First A380 delivery

On Oct 15, 1:38 pm, Jay Honeck wrote:
As Singapore airlines has probably made more profit in the last 10 years
than the whole of the big US legacy carriers put together, I would suspect
their judgement is better than anything the US has to offer.

I confess I know nothing about Singapore Airlines, so bear with me.

How is it that they are so profitable, in a cut-throat, competitive
world-wide market?

Last year I took a round the world business trip that included a
majority of flights in the Pacific Rim, most of them on Cathay Pacific
(I was on a oneworld ticket, and that alliance doesn't include
Singapore Airlines, which is part of Star Alliance I believe). I also
flew Qantas quite a bit, and a few other local carriers like Dragonair
(which is owned by Cathay Pacific).

The biggies that fly all over the pacific all provide a level of
service that U.S. customers haven't seen for years. However it's not
that fair a comparison because almost all flights on those airlines
are international and very long. Most of these airlines fly mostly
international, while U.S. airlines fly mostly domestic, and it shows
in how they work on both types of flights. The domestic flights in
that region are few and far between and not usually on the flagship
carriers, because most of the countries, except Australia and China,
are too small geographically. The domestic flights I did take, on
Dragonair in China and Qantas in Australia, were not any better or
worse than U.S. domestic flights in my opinion. Qantas is probably
the only major airline in the region that also does a significant
amount of domestic flying and they are pretty good at it, but it ain't
like the international flights that leave Americans raving at how good
airline service in the Asia-Pacific region is. And oh by the way
Qantas is getting its lunch eaten domestically by lower cost, no-
frills domestic airlines.

Anyway, international flights are more profitable than domestic
flights, period. Even the U.S. carriers do well financially on their
international service, which is why they fight so hard for those
routes. So if you're a carrier that flies mostly international,
you'll be doing better than one that flies mostly domestic as a
general rule -- and that describes most major airlines in that part of
the world. Oh, the travel market in that part of the world is booming
anyway.

"Kingfish" wrote in message ups.com...
On Oct 15, 10:11 am, Thomas Borchert
wrote:
Kingfish,

Makes
me wonder why they didn't just buy more 747-400s.

The seats are different. Very. Wait for the pics.

???

Does that justify spending bazillions on new aircraft? I thought the
whole point of A380 was more bodies onboard, then SIA only puts in 471
seats? Does't make sense to me.


Singapore flies less than 350 seats in its 47's: http://www.seatexpert.com/_SQ_Boeing_747_400_V1.html

Kingfish wrote:
On Oct 15, 10:11 am, Thomas Borchert
wrote:
Kingfish,

Makes
me wonder why they didn't just buy more 747-400s.
The seats are different. Very. Wait for the pics.

???

Does that justify spending bazillions on new aircraft? I thought the
whole point of A380 was more bodies onboard, then SIA only puts in 471
seats? Does't make sense to me.


It may if you are riding in one of the seats. I now avoid airline as
much as possible. I will drive 8 hours now to avoid an airline trip.
It is just too uncomfortable now to fly unless you have no alternative.
I believe that an airline with an airplane that brings some comfort
back to long distance travel may well perform better financially.

Matt

Kingfish wrote in news:1192456533.874457.213800
@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

I read about Singapore Airlines taking delivery (finally) of its first
A380. The article said the plane was configured with 471 seats, which
I found odd seeing as the plane's 550-pax capacity has been pitched by
Airbus since day one (never mind the 800-pax max density seating aka
cattle truck) I realize every airline will configure the plane to fit
their own needs, but that sounds like a big drop in seat count. Makes
me wonder why they didn't just buy more 747-400s.





Because then they wouldn't be able to do this:

I don't think singapore has signed up for this program yet, but they
certainly will. They're one of the worlds worst aviation employers and
having people they could control more easily would be a godsend to them.






Financial Times FT.com
Airlines call for reinforcements in the cockpit

By Raphael Minder
Published: October 7 2007 22:09 | Last updated: October 7 2007 22:09

It will take just over a year for Christine Lopez, a 26-year-old
Filipino, to complete the transition from catwalk to the cockpit of an
Airbus A320.

If all goes to plan, the former model will become the fastest person to
qualify as a commercial airline pilot, under a revolutionary training
scheme - the multi-crew pilot licence (MPL) - that was approved last
November by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the sector's
regulatory body. She says: "I started to think that I wanted to fly
during my high-school days but I never thought that, once I decided to
do it, it could happen this quick."

Ms Lopez will receive her licence from a new aviation school opened on
the grounds of a former US air base in Clark, north of Manila. It will
qualify her for a job at Cebu Pacific, the largest domestic carrier in
the Philippines, which has sponsored her training.
Clark is one of three schools - the others are in Denmark and Australia
- pioneering the MPL. It reduces schooling time by tailoring the
training to a specific type of aircraft and using flight simulators more
than planes.

