Singapore Airlines Flight Delays & Disruptions

[SQ-77W]

SQ31|07OCT (SFO-SIN) operated by 9V-SMK diverted to HND earlier today.

Currently en-route HND-SIN and estimated to arrive into SIN tonight with ETA: 2147.

Was at HND yesterday to catch SQ633 into SIN and what a sight it was to see the two SQ A359s beside one another at the gate.

I wonder why SQ31 was diverted to HND though. The need to refuel due to strong headwinds?

[9V-SPL]

Seems like 9V-SKK is AOG in HKG whilst operating SQ863|09OCT.

[9V-SPL]

SQ31|07OCT (SFO-SIN) operated by 9V-SMK diverted to HND earlier today.

Currently en-route HND-SIN and estimated to arrive into SIN tonight with ETA: 2147.

[SQfanatic]

SQ801|21SEP (PEK-SIN) operated by B777-300ER (9V-SWA) is delayed for almost 19 hours.

STD: 0005
ATD: 1804
STA: 0620
ETA: 0041 (22SEP)

The aircraft is scheduled to park at a remote bay (400) on arrival.

I wonder what happened...Sounds like a technical problem but if anyone really knows keep posted here.

[9V-SPL]

SQ801|21SEP (PEK-SIN) operated by B777-300ER (9V-SWA) is delayed for almost 19 hours.

STD: 0005
ATD: 1804
STA: 0620
ETA: 0041 (22SEP)

The aircraft is scheduled to park at a remote bay (400) on arrival.

[Arundel Lad]

FR24 shows SQ255 9V-SVM SIN - BNE on 17th Sep diverting to Darwin before continuing to BNE. It doesn't seem to have delayed arrival in BNE by much more than 90 mins. Any ideas as to the reason for the diversion.

[kevin-sg]

Due to fuel rationing at AKL, SQ286 is required to make a stopover in SYD on 20-21 Sep, Wed and Thur flights. ETA on both days would be delayed to 2010 hrs.

[9V-SPL]

SQ235 to BNE (13 Sept) operated by 9V-STW is returning to Changi after 2 hours of flight. Seems to have turned back one hour into the journey. Wonder what happened.

A technical issue prompted the air turn back with 9V-STB taking over.

Eventually departed at 0245.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SQ403|13SEP (DEL-SIN) operated by 9V-SKC was delayed for about 17.5 hours.

STD: 2155 (13SEP)
ATD: 1512 (14SEP)
STA: 0610
ATA: 2334

Arrival Gate: F42

According to tweets from some passengers, they were kept on board for at least 3-4 hours.

[ell3]

SQ235 to BNE (13 Sept) operated by 9V-STW is returning to Changi after 2 hours of flight. Seems to have turned back one hour into the journey. Wonder what happened.

[wlgspotter]

The first aircraft in SQ's fleet to have a glass cockpit and 2 man operating crew was the A310 and B757. B744 just had more screens. I remember one of the problems the B744 had were of the tire pressure indicating system cable on the wheel coming loose in flight causing the tire pressure of a parricular wheel to be shown as XX in flight. The pilots as a protocol had to activate the emergency services upon arrival. After multiple false alarms, these digital tire pressure systems were removed from the B744. The 744 freighters till today do not have it.

Yep you're right about that A310s and B757 being the first glass cockpits and 2 man operating crew.l - I stand corrected on that.

And I do remember the issues they had with the tyre gauge and the activation of emergency services upon arrival. The B744 fleet had its fair share of false alarms at the time...

[boing]

Yeah that's certainly quite true. But, if memory serves me right, I think a lot of the so called teething issues with the B744 at the time seemed to be from the fact that the 744 was the first aircraft in SQ's fleet at the time that replaced a lot of traditional dials and gauges in the cockpit with the famed 6 LCD screens. That presented some challenges. By the time the 777s came along SQ, along with Boeing, already had a number of years with using LCD screens in the cockpits...

The first aircraft in SQ's fleet to have a glass cockpit and 2 man operating crew was the A310 and B757. B744 just had more screens. I remember one of the problems the B744 had were of the tire pressure indicating system cable on the wheel coming loose in flight causing the tire pressure of a parricular wheel to be shown as XX in flight. The pilots as a protocol had to activate the emergency services upon arrival. After multiple false alarms, these digital tire pressure systems were removed from the B744. The 744 freighters till today do not have it.

