Singapore Airlines debuts new first, business class on London flights

Well, we can't have it all!

I'm also inclined to suspect that because the period during which this is being introduced will be moving into the Christmas season, loads on the Sydney services will be high enough for both SQ 221 and SQ 231 to be A380s, which locks out the 777-300ER anyway (since the two day flights, SQ 211/212 and SQ 241/242, are run using the 777-200ER).

Eurocentric perspective of previous management, who were fixated on long haul routes, whilst ignoring the burgeoning opportunity of the regional asia pacific market?

Fixation on long haul routes = Buying fuel guzzling 747

Ignoring opportunity of apac = Foresaking 777-200 that could increase frequency to key regional cities at a lower marginal cost

Am I off the mark?

This topic again? I'll bite. No, QF made the right call to skip the 777-200ER. They made the wrong call, however, by not seeing the warnings with the 787 project delays; if they had responded in time, I believe the correct ship to jump to would be identical to SQ - jump on a bunch of new A330-300s on relatively short leases and kit them out with the A380 product (sans F). This would have provided a weapon which should have been powerful enough to fend off CX and SQ enough to keep QF a relevant Asia-Australia player.

hahahha sorry to goad you watson374.

Excuse my ignorance...why was the 777-200 not a good choice?

No worries! A little armchair is good fun once in a while. The following drivel will be Asia-focused because of TheRealBabushka's mention of it. It will also be with the benefit of hindsight.

While I agree that Qantas missed the boat getting an intermediate-capacity widebody for its Asia network for the last decade, I believe the 777-200(ER) was too big, too heavy and by the time Qantas needed this weapon in Asia, it was past its prime.

The correct choice would have been to have leased additional A330-300s for relatively short terms to tide them over the 787 Dreamliner disaster, then churned them out to let their purchased 787s take their place. The A330-300 is lighter and more efficient for an equivalent function compared to the 777-200ER; Singapore Airlines' experience with both types suggests that the better regional bird is the A330-300. In any case, Qantas had already bought A330-300s by the time the Dreamliner tripped, and the economics of operating two dozen A330-300s (and the A330-200s!) as opposed to a dozen A330s and a dozen 777s is a solid reason to favour the A330.

Unlike other airlines (e.g. Air New Zealand), the 777 issue with Qantas was not one of 747-400 replacement, as they had (and still have) many relatively young frames (1999 onwards) to do the non-A380 heavy lifting. The issue was a growth tool for the Asia-Pacific region, as Europe was rapidly becoming codeshare material and America was solidly A380 material.

As such, the 777-200ER was not the right ship to jump onto for Qantas.

PS: Before you start, I don't believe the 777-300ER was the right move either. Here, I will borrow from Cathay Pacific's experience - successfully growing routes with additional frequency rather than upsizing to a fat whale. Given that Qantas would almost certainly not have beaten its big Asian rivals CX and SQ into oblivion, they would be on the back foot, defending their position most of the time. As such, the 777's bigger capacity isn't needed - even CX has gone for a pure A330-300 strategy in Australia.

Summing up, I believe the 777 was the wrong choice because the A330 was the better one during the crucial years of the latter Noughties. It only looks good because we like 777s and because the actual choice was inaction.

Understand! Thanks watson374!

Wow, you read it! Glad you enjoyed it, and apologies to everyone for posting up a wall of text.