Why can't the a350 do 19 hours from KJFK TO WSSS

[ErickPinedo]

in real life a350-900 reaches those 2 airports withouth a problem im having issues with aircraft range?

[ErickPinedo]

[559AS]

Ultra long haul flights are very weight restricted.  Try bumping that 16,000 pounds of cargo, and reducing your passenger load a little.   See if that helps. 

[jaybird]

Do a google search for "A350 ULR", you'll find that there are significant modifications to the standard plane, and we don't have that model, so it's no big surprise you cant make the range.

 

[sunake]

Yes, what 559AS said. When Singapore did that route with the A340-600, I believe they used an all business class configuration so the passenger load was much less than a standard configuration A346. I was able to plan that route successfully in simbrief by dropping the passenger load down to 100ish. Also it's possible Singapore Airlines also has an exception or something, to use different enroute reserve fuel planning, which allows them to legally take less reserves for the enroute portion. 

[rke]

As mentioned by Jaybird, these flights (EWR and JFK) are operated by the ULR variant, which hasn't been released yet, not to mention they operated with a vastly reduced seat count (161 seats as opposed to 253 on their standard non-regional A350).

IIRC, and I may be wrong, but SFO and LAX can be done with the non-standard variant.

Edited March 9 by rke

[ErickPinedo]

there is youtube videos doing the flight so why  there is  a problem if people is doing the flight that mean i can do it ,pls help me fix that ?
 

Edited March 15 by ErickPinedo

[pete_auau]

4 hours ago, ErickPinedo said:

there is youtube videos doing the flight so why  there is  a problem if people is doing the flight that mean i can do it ,pls help me fix that ?
 

they probably cheating by doing the  refuel  whilst in flight

[Nikolaj Delaney]

lower your ZFW, set cost index 0 and cargo to 0. Use EASA contingency fuel.
Here example with 130 pax, 0 cargo - it's possible, just needs more careful planning

[Swisspilot1986]

but it has no sense because of no profitability. I think it's better to wait on the ULR version in a couple of weeks and when most of bugs will be fixed

[MrFickles]

Don't forget that the seats on the route are minimally premium economy costing maybe $1000 or perhaps thrice that for business. The route is probably profitable even with low load factors.

Even Singapore Airlines found it worthwhile to operate WSSS-KJFK in the middle of the pandemic when load factors were like 30-40%.

 

Edited April 1 by MrFickles

[bilookhan]

Hi

Now with the ULR released I would like to perform the flight JFK -> SIN SQ 23

Do we have updated simbrief profile to accomodate this feature ?

As of now I am still getting an error in simbrief "exceed aircraft range".

I understand these flights have max passenger setting to 167. I am assuming I should be able to carry atleast 75% load on this flight to make it a economically feasible flight.

Also what should my cost index be for such flights ?

[Swisspilot1986]

You can add the A350 Airliner ULR SimBrief profile by clicking here.

[bilookhan]

7 hours ago, Swisspilot1986 said:

You can add the A350 Airliner ULR SimBrief profile by clicking here.

Thank you for that.

I realized that the fuel range was low according to online sources. I had to change fuel capacity to 291850 lbs. That helped.

[lume237]

Is it correct only 161 passengers max?