Singapore Airlines seemingly wants its non stop services between Singapore and the USA back. So much so – it has gone to Airbus for a variant of the Airbus A350-900 – dubbed the A350-900ULR (Ultra Long Range).
Singapore Airlines Airbus A350-900 ULR – Rendering, Airbus.
From the pool of orders Singapore Airline has with Airbus for the A350-900, seven of them will be the ULR variant.
According to Leeman News, these will have 170 seats installed on the plane to be operated in a premium configuration.
Plans exist to operate them in 2018 between Singapore and Los Angeles and Singapore and New York.
Even Singapore Airlines have got the PR out already:
Singapore Airlines holds orders for 67 A350s in total.
I’m going to admit – this is a tough call to make it work. Last time Singapore did this – again – they used special mission aircraft (Airbus A340-500s), which had the fuel tanks and legs for this segment.
Part of the reason why this flight is premium is that for a lot of the flight – the plane is a flying fuel tanker. When fuel prices hit the roof a few years ago, the route just wasn’t economical to run.
It seems that Singapore Airlines thinks the tide has turned, and it can run the route again.
Whist these segments are long (and 19 hours is long by any stretch of the imagination), it will take some creative work to ensure those planes both make the loads and yields to make this route work again.
And I’m unsure if these actually exist.
The A350-900ULR will add a new dimension to the fuel costs, and hopefully deliver the savings Singapore Airlines require.
If its enough will be the big question.
Welcome to Economy Class and Beyond – Your no-nonsense guide to network news, honest reviews, with in-depth coverage, unique research as well as the humour and madness as I only know how to deliver.
Follow me on Twitter at @EconomyBeyond for the latest updates! You can also follow me on Instagram too!
Also remember that as well as being part of BoardingArea, we’re also part of BoardingArea.eu, delivering frequent flyer news, miles and points to European readers
How many times did you fly this route? Are you familiar with residuals on A340-500s?
I flew the old A340-500 service nearly a dozen times across the span of a decade. The flights were nearly always full. Figure 90+ J seats taken on each flight (out of 100 total). One way EWR-SIN on a corporate fare was a little over $5k. Back out taxes and figure they were netting $4,500 per seat one way. Even selling 80 seats (which I estimate to be low) on average, that’s $360-400k of revenue per flight (mindful that not everyone was on a corporate fare). Even near the holidays, these flights were full.
When Kerosene was $3/gallon, it would cost about $150k to fill up an A340-500. That leaves $210,000-$250,000 per flight for staff, ground space, catering, miscellaneous and most importantly, aircraft depreciation. The flights were quite profitable…however, the A340-500s had such limited use (and were designed for limited cycles), the residual values were horrendous. SQ had some spruce gooses on its hands.
Recall also that Airbus was hungry to find lead orders for the A350. What better early buyer than SQ? How do you get them to buy the 350? Offer to take back the A340-500s at generous prices. Contrary to assertions in the media, this is the real reason the non-stops to LAX and EWR ended…the old planes were close to worthless…and Airbus needed a prestigious buyer…so voila…
Today, the cost of Kerosene is down by about half, so even with comparable efficiency (presumably the A350 is more efficient), making this math even better.
SQ is a smart carrier. If these routes didn’t make financial sense, they wouldn’t be trying to launch them again so quickly. The only reason they were cancelled is due to the residual on the old equipment.
Why would it be 19 hours for a direct flight, but currently with connection via Taipei, it’s `17+ hours. That seems strange.