A350 Deliveries and Routes

[9V-JKL]

If all the A333s are replaced with A350s, where do the 787-10s fit?

[jaywell]

If all the A333s are replaced with A350s, where do the 787-10s fit?

I'm guessing they'll probably end up going to Scoot.

[9V-JKL]

I'm guessing they'll probably end up going to Scoot.

There's 30 of them, does scoot need so many?

[Metropolitan Airlines]

If all the A333s are replaced with A350s, where do the 787-10s fit?

Or B787-10s can be used for further expansion from SQ, such as going to Vistara or Virgin Australia.

[SQfanatic]

If all the A333s are replaced with A350s, where do the 787-10s fit?

Boeing 787-10 aircraft are likely replacements for Boeing 772 and 773 regional routes (Possibly including CPT/JNB unless that goes A350).

Initially, when SQ ordered A330's, I initially thought they were backups before their 787's arrive.

[leops1984]

Boeing 787-10 aircraft are likely replacements for Boeing 772 and 773 regional routes (Possibly including CPT/JNB unless that goes A350).

Initially, when SQ ordered A330's, I initially thought they were backups before their 787's arrive.

Would something like this make sense, then, for the long-term SQ fleet strategy:

Regional routes (SE Asia, Hong Kong, Taiwan) = 787-10
Medium-range routes (Middle East, East Asia, Australia) = Medium-range A350
Long-haul routes = Long-range A350, 777X(?), A380neo(?)
ULH routes = A350ULR

Still, I would not be 100% surprised if someone at Boeing was trying to get to convert some of that 787-10 order to 777Fs and/or 747-8Fs.

[9V-JKL]

Ok, let me re-phrase the question.....

The 78J is some 10+MT lighter than the A359. Clearly that gives it a cost advantage for regional flights in the way the A333 became a cheaper aircraft to operate than the 772/773. Considering the A333s operate up to 8hr+ flights.

So, if the 78J is technically a better regional plane (on paper since its not flown), why would SQ use replace the A333 with the A359? unless the plan is only till 2019 when there's a sizeable 78J fleet?

[259850]

At end December, SQ had 49 "regional" aircraft: 7 773s, 11 772s and 31 333s. Assuming no growth, makes sense for SQ to use 30 78Js and 20 359s in regional configuration to replace them.

[jaywell]

At end December, SQ had 49 "regional" aircraft: 7 773s, 11 772s and 31 333s. Assuming no growth, makes sense for SQ to use 30 78Js and 20 359s in regional configuration to replace them.

SQ has ordered 67 A359s. 20 of them are for long-haul, 7 of them for ultra long-haul, and lets say 20 or so are for regional. What exactly does SQ plan to do with the 20 surplus aircraft? They aren't allowed to convert current orders to the larger variant either, only the options. So it's only logical to guess that the leftover A350s will be used to replace all the 777s (excluding the -300ER).

[leops1984]

Ok, let me re-phrase the question.....

The 78J is some 10+MT lighter than the A359. Clearly that gives it a cost advantage for regional flights in the way the A333 became a cheaper aircraft to operate than the 772/773. Considering the A333s operate up to 8hr+ flights.

So, if the 78J is technically a better regional plane (on paper since its not flown), why would SQ use replace the A333 with the A359? unless the plan is only till 2019 when there's a sizeable 78J fleet?

SQ tends to have a broader definition of regional than some of its competitors. Some of SQ's "regional" routes a bit longer than what is usually considered regional - the A330 flights to Australia are a good example. So it makes sense to split the fleet and have some "regional" planes targeted for the longer routes. The goal may even be to shrink what is considered "regional" and go with two A350 configurations (excluding the ULR): a premium-heavy three-class, and a denser two-class configuration.

From the passenger perspective, I'd consider it a good thing if the 78J does the shorter routes. Chances are good that SQ will do 9-abreast in Y (only JAL flies it in 8-abreast). That's not a great seat for longer flights. 78J will need some sort of new regional J seat - probably something like the business suites JAL and KE are rolling out is a good bet.

[vasqflyer]

Is the 1st SQ 350 still on track for delivery this month?

[leops1984]

Based on the unofficial production lists I've seen, the delivery of 9V-SMA will be delayed. There are only two A350s that are believed to be ahead of SMA in the Airbus production line, but the first one of those isn't scheduled for first flight until January 27. At the earliest, I'd say mid-to-late February is a good bet for delivery.

[SQKevin]

Is the 1st SQ 350 still on track for delivery this month?

It now appears highly unlikely that the 1st SQ A350 will be delivered in January. It's almost half way through the month and there is still no sign of 9V-SMA being rolled out onto the Flight line. She has spent 3 months in Station 20 for engine attachment & cabin fit. I am not sure why there has been a delay. It takes a minimum of 3 weeks from exiting Station 20 to delivery. So a February delivery is now most likely.

[SQKevin]

Based on the unofficial production lists I've seen, the delivery of 9V-SMA will be delayed. There are only two A350s that are believed to be ahead of SMA in the Airbus production line, but the first one of those isn't scheduled for first flight until January 27. At the earliest, I'd say mid-to-late February is a good bet for delivery.

There are 3 A350s ahead of 9V-SMA in the production line. 2 already have had their first flight and 1 is awaiting its first flight. These 3 will likely be the only deliveries in Jan. SMA should be the first delivery of Feb if there are no more delays.

[leops1984]

It now appears highly unlikely that the 1st SQ A350 will be delivered in January. It's almost half way through the month and there is still no sign of 9V-SMA being rolled out onto the Flight line. She has spent 3 months in Station 20 for engine attachment & cabin fit. I am not sure why there has been a delay. It takes a minimum of 3 weeks from exiting Station 20 to delivery. So a February delivery is now most likely.

Zodiac is getting the blame for this - apparently not only are they a key supplier of seats, they are the exclusive supplier for the lavatories, which have been delayed. The phrase that Airbus was using was Zodiac was "in denial".

As a result, Zodiac has been "deselected" (i.e., removed) from the interior catalog of the A330neo.