Ultra Long flights to Europe

Page 1 of 3123>
July 2nd, 2017 at 12:41:54 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 744
Posts: 8738
European Airlines because of geography do not fly the longest routes in the world. Santiago Chile is the most distant city for major airlines , and only Lufthansa doesn't fly further than Argentina as of today. Boeing aircraft are sufficient to cover this distance

Miles of longest route flown by airline
7,132 Buenos Aires | Frankfurt | Lufthansa LH 510 Boeing 747-8I
7,236 Santiago | London-Heathrow | British Airways BA 251 Boeing 787-9
7,410 Santiago | Rome-Fiumicino | Alitalia AZ 688 Boeing 777-200ER
7,240 Santiago | Paris-Charles de Gaulle | Air France AF 406 Boeing 777-200ER/300ER
7,467 Santiago | Amsterdam-Schiphol | KLM KL 701 Boeing 777-300ER
7,526 Santiago | Frankfurt | LATAM Chile LA 705 Boeing 787-8

Boeing has essentially widely made aircraft to go this distance since 1989 and with specialty planes since 1976. The critical route California to Australia was usually the driver.

Do you see that changing in the next 5 years? A new generation of aircraft may bring Australia in reach of non stop flight to Europe, but there are many well established transfers from there. Some people don't think that the European airlines will invest in expensive ultra long haul jets just for this market.


Airlines with t least one route longer than Santiago to Frankfurt (7,526 miles)
  1. Qatar Airways (Auckland to Doha 9,031 miles)
  2. Emirates
  3. Qantas
  4. Singapore Airlines
  5. United Airlines
  6. Delta Air Lines
  7. Etihad Airways
  8. Saudia
  9. American Airlines
  10. Cathay Pacific
  11. Aeroméxico (Mexico City to Shanghai-Pudong 8,026 miles)
  12. China Southern Airlines
  13. South African Airways
  14. EVA Air
  15. Virgin Australia
  16. Xiamen Airlines
  17. Air Canada
  18. Air India
  19. China Airlines
  20. El Al
July 2nd, 2017 at 1:26:10 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 50
Posts: 4984
Pilots and pilot rest breaks are critical but pilots are often 'burger flippers' as far as economics is considered.
Qantas pilots are no longer Kings.
Air India pilots have excellent training and experience, just look at their logbooks but don't look too closely or you might notice extreme irregularities.

I don't know about this 'the world is getting smaller' or why ultra long flights should be so critical. New York and Paris are the same distance apart.Nothing has changed on the bread and butter flights. If you solve turnaround problems at airports and I mean really solve them you don't need ultra long flights. The ultra long and over water flights will be okay as they are.

Are pilots the limiting factor or passenger tolerance the limiting factor?

Ground cooling in Denver just caused a flap for Delta, air borne incidents seem to be increasing, what is the use of having ultra long flights if those flights have to deviate due to onboard incidents or are cancelled because some elderly woman tosses coins into a jet engine as if it were a good luck fountain?
July 2nd, 2017 at 2:11:20 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 744
Posts: 8738
In August 1967, Aerolíneas Argentinas established its non-stop Boeing 707 service on a 10,062-kilometre route between Madrid and Buenos Aires with a flight time of 12 hours. That record for a regularly scheduled route held for 9 years until widebody aircraft came along. (10,000 km = 6214 statute miles)

The widebody age began in 1970 with the entry into service of the first widebody airliner, the four-engined, partial double-deck Boeing 747.New trijet widebody aircraft soon followed, including the McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar. The first widebody twinjet, the Airbus A300, entered service in 1974.

But California to Australia has always been a busy route, and deviations to Honolulu for refueling are costly in terms of both time and fuel. In April 1976, when the Boeing 747SP entered service. In 1976 Pan American World Airways set the new record with its 10,854-kilometre New York City (John F. Kennedy International Airport)–Tokyo route. In December, the airline set another record with Sydney–San Francisco, covering 11,937 kilometres .

The SYD-SFO (7433 miles) , SYD-LAX (7503 miles) essentially was the definitive long distance flight for decades. The Boeing 747-400 made that distance relatively routine. With some minor deviations like Los Angeles to Melbourne.

Quote: Fleastiff
Are pilots the limiting factor or passenger tolerance the limiting factor?


I don't think it was either. Although you do need a second set of pilots which costs more.

