Long long long range

[The Rok]

Just an open thought. I know very little about the mechanics or economics behind air travel, but does anybody think or really believe that some day we will get long range non stop services.

Maybe MEL/SYD/PER - LHR.

If so, what is the likely time frame and on what metal? What carrier?

If not, why not? Is it not economically viable?

I saw an article on the VS order of Boeing 787's and a suggestion that PER - LHR could be a possible route for them. Given that VS do not currently fly out of Perth at all is this just marketing or a possibility???

 

[anat0l]

At the moment, it's probably possible, although you would need to have much lighter payloads (i.e. less pax, less cargo, etc.). That all would push up the prices, and not many people would like that.

To give an example, SYD-DFW is pretty far as it is already, but QF are struggling to make the journey with their 747-400ERs. To be fair, incidents which push fuel consumption like adverse weather is what is stuffing them up.

SQ's SIN-EWR service is one of the longest flights in the world and is operated by a A340-500, however it is configured to carry only 100 (Business Class) passengers.

Many modern long range aircraft report great ranges and distances, as well as air travel records to "prove" it, however some of these were set with non-commercial situations, e.g. no pax, no cargo.

To top it off, many pax may not like spending very long on a plane. Even if a plane could make the entire journey from SYD to LHR without stopping, it would likely take between 20 - 24 hours. First pax may be feeling alright, but the Economy pax will be lucky if they don't kill each other.

In short, I think we won't see such non-stop services until faster travel can close the distance gap, allowing aircraft to travel farther for the same amount of time....additionally without having to sacrifice profit/yield from pax and cargo. Aircraft manufacturers paint a rosy picture when it comes to aircraft pax capacities....then the airlines find a way to squeeze every single square inch for profit.


I'm not sure if VS are talking out of their backsides if they think a 787 will make the PER-LHR journey. Whilst the GCM distance falls within the expected fully-loaded range of a 787, there isn't much room for allowances. Add to this no definite flight path (which may be larger than GCM) and need to allow for things like weather, tail/head winds, etc., whilst a one-stop service may be feasible a non-stop one perhaps not....

 

[anat0l]

Here's a view from Wikipedia (i.e. whoever wrote the article):

Non-stop flight - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Simo]

Payload/wanting to get the most revenue out of the flight.Ie take freight from Aust to an Asian area and then onto Europe areas.When coming bake from SIN I noticed many pallets of freight being loaded.It could also make fares slightly dearer as maybe paxs don't want to go direct from Aust to Europe.

 

[oz_mark]

If so, what is the likely time frame and on what metal? What carrier?

If not, why not? Is it not economically viable?

To quite a degree, the economics of ultra long haul travel don't really stack up. This is due to several reasons, but they include the cost incurred of having to tanker fuel in order to make the distance, and the additional crew costs. In an example of Australia-London, the calculations I have seen come out that stopping somewhere enroute has substantial cost benefits.

Consider the SQ case - when the flight was first launched it was a mixed class flight, but the costs of the flight meant that it didn't really work. So, it can work, but wil likely to be only on routes where the plane can be filled with high yield passengers.

 

[serfty]

When Qantas took delivery of their first 744, they did indeed fly it from Europe to Oz.

This was in 1989, and they did it non stop 18,001km from London to Sydney in "20 hours nine minutes and five seconds".

I believe that particular flight took off with full tanks and little cargo. While it was a promotional/delivery flight, it did carry "passengers" - 11 in total, some were VIPs' but I can't recall if that number included the Aircrew.

 

[Awesom Andy]

I think the 77L can already do LHR-PER while carrying a useful load, although the headwind will stop it from going back without a stop. Personally, I can't see