Used SQ -400's ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: europe
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used SQ -400's ?
Can former or present SQ pilots or GE's shed some light on the technical status of the early 747-400's (delivered 1990 - 1994) in SQ's fleet?
Corrosion, structural damages, Long storage periods at Changi?
Some of these are coming onto the market and we're interested in the work forces opinion.
Thanks in advance for the info!
Corrosion, structural damages, Long storage periods at Changi?
Some of these are coming onto the market and we're interested in the work forces opinion.
Thanks in advance for the info!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Far East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SQ has one of the highest A/C in the air per day rates so these work horses have done the milage you would expect in 10 years. (between 15 and 16 hrs per day) That said they are in fair condition and have been maintained well. As far as I know the only time any were stored in the desert was during SARS so a few will have been stored for just over a year.
I have been told before that the FAA dont like having SQ aircraft in its airspace that are over 5 years old.
Something to do with maintenance audits....not happy with their aging fleet maintenance.
Something to do with maintenance audits....not happy with their aging fleet maintenance.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well swh the least you could do would be to post the source of this amazing piece of (dis) information.
Never heard such rubbish for a long time, you have an axe to grind? Didn't get offered a job maybe?
Never heard such rubbish for a long time, you have an axe to grind? Didn't get offered a job maybe?
Omark44 & DoMePlease
I went out for dinner with an experienced SQ skipper last week in SIN, its what he told me, they were his words.
He was fed up with things at SQ and is moving on to the middle east.
If he is wrong I would be more than happy to be corrected.
I went out for dinner with an experienced SQ skipper last week in SIN, its what he told me, they were his words.
He was fed up with things at SQ and is moving on to the middle east.
If he is wrong I would be more than happy to be corrected.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Somewhere in the Tropics UTC+7 to 9
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been told before that the FAA dont like having SQ aircraft in its airspace that are over 5 years old.
Well, I have heard the condition of some of their planes are bad (perhaps even very bad), but I never heard of that FAA "dislike"...
I've been on some really bad SQ planes that would make some 732s feel brand new... but even when ppl tell me how bad some of the things are, they sound REALLY bad because it's the total opposite of the image of SQ potrayed by their PR machine... take the PR machine out, then hey, is it REALLY that bad?
If the FAA does what SWH wrote (himself or in accordance to the info he got), then the FAA must have overlooked things for a while watching SQ adverts, duped into believing the PR campaign, and then got shocked when reality came in and they cried!
PK-KAR
Well, I have heard the condition of some of their planes are bad (perhaps even very bad), but I never heard of that FAA "dislike"...
I've been on some really bad SQ planes that would make some 732s feel brand new... but even when ppl tell me how bad some of the things are, they sound REALLY bad because it's the total opposite of the image of SQ potrayed by their PR machine... take the PR machine out, then hey, is it REALLY that bad?
If the FAA does what SWH wrote (himself or in accordance to the info he got), then the FAA must have overlooked things for a while watching SQ adverts, duped into believing the PR campaign, and then got shocked when reality came in and they cried!
PK-KAR
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,097
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do believe this may be getting just a wee too far fetched.
A disgruntled Captain who is leaving isn't very likely to be the most reliable source of information, even though I have to admit that there are many unhappy crew in SIA at the moment who have been treated very badly and all with the full endorsement of LKY.
All that said I also believe that SIA's maintenance procedures as as good as anyone else and I do doubt very much that the FAA would be objecting to the presence of SIA in American airspace.
Long before they can do that they have to mend their fences at home.
A disgruntled Captain who is leaving isn't very likely to be the most reliable source of information, even though I have to admit that there are many unhappy crew in SIA at the moment who have been treated very badly and all with the full endorsement of LKY.
All that said I also believe that SIA's maintenance procedures as as good as anyone else and I do doubt very much that the FAA would be objecting to the presence of SIA in American airspace.
Long before they can do that they have to mend their fences at home.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: about 6'4''
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
an extremely well informed source of mine does maintenance work at SHJ on SQ freighters running trough there. they are completely in accordance with reg's and their maintenance record (as well as shape the a/c's are in) would put other major operators to shame......
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Guys,
Don't expect airplanes in pristine condition. Remember these birds are 10 - 15 years old. One of them was used in the Boeing certification program. And these birds have been worked very hard and have their fair share of wear and tear.
Corrosion can be expected, especially toilet areas/plumbing fixtures.