Breaking the 7500 mile barrier was largely the cost of designing planes to go that distance, plus the obvious uneconomical prospect of flying fuel that outweighs passengers.
The idea of flying nonstop from North America to Africa or the Middle East or India or from the east coast to Hong Kong was not an economic priority.

In 1989 the Boeing 747-400 had ranges of over 8300 miles, but most airlines were not flying that distance. I think in USA the Chicago to Hong Kong flight (7790 miles) was the first one to break the 7503 mile barrier and it took about two decades after the CA to Australia route was first established.

Even today the European airlines don't fly further than 7526 miles. Australians and New Zealanders have been flying to Europe with a single fuel stop for over a half a century. There are at least half a dozen intermediate airports that are being used with Singapore being the most traditional.

Newark to Singapore (9,535 miles) from 28 June 2004 to 23 November 2013 is the longest non-stop commercial flight in history.
July 2nd, 2017 at 6:15:11 PM permalink
Aussie
Member since: May 10, 2016
Threads: 2
Posts: 273
Australia to Europe non-stop is already in reach and is actually about to happen. Qantas is scheduled to begin PER-LHR in March 2018 using a 787. It will only be a matter of time until SYD-LHR is possible. What happens in the future? Qantas has also suggested other European destination may be coming as well as SYD-JFK non-stop.
July 2nd, 2017 at 7:57:47 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 330
Posts: 11556
Quote: Aussie
What happens in the future?


Airlines start scheduling holding patterns to extend their longest flights :)
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
July 2nd, 2017 at 9:50:28 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 744
Posts: 8738
Quote: Aussie
Australia to Europe non-stop is already in reach and is actually about to happen. Qantas is scheduled to begin PER-LHR in March 2018 using a 787. It will only be a matter of time until SYD-LHR is possible. What happens in the future? Qantas has also suggested other European destination may be coming as well as SYD-JFK non-stop.


I should have qualified my original question. Certainly Qantas is going to purchase the latest ultra long haul jets as it has too much to gain.

This flight from Perth may not work out, as it is actually a longer trip than changing in Singapore or Dubai.
PER - LHR 9,010 mi
SYD - LHR nonstop 10,574 mi (by 2020 it may be feasible)
SYD - SIN - LHR 10,673 mi (older Qantas stop)
SYD - DXB - LHR 10,902 mi
SYD - PER - LHR 11,051 mi

Perth alone is only about 2 million people and would have trouble supporting a daily flight.

Historically ultra long range jets have been very bad investments. They are too expensive to operate and they end up being retired far earlier than more mundane aircraft. You can check history of the B747-SP, the A340-500 and the B777-200LR.

New Zealand Air makes stops in either Singapore or in LAX.

My question is will the European airlines purchase ultra long haul jets simply to fly to Australia and New Zealand? Or will they simply maintain their current routes and compete on price. For instance British Air has been stopping in Singapore for decades and it is a mere 99 extra miles plus the time it takes to stop.
July 2nd, 2017 at 10:06:11 PM permalink
Aussie
Member since: May 10, 2016
Threads: 2
Posts: 273
Quote: Pacomartin
I should have qualified my original question. Certainly Qantas is going to purchase the latest ultra long haul jets as it has too much to gain.

This flight from Perth may not work out, as it is actually a longer trip than changing in Singapore or Dubai.
PER - LHR 9,010 mi
SYD - LHR nonstop 10,574 mi (by 2020 it may be feasible)
SYD - SIN - LHR 10,673 mi (older Qantas stop)
SYD - DXB - LHR 10,902 mi
SYD - PER - LHR 11,051 mi

Perth alone is only about 2 million people and would have trouble supporting a daily flight.

Historically ultra long range jets have been very bad investments. They are too expensive to operate and they end up being retired far earlier than more mundane aircraft. You can check history of the B747-SP, the A340-500 and the B777-200LR.

New Zealand Air makes stops in either Singapore or in LAX.

My question is will the European airlines purchase ultra long haul jets simply to fly to Australia and New Zealand? Or will they simply maintain their current routes and compete on price. For instance British Air has been stopping in Singapore for decades and it is a mere 99 extra miles plus the time it takes to stop.




Perth by itself probably couldn't support the flight on its own but what you will find is that Qantas will be funnelling connecting traffic through there. MEL-DXB-LHR is being discontinued with those in Melbourne being pushed towards the Perth flight. Infact, PER-LHR is actually MEL-PER-LHR with the same plane being used he whole way. So they get a long haul international product on a domestic route. That may well be more appealing than jumping in a sardine tin up to Sydney first. They will also get plenty of other passengers who don't live in Sydney choosing this flight.

