Singapore Airlines will be resuming service to New York, and in the process will be launching the world’s new longest flight (by a few miles). There’s one very surprising detail, though…
Continue reading: Singapore Airlines Shifts World’s Longest Flight To JFK
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Probably won’t bring JFK-FRA-SIN for long time till demand come back or they will switch it up to EWR-FRA-SIN.
World just view JFK as NYC’s flagship airport and probably could sell tickets little better with JFK name instead of EWR
Flew EWR-SIN last year...packed. Flew back SIN-FRA-JFK....nearly empty. So agree with whale380. Don’t like the 10:30pm (+2 days) JFK departure time for EAST-WEST routes unless you happen to get the WEST-EAST flight path. Just my preference. That’s somewhat seasonal but basically hit-or-miss
In the schedule mentioned I think there is a mistake as it does not add up.
Flight to the US is operated Mon Wed and Fri
Flight from the US is operated Mon Wed and Sat.
This is so bizarre and I’m Allstate positive the flights routed through Newark for connectivity purposes on United Airlines (another star alliance member)
But maybe this is for Search Engine Optimization? The company must have enough cargo to make the flight profitable.
GREAT NEWS! 10:30 departure is slightly later than ideal but the arrival is perfect for connections in SIN. Not as many connections available from the previous EWR schedule.
Reason for using the standard 359 would be due to larger cargo capacity. ULR has a lot of those space taken up by irregular shaped fuel tanks. With the restriction on going passenger numbers would be negligible anyway. You need permission to go to Singapore now even if you are willing to be quarantined.
I doubt this flight will be weight restricted with fewer passengers traveling most days. Yet another blow to the prestige of EWR.
I flew that 18h flight once in J...it is LONG!!! And I love being on a plane 😉
Outside of some financial services workers and cargo, I can't see anyone flying this -- especially in economy.
I'm willing to bet the pax loads on this flight are near zero, single digits at most. The regular -900 as mentioned above has more cargo capacity, the cargo operation at JFK blows the one at EWR out of the water. Makes perfect sense to me considering the fact that we are in the midst of a global pandemic that as much as some people want to believe, isn't fake news
@Ben, the -900 and -900ULR essentially have identical fuel tanks (i.e. the -900ULR doesn't have extra fuel tanks, but rather the standard fuel tanks on the A350 are already MASSIVE).
The difference is just that the ULR has an increased MTOW, due to various tweaks (software, fuel feeding, some minor structural changes, etc.) But the main thing is that -900ULR has large cargo compartments essentially sealed off and useless, because the equipment on the floor of the compartment and any other cargo-necessary features, have been removed to save weight. Essentially, the -900ULR can't really carry any real cargo.
So, if passenger loads are low, and money is going to be made by cargo, it makes sense to send a -900 instead of a -900ULR, since you get similar MTOW which can be used up by cargo and more fuel instead of passengers, bags, catering, etc.
“Operating to JFK International Airport would allow Singapore Airlines to better accommodate a mix of passenger and cargo traffic on its services to New York in the current operating climate. SIA’s non-stop services to New York would also be supported by the growing number of transfer passengers who can now transit via Singapore’s Changi Airport.”
Maybe it’s just me, but this statement by SIA seems rather meaningless. EWR is a metro NY airport. And the transit passenger statement doesn’t make any sense to me. Perhaps this ties in to UAL wanting to grow it’s presence at JFK.
@Ksa63 - probably has zero to do with United's JFK intentions. UA will likely be serving o/d premium routes to JFK, at least initially, mostly transcons and from hubs. The tie up at EWR was for local feed from the eastern half of the country, think smaller business markets. There will be virtually no feed from the JFK routes, as those customers could just fly via LAX and eventually SFO again. This is entirely a cargo decision. There are just no pax flying to Singapore right now.
I wonder if SQ swapped their JFK-FRA slot for this 10:30pm departure. I don't see SQ26/25 coming back anytime in the near future and the AM departure out of EWR still performed well. Perhaps in the long-run we'll see double daily for am AM/PM departure and arrival. I would have far preferred an earlier SIN departure/JFK arrival. 7:30am arrival lands right in the middle of rush hour madness.
SQ is not relying on NY connections. They are relying on SIN. The red-eye both ways and early morning arrival in SIN is clearly timed to connect with its 7-10am morning bank of Asia/OZ departures. The previous PM arrival excluded many regional destinations. The fact that SQ never had a single UA codeshare out of EWR all while maintaining their B6 partnership is quite telling of their relationship with UA/*A.
I think the ground time at JFK might be even longer... with 2 SQ A350 on the tarmac at JFK sometimes...
arrive Mon 0730 depart Wed 2230
arrive Wed 0730 depart Fri 2230
arrive Sat 0730 depart Mon 2230
JFK sells a lot better than EWR and has much better pricing power. Just look at how much cheaper the United flights out of EWR are selling compared to the same AA or DL flights out of JFK.
I suppose economy won’t be that bad if the load factors are low - plenty of room to sleep across 3-4 seats.
I'm assuming, while light at the moment, there has been NJ/NY travel restrictions and they're advising non-essential tri-state area travel, so JFK would avoid any issues of staffing/travel/cargo.
Travel Apatite & pax numbers are still low and picking simultaneously.... making sense to combi cargo/pax , restricted weights idea is possible too
This flight is aimed at travellers who miss visiting a world city but not permitted to visit Tokyo, Bangkok or Hong Kong. I feel that Singaporeans will fall in love with New York especially in the winter spring and fall seasons. It's just a pity it's so far away and traditionally Singapore Airlines never bothered trying anyway.
I would like to clarify that Singapore and United are great companies who partner well. The only reason why closer relationship cannot occur because United, ANA, Singapore would be a monopoly. And quite a lot of London bound pax actually connect across Virgin and Delta's UK US network. Because I do not think a pro US slant is beneficial for UK, I see a significantly downsize market that may be filled by DL A321LR and B6 A220.
The fact that the flight seems to arrive at similar time to VS24 is telling
Flew the Seattle-SIN flight last year. It was sold as a 16 hour flight but my flight ended up taking 17 hours due to weather issues while landing in Singapore. I did not enjoy the flight since it felt too long. 14-15 hours is probably the upper limit. Beyond that is a torture. The return leg SIN-SEA takes 14 hours which is tolerable. Also A350 isn't as good as A380 for economy comfort. My onward flight from SIN was an A380 and you can immediately realize the difference.
Unfortunately A380s will mostly be discontinued and A350s will never be able to match that level of comfort.
Singapore Air interlines with FedEx and UPS. UPS has their main NYC center at JFK. While FedEx's main NE hub is at EWR. If cargo is the reason, then UPS is that customer.
Did this shift ever actually take effect? I see EWR-SIN flights bookable for this summer..
funny how that works isn’t it
You claim UA needs dirt cheap fares to make EWR work
yet many also claim UA flyers at hub captive at EWR
I never heard of airlines doing dirt cheap sale every flight every day for their hub captives.
So which one is it then
yeah.. like totally ….. JFK just sells tickets THAT much easier
is that why UA is still #1 in NYC instead of Delta ?
cuz JFK’s ease of selling tickets ended up trashing their yields ?