Yet another aviation thread.

Quote: Pacomartin

The A350-900ULR that just rolled off the assembly line in France will carry 0.88 short tons of fuel per seat, but the plane will be capable of flying Singapore to New York City (the longest commercial flight in the world). That compares to the 1 short ton of fuel for the Concorde per seat to fly from London to JFK.

I see 12% less fuel than Concorde, which ins't spectacular, but also more seats than the ill-fated SST.

Also, as I recall, Singapore will have a rather low capacity for that flight. The common A350 with a 2 or 3-class cabin carries more passengers, which makes the per-seat fuel calculus look far more civilized.

Quote: Nareed

Also, as I recall, Singapore will have a rather low capacity for that flight. The common A350 with a 2 or 3-class cabin carries more passengers, which makes the per-seat fuel calculus look far more civilized.

Singapore Airlines has 91 more seats in the normal range A350. But still when Singapore Airlines flew that route with a 4 engine plane from 2004-2013 they reconfigured in 2008 with only 100 business class seats. They were burning nearly 2 tons of fuel per seat. After a decade they finally gave up on the planes, and returned them to Airbus. Singapore Airlines had to charge so much money, that most Chief Financial Officers were demanding that their employees change planes in Tokyo (or Frankfurt) to fly to the United States.

Airbus took back the A340-500ULR jets, but only on condition that SA restart their order for the A380s that had been languishing for years. As you know, SA, is accepting the new A380s, but they are returning the old ones after their initial ten year lease expires.


You wonder if this reduction in engines will ever reach the point where we have a single engine mounted over the fuselage which keep electric motors charge on the wing. The job of the electric motors is to make a safe descent (for up to 1 hour) in the very unlikely even that the jet engine fails. Of course, this would probably not be for routes over water.


The electric wing mounted motors may even power propellers because they are only used in case of emergency.

Quote: Pacomartin

As you know, SA, is accepting the new A380s, but they are returning the old ones after their initial ten year lease expires.

Speaking of A380s, Hi-Fly, a Portuguese wet lease lessor, did buy two former Singapore A380s and will begin flying them shortly. They did not change the interiors, so they will have first class suites plus economy on the lower deck, and a business class upper deck.

They say they plan to lease them to airlines who need extra capacity on an occasional basis. That might be a great idea, if seasonal need fo additional capacity doesn't happen everywhere at once.

Quote:

You wonder if this reduction in engines will ever reach the point where we have a single engine mounted over the fuselage which keep electric motors charge on the wing.

Airlines would love a single engine. It's rare, though, even in combat aircraft.

How would you mount it? Airliners with a third engine typically have it on the tail, see the DC-10, 727, L-1011 and even Boom. The F-16's single engine is on the tail as well, but mounted under the tail-fin, between the horizontal stabilizers. the intake is under the fuselage, about a third of the way towards the nose.

I don't think we'll see electric motors on airliners. At least not until you have much higher energy density in batteries, and the motors can propel the plane to jet liner speeds. Maybe for the lightest airliners, even things like current turboprops (which are quite slower than jets).

If/when oil is exhausted, the logical fuel, short of synthetic Jet A made from hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, etc., would seem to be Hydrogen.

Quote: Nareed

I don't think we'll see electric motors on airliners. At least not until you have much higher energy density in batteries, and the motors can propel the plane to jet liner speeds.

In August 2014 the pilot of a 787 Dreamliner was forced to shut down one of the plane’s two engines about one and a half hours into a scheduled nine-and-a-half hour flight from the Dominican Republic to Manchester, England. The plane , made a safe emergency landing in the Azores about four hours after the engine was shut down. Modern airplane engines installed on two-engine planes like the 787 are designed to be able to complete their full flight from any point on the flight plan with just one operating engine.

It seems unlikely that the Azores had the closest airport if the plane lost an engine only 1.5 hours into the flight. Since it took him 4 hours to reach the Azores, it is logical that he could have returned to the Dominican Republic or flown to continental USA.