[boing]

As someone had pointed out, Airbus aircraft are slightly more challenging to work on than Boeing from a maintenance perspective. Their component removals require more time and effort. Once saw a Boeing documentary on the 777 and Boeing actually has a software simulating an average human's ergonomics to make sure that any component's access on the 777 is not in an out of reach area for the mechanics. And this was in the 90s ! Likewise, UA mechanics were consulted on every common issues on an aircraft and these feedbacks were taken into consideration. As such, 777 is a breeze to work. That's not to say they didn't have their fair share of teething problems during EIS, but they were resolved faster.

[wlgspotter]

Wow, that's quite a 'legacy' to have I guess the 777s have lots less issues because their base design is 20 years old and probably the engineers maintaining them have lots more exposure and experience? Of course, don't want to rule out good and reliable design and build quality.

Yeah that's certainly quite true. But, if memory serves me right, I think a lot of the so called teething issues with the B744 at the time seemed to be from the fact that the 744 was the first aircraft in SQ's fleet at the time that replaced a lot of traditional dials and gauges in the cockpit with the famed 6 LCD screens. That presented some challenges. By the time the 777s came along SQ, along with Boeing, already had a number of years with using LCD screens in the cockpits...

[loldude333]

I do concur with SQ228's assessment that the ZRH flight (SQ346) seem to be the flight that gets delayed should issues occur with aircraft use that cannot be fixed on time, and it doesn't seem to be just the A380. I remember what I was working for SATS back in 92/93, SQ's rather newish B744 fleet at the time had quite a bit of "teething" issues as well. At the time, SQ only have 2 types of aircraft in their fleet - the Boeing 747 Series (742, 743 and 744) and the Airbus A310s (312 and 313), plus a single Boeing 733 for SIA Cargo. Therefore, only the Boeing 747s are the designated long haul aircraft, and certainly the B744 are the ones that do non-stop European routes (with the exception of ATH). Therefore, when an issue occur with a B744, it is always ZRH's aircraft that gets "stolen", as that will certainly either buy the engineers time to fix it, of if that is not possible, then they will have to wait until the early morning European arrivals before they can do an aircraft swap for ZRH. They couldn't even use SQ11's aircraft as although SQ11 arrives around the time when SQ346 is due to depart, however, in the early 90s, SQ12/11 was still operated by a B743, so it can't do the non-stop SIN-ZRH sector.

Seems that the patterns haven't changed much throughout the years!

Wow, that's quite a 'legacy' to have I guess the 777s have lots less issues because their base design is 20 years old and probably the engineers maintaining them have lots more exposure and experience? Of course, don't want to rule out good and reliable design and build quality.

[wlgspotter]

...2. ZRH is the last A380 flight to depart for the night, so should any technical failures occur, they seem to assign the faulty plane to SQ346 in order to buy more repair time, which if it can't be repaired means waiting for the first arrivals at dawn to source another A380 instead.

I do concur with SQ228's assessment that the ZRH flight (SQ346) seem to be the flight that gets delayed should issues occur with aircraft use that cannot be fixed on time, and it doesn't seem to be just the A380. I remember what I was working for SATS back in 92/93, SQ's rather newish B744 fleet at the time had quite a bit of "teething" issues as well. At the time, SQ only have 2 types of aircraft in their fleet - the Boeing 747 Series (742, 743 and 744) and the Airbus A310s (312 and 313), plus a single Boeing 733 for SIA Cargo. Therefore, only the Boeing 747s are the designated long haul aircraft, and certainly the B744 are the ones that do non-stop European routes (with the exception of ATH). Therefore, when an issue occur with a B744, it is always ZRH's aircraft that gets "stolen", as that will certainly either buy the engineers time to fix it, of if that is not possible, then they will have to wait until the early morning European arrivals before they can do an aircraft swap for ZRH. They couldn't even use SQ11's aircraft as although SQ11 arrives around the time when SQ346 is due to depart, however, in the early 90s, SQ12/11 was still operated by a B743, so it can't do the non-stop SIN-ZRH sector.

Seems that the patterns haven't changed much throughout the years!