Will it work out long term? Who knows. I'm on the east coast and with better products available out of BNE, SYD or MEL on Qantas as well as other airlines I would give PER a miss. That's just a personal preference though. I'm sure there will be plenty of people who will like the idea of not having to transit in another country.
July 2nd, 2017 at 10:12:46 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 744
Posts: 8738
I had someone tell me that Australians consume more jet fuel per capita than anyone else in the world. I don't know if it is true, but it certainly sounds reasonable.

When widebody aircraft were less than 7 years old they had a version of the B747SP where SP means "Special Performance" that was primarily designed to fly from Australia to California.
================

But ultra long range aircraft are a very risky proposition. As a reference point, the Concorde took about a ton of fuel to fly each seat from London to NYC.

In 2004 the A340-500 took about a ton of fuel to fly one seat (out of 180) from Singapore to New York or LAX. After four years they reduced the number of seats from 180 to 100, so that it was closer to 2 tons of fuel to fly one seat. It's very risky economics as you can tell by the limited number of aircraft that were built.

The Qantas A380 that flies from Sydney to Dallas (8,574 mi) fully fueled is about 1180 lbs of fuel per seat. As there must be some reserve when you land, it probably uses half a ton per seat.

45 Boeing 747-SPs were built
59 Boeing 777-200LR (("LR" for Longer Range also called The Worldliner) were built
34 Airbus A340-500s were built

The next generation jets will be more efficient, but you are talking about going up to 10,500 miles . My guess is you are going to be talking about a lot more fuel than the stop in Singapore.
July 2nd, 2017 at 10:20:27 PM permalink
Aussie
Member since: May 10, 2016
Threads: 2
Posts: 273
Would not surprise me if that were true. We are a long way from anywhere really so going overseas is naturally going to use a lot of fuel. Also we don't have the population to support other forms of efficient public transport so if you want to go anywhere domestically you are very likely going to be going via plane.
July 2nd, 2017 at 10:34:46 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 744
Posts: 8738
Quote: Wikipedia
A350-900ULR
The ultra-long range -900ULR MTOW will be increased to 280 tonnes and its fuel capacity from 141,000 litres to 165,000 litres within existing fuel tanks to enable up to 19-hour flights, or up to about 9,700 nautical miles (17,960 km).

The launch customer Singapore Airlines ordered seven aircraft, and will use these for non-stop flights from Singapore to New York and cities on the U.S. West Coast. Seating is reduced from 300 seats in Singapore Airlines standard A350 configuration to seat 170 mainly business class, but the plane could be reconfigured. Singapore Airlines is expected to take delivery of the aircraft in 2018.

At the 2015 Dubai Air Show, Airbus' John Leahy noted the appetite from the gulf carriers for the variant. The MTOW increase is 5 t from the previously certified 275t variant. As the A350-900 fuel consumption is 5.8 t/hr, it needs an additional 24 tonnes of fuel to fly 19 hours instead of the standard 15 hours, gained through MTOW increase and lower payload allowing larger fuel capacity.


Although the order list for the A350-900 is long, it is not clear if anyone other than Singapore airlines order the Ultra Long Range variant. You will notice that Qantas is not on the list. They may be waiting for Boeing's contender.

Singapore Airlines does not need ULR aircraft to go to Europe, so they probably intend to fly to NYC and LAX and possibly a third city in Northern America.

67 Singapore Airlines
43 Qatar Airways
40 Etihad Airways
25 Delta Air Lines
25 Lufthansa
22 American Airlines
21 Air France
20 AerCap / ILFC
20 Air Lease Corporation
20 Cathay Pacific
20 China Eastern Airlines
20 China Southern Airlines
19 Finnair
18 Japan Airlines
16 Iberia
15 Hong Kong Airlines
14 Aeroflot
14 China Airlines
14 CIT Group
13 LATAM Airlines Group
12 ALAFCO
12 Asiana Airlines
12 Ethiopian Airlines
10 Afriqiyah Airways
10 Air China
10 AirAsia X
10 Kuwait Airways
10 Synergy Aerospace
10 Undisclosed
10 Vietnam Airlines
10 Yemenia
9 Aer Lingus
8 Scandinavian Airlines
7 KLM
6 Libyan Airlines
6 Philippine Airlines
4 Air Mauritius
4 SriLankan Airlines
4 Thai Airways
1 Governments, executive and private jets
1 Groupe Dubreuil
Page 1 of 3123>