The streamlined MPL is addressing the dearth of pilots, particularly in
Asia, the world's fastest growing aviation market. In India, more than
6,000 pilots will be required to meet the anticipated doubling of
passenger traffic over the coming 10 years. Last month, the General
Administration of Civil Aviation of China warned that it only had the
capacity to train 7,000 of the 9,000 pilots required by the country's
airline industry by 2010.

The story of MPL's creation illustrates how companies finding themselves
facing a recruitment crunch can use a combination of technology and
smart training methods to fill the gap.

Rick Norman, a former pilot who is now flight operations manager at
Clark, says: "This is a course that gets you straight to where you want
to be. The day after you get the licence, you should be flying from
Manila to Bangkok, with 180 passengers behind you."
The Clark school was established by Alpha Aviation, a privately held
British group, in partnership with Cebu, which is sponsoring 59 of the
104 students. Alpha is talking to several Asian airlines about
replicating its joint venture model and expects to open 10 more schools
in the region over the coming five years.

Mr Norman says: "The blueprint that we have developed in Clark is
clearly very attractive to lots of Asian and Middle Eastern airlines
that are facing the same need to find more pilots."

Demand has risen just as the pool of available pilots has dwindled due
to the decision by many Asian countries to reduce their air forces - a
traditional training ground for commercial aviation. The profession has
also become less financially attractive as airlines such as Cathay
Pacific have gone through bruising battles with pilots to cut staff
costs. Andy Law, a senior Cathay captain, admits: "The people who go to
our cadet school are capable of doing plenty of other things ... Cathay
is finding it difficult to attract people from the local community,
which is a bit of a concern."

The timing of MPL's introduction therefore is opportune, but it has
sparked criticism from pilot unions and industry pundits that it could
lead to lower standards, just as crashes in Indonesia and Thailand have
put safety levels under the spotlight. Jim Eckes, an aviation consultant
and former commercial pilot, points out: "You can do amazing things with
a simulator, but it's really only when you're up there, flying alone,
that you can build up the confidence."

Clark certainly doesn't lack rigour. Students in freshly pressed pilot
uniforms stand to attention when visitors enter the classroom. Their 12-
month course involves a minimum of 70 hours of flying, including 30
hours solo, as well as at least 180 hours spent on a simulator. However,
the bulk of the course is in class, with much of the learning coming
from computer coursework. That helps explain why the Clark licence, at
$80,000 for the year, is relatively cheap by industry standards.

In Asia, where being a pilot has been prohibitively costly, the MPL's
arrival is a welcome opportunity. As Marsha Bell, vice-president at
Alteon, Boeing's training subsidiary, says: "The dream of flying is not
something that everybody in Asia has been exposed to. This (MPL) makes
it accessible, as well as more advantageous."

Bertie,

Makes
me wonder why they didn't just buy more 747-400s.


Because then they wouldn't be able to do this:
...

You don't really make sense (to me). Care to explain?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote in
:

Bertie,

Makes
me wonder why they didn't just buy more 747-400s.


Because then they wouldn't be able to do this:
...

You don't really make sense (to me). Care to explain?


Did you read the attached? It's pretty much self explanatory.
you can teach someone to push buttons in 70 hours flight time and 180 sim,
but they won;t be able to fly..


And you have to fly a 747 wheras with the A380 you couldn't if oyu wanted
to.

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

And you have to fly a 747 wheras with the A380 you couldn't if oyu wanted
to.

The day is coming, isn't it?

--
Dan

"The future has actually been here for a while, it's just not readily
available to everyone."
- some guy at MIT

"Dan Luke" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

And you have to fly a 747 wheras with the A380 you couldn't if oyu
wanted to.

The day is coming, isn't it?


What, the pilot and dog scenario?


Bertie

Could the answer be "freight"? With 471 full seats what is the remaining
payload capability?
Jim

"Kingfish" wrote in message
oups.com...
I read about Singapore Airlines taking delivery (finally) of its first
A380. The article said the plane was configured with 471 seats, which
I found odd seeing as the plane's 550-pax capacity has been pitched by
Airbus since day one (never mind the 800-pax max density seating aka
cattle truck) I realize every airline will configure the plane to fit
their own needs, but that sounds like a big drop in seat count. Makes
me wonder why they didn't just buy more 747-400s.

"Jim Burns" wrote in
:

Could the answer be "freight"? With 471 full seats what is the remaining
payload capability?
Jim

Nah, it's just a load of beds in first or a full sized badminton court or
some such. they wouldn't be running the #1 bus in a QC or combi config.

Bertie