My question is what would the pilot have done if he lost the pilot after 6-7 hours of flying? Would he have continued on another 2.5-3.5 hours to his destination even if an airport in Ireland was closer? Shannon is 281 miles from Manchester. If the plane is designed to make the full flight with only one operating engine, do you only go to your final destination if that is the nearest airport?

If the answer is you always fly to the nearest airport, then a related question is can you produce a smaller single aisle jet with just one engine, and two turoprops or electric motors to guide you to the nearest airport? It might be the most fuel efficient commercial jet ever built.

Quote: Nareed

Speaking of A380s, Hi-Fly, a Portuguese wet lease lessor, did buy two former Singapore A380s and will begin flying them shortly. They did not change the interiors, so they will have first class suites plus economy on the lower deck, and a business class upper deck.

They say they plan to lease them to airlines who need extra capacity on an occasional basis. That might be a great idea, if seasonal need fo additional capacity doesn't happen everywhere at once.

They have been talking about using the old A380s as wet leases for several years now. Since SA is retiring five old ones, and only two are being acquired as wet leases, I would say they are taking very careful steps in that direction.

The five new SA A380s are being outfitted with a chair and a bed in their suites. A chair and a bed? That is certainly God's way of telling you that you have too much money.


Qantas first class suites on the A380 in comparison


I have a puzzler. IMHO Singapore Airlines is more an elitist airline while Qantas is slightly more of an egalitarian airline.

But while Qantas never ordered a B777 and stuck with the FOUR engine B747 to the point of bankruptcy, Singapore Airlines behaved more like the US flagged airlines, also ordered their last B747s in the mid 1980s, and began ordering B777s in the 1990's.

Twin engine aircraft began the first ETOPS-180 flights in 1989 only four years after the ETOPS-120 flights began in 1985. But while the twin engine aircraft became quickly popular for Trans Atlantic, it took a while for them to be viewed as suitable for the Pacific.

Why did Qantas take so long to react when Singapore Airline was so quick to jump on the twin engine bandwagon?


747 Total 57 Qantas
747-200 PW 02-Nov-1967 16
747-200 PW 30-Jul-1976 1
747-200 RR 07-Feb-1979 2
747-200 RR 07-Feb-1979 3
747-100 RR 16-Jan-1980 2
747-300 RR 07-Sep-1983 6
747-400 RR 02-Mar-1987 21
747-400ER GE 19-Dec-2000 6

747 Total 93 Singapore Airlines
747-200 PW 26-Jul-1972 19
747-300 PW 15-Dec-1981 11
747-300 PW 31-May-1983 3
747-400 PW 27-Mar-1986 42
747-200 PW 20-Aug-1987 1
747-400F PW 16-Jan-1990 17

777 Total 105 Singapore Airlines
777-200ER RR 22-Dec-1995 46
777-300 RR 22-Dec-1995 12
777-300ER GE 29-May-2001 27
777X GE 19-Jun-2017 20

You have made me eager for my August trip with those photos Paco. I’m flying that product on my return trip out of JFK. Well for part of it anyway. Old suites JFK-FRA-SIN then new suites SIN-SYD the following day. A miles redemption of course. :)

Quote: Aussie

Old suites JFK-FRA-SIN then new suites SIN-SYD the following day.

I think the new suites are only available on the SIN-SYD route


The old SA A380 suites (from 2007) don't have a separate chair.

Here's a review of the new Singapore suites: https://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2018/03/29/singapore-airlines-new-suites-a380-review/

Spoiler alert, the reviewer wasn't impressed.

Lufthansa and Etihad also offer a separate seat and bed on some first class configurations

Quote: Nareed

Lufthansa and Etihad also offer a separate seat and bed on some first class configurations

Lufthansa's configuration seems to be the oldest. It is a little more utilitarian, and does not come with the double bed option.

Currently on SIN-SYD/LHR/HKG on certain flights numbers. PVG & ZRH are the next destinations to get it in the coming months. Basically they are adding destinations as they receive their new A380s and old ones get refurbished.

https://mainlymiles.com/2018/01/25/shanghai-and-zurich-next-to-get-the-new-singapore-airlines-a380-cabin-products/