKG and back.

[flyguy]

The A320 cannot make it to HKG and back without refuelling as that would mean a almost 7 hour flight which it is not capable of. Doubt AK will follow SQ in its fuel policy.

[sbs2716g]

The A320 cannot make it to HKG and back without refuelling as that would mean a almost 7 hour flight which it is not capable of. Doubt AK will follow SQ in its fuel policy.

Scoot A320 turn back to SIN from just outside HKG recently during one of the shutdown. So it should have at least 7hrs of fuel?

[yuuka_miya]

Scoot A320 turn back to SIN from just outside HKG recently during one of the shutdown. So it should have at least 7hrs of fuel?

Scoot is a budget airline that probably uses tankering to keep its turnarounds down anyway, or they loaded extra fuel in case of diversion.

It's not unlikely that AK would tanker too.

[sbs2716g]

Scoot is a budget airline that probably uses tankering to keep its turnarounds down anyway, or they loaded extra fuel in case of diversion.

It's not unlikely that AK would tanker too.

I am replying to the guy above who said that A320 can’t take 7 hr to travel to HKG n back

As for AirAsia, they are scheduled turnaround time of 25 mins at malaysia airports. But longer turn around time at Changi. And some one mention that the fuel price is lower in SG. So they might refuel enough for few trips rather than refuel each time they land.

[flyguy]

I am replying to the guy above who said that A320 can’t take 7 hr to travel to HKG n back

As for AirAsia, they are scheduled turnaround time of 25 mins at malaysia airports. But longer turn around time at Changi. And some one mention that the fuel price is lower in SG. So they might refuel enough for few trips rather than refuel each time they land.

One can always check the Airbus website and check and there are different types of A320s - still doubt the standard A320 can fly SIN-HKG and land and then take off from HKG-SIN without refuelling. There are contingency fuel, diversion fuel and fuel reserves to carry. And if you do fly on AK one can see that AK turnaround time in Changi is also 30 mins from even their timeable and in KUL they may actually take longer turnaround time.
"Planes cannot refuel enough for few trips" unless each trip is less than 30 mins which is highly doubtful.

[EWR]

There’re no more amenities kits and footrests in a380 v3 economy

[flyguy]

oh but believed there's still the basic amenity for long nght flights ie SIN-LHR or to Australia etc. For day flights, there's nothing like SIN-HKG or SHA.

[ycp81]

oh but believed there's still the basic amenity for long nght flights ie SIN-LHR or to Australia etc. For day flights, there's nothing like SIN-HKG or SHA.

Economy amenity kits are now only available upon request on long haul flights.

[SQ228]

Economy amenity kits are now only available upon request on long haul flights.

If I’m being honest, I have at least 8 of them unused in a drawer. I mostly use the zipper bags to store my collection of foreign currencies ready for future travels. I think I’m one of very few passengers who uses the queue for the toilet as time to unwrap the toothbrush and squeeze out the paste ready to brush with ultimate efficiency!

[lingua101]

There was no bread and tea cup on my SQ963 flight. It use wider tray but half size.... is it a new design or what?