Avionics wise, all of the 744 that SQ operate have SATCOM/ACARS/ADS/CPDLC/etc.. I can't say what condition the interior of the airplanes are in. When the airplanes were operational, they had inseat videos in every seat with the Matsu****a 2000 CMIV. Some of these may have been scavenged for use in the current fleet.
Interiors may be a bit worn, but to be expected for airplanes this old. Nothing that a good paint / upholstery job cannot fix.
No major accidents on any of the airframes, only 2 tail scrapes on different airplanes to my knowledge. One of them relatively minor and the other more recently in AKL.
Maintenance standards are quite good. Some people gripe that the airplanes are badly maintained whenever they see more than 2 items on the Deferred defect log. However in most cases these are relatively minor, the engineering dept does not dispatch the airplanes with any more than 2 defect items that cause fuel penalties.
Only drawback that I could see over the years is the high fuel burn APDs. But these I think are because of the PW4056 engines. Some of them may not have been modified to comply with the FAA air wortiness directives covering the CWT & HST and the IDS software load may not be the latest but can be expected because some were already in storage when these were issued.
So there you have it, my 2 cents worth. I reckon, just like buying any used car, you would need to get your own guys to look them over. Or you could talk to some guys who have bought or leased some of the SQ airplanes eg: Ansett, Fiji Air Pacific & Iberia.
Cheers
Don't expect airplanes in pristine condition. Remember these birds are 10 - 15 years old. One of them was used in the Boeing certification program. And these birds have been worked very hard and have their fair share of wear and tear.
Corrosion can be expected, especially toilet areas/plumbing fixtures.
Avionics wise, all of the 744 that SQ operate have SATCOM/ACARS/ADS/CPDLC/etc.. I can't say what condition the interior of the airplanes are in. When the airplanes were operational, they had inseat videos in every seat with the Matsu****a 2000 CMIV. Some of these may have been scavenged for use in the current fleet.
Interiors may be a bit worn, but to be expected for airplanes this old. Nothing that a good paint / upholstery job cannot fix.
No major accidents on any of the airframes, only 2 tail scrapes on different airplanes to my knowledge. One of them relatively minor and the other more recently in AKL.
Maintenance standards are quite good. Some people gripe that the airplanes are badly maintained whenever they see more than 2 items on the Deferred defect log. However in most cases these are relatively minor, the engineering dept does not dispatch the airplanes with any more than 2 defect items that cause fuel penalties.
Only drawback that I could see over the years is the high fuel burn APDs. But these I think are because of the PW4056 engines. Some of them may not have been modified to comply with the FAA air wortiness directives covering the CWT & HST and the IDS software load may not be the latest but can be expected because some were already in storage when these were issued.
So there you have it, my 2 cents worth. I reckon, just like buying any used car, you would need to get your own guys to look them over. Or you could talk to some guys who have bought or leased some of the SQ airplanes eg: Ansett, Fiji Air Pacific & Iberia.
Cheers
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Suitcase....
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PK-KAR
Any specific facts to back up your allegations. Or is this along the lines of "I have a friend who has a friend who had a friend tell him"?
I work for SQ and have worked for 4 other airlines in my 30 years. SQ's fleet is among the best. They may get rid of their aircraft when it needs heavy MX, but that's a business decision. Nothing more or nothing else.
I have no hesitation putting my family on any of their aircraft. That's more than I can say for other airlines.
You say you've been on some "really bad" SQ aircraft? Is that as a pax or operating crew. I'd sure love to hear some specific examples.
Any specific facts to back up your allegations. Or is this along the lines of "I have a friend who has a friend who had a friend tell him"?
I work for SQ and have worked for 4 other airlines in my 30 years. SQ's fleet is among the best. They may get rid of their aircraft when it needs heavy MX, but that's a business decision. Nothing more or nothing else.
I have no hesitation putting my family on any of their aircraft. That's more than I can say for other airlines.
You say you've been on some "really bad" SQ aircraft? Is that as a pax or operating crew. I'd sure love to hear some specific examples.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Somewhere in the Tropics UTC+7 to 9
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phil Squares,
You say you've been on some "really bad" SQ aircraft? Is that as a pax or operating crew. I'd sure love to hear some specific examples.
Well you've just answered it yourself with...
They may get rid of their aircraft when it needs heavy MX, but that's a business decision.
Plus add into that "as a pax", "a couple of 744s due for MX in the past" and "comfort is subjective to the perception of the beholder..." to complete the answers to your questions.
Perhaps you also misunderstood the meaning of my comment of Well, I have heard the condition of some of their planes are bad (perhaps even very bad), but I never heard of that FAA "dislike"...
Let me re-emphasize certain words to make sure there is no misunderstanding here...
Well, I have heard the condition of some of their planes are bad (perhaps even very bad), but I never heard of that FAA "dislike"...
Which concurs with the reply you wrote immediately before my comment which makes me wonder, do you just pick out anything that sounds anti-SQ in my comment or do you read the whole thing before concluding what my opinion on SQ?
take the PR machine out, then hey, is it REALLY that bad?... it's not that bad is it? I just flew your company 2 weeks ago and no it wasn't. Did I write a paragraph on that reply that would explicitly say that SQ is bad? No...
Regards,
PK-KAR
You say you've been on some "really bad" SQ aircraft? Is that as a pax or operating crew. I'd sure love to hear some specific examples.
Well you've just answered it yourself with...
They may get rid of their aircraft when it needs heavy MX, but that's a business decision.
Plus add into that "as a pax", "a couple of 744s due for MX in the past" and "comfort is subjective to the perception of the beholder..." to complete the answers to your questions.
Perhaps you also misunderstood the meaning of my comment of Well, I have heard the condition of some of their planes are bad (perhaps even very bad), but I never heard of that FAA "dislike"...
Let me re-emphasize certain words to make sure there is no misunderstanding here...
Well, I have heard the condition of some of their planes are bad (perhaps even very bad), but I never heard of that FAA "dislike"...
Which concurs with the reply you wrote immediately before my comment which makes me wonder, do you just pick out anything that sounds anti-SQ in my comment or do you read the whole thing before concluding what my opinion on SQ?
take the PR machine out, then hey, is it REALLY that bad?... it's not that bad is it? I just flew your company 2 weeks ago and no it wasn't. Did I write a paragraph on that reply that would explicitly say that SQ is bad? No...
Regards,
PK-KAR
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Suitcase....
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PK-KAR
Again, I would ask for some specific examples. As I said in my prior post is this a situation of "I heard from a friend who has a friend......".
No, I did not misunderstand the meaning of your comment, it was very clear. You're correct that comfort is a matter of perception. However, I would argue since, SQ is consistently rated as one of the leading airlines in the world, from a passenger's perspective, you too have answered your own question.
Finally, I do real all the dribble you put in your post and laugh at every word.
Again, I ask you for specific examples to justify your comment. The simple fact that SQ would park an aircraft rather than do a D check is completely irrelevant from a passenger's perspective.
Again, I would ask for some specific examples. As I said in my prior post is this a situation of "I heard from a friend who has a friend......".
No, I did not misunderstand the meaning of your comment, it was very clear. You're correct that comfort is a matter of perception. However, I would argue since, SQ is consistently rated as one of the leading airlines in the world, from a passenger's perspective, you too have answered your own question.
Finally, I do real all the dribble you put in your post and laugh at every word.
Again, I ask you for specific examples to justify your comment. The simple fact that SQ would park an aircraft rather than do a D check is completely irrelevant from a passenger's perspective.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Somewhere in the Tropics UTC+7 to 9
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phil Squares,
Sorry if my comment resulted in an interpretation that is not the original intention which is to point out that swh heard doesn't sound right... Now if you understood it differently, then please tell me how you interpreted my comments so I can see where our differences are.
I never wrote that I KNOW the condition of their planes are whatever, I just said I HEARD that... Some I heard from people who are/were in SQ, some from the typical "a friend who has a friend"...
I never stated the condition of the aircraft as FACTS (at least not beyond those of personal perception from personal experience which as you say is irrelevant), and now you ask me to state the facts which I never claim to know?
PK-KAR
Sorry if my comment resulted in an interpretation that is not the original intention which is to point out that swh heard doesn't sound right... Now if you understood it differently, then please tell me how you interpreted my comments so I can see where our differences are.
I never wrote that I KNOW the condition of their planes are whatever, I just said I HEARD that... Some I heard from people who are/were in SQ, some from the typical "a friend who has a friend"...
I never stated the condition of the aircraft as FACTS (at least not beyond those of personal perception from personal experience which as you say is irrelevant), and now you ask me to state the facts which I never claim to know?
PK-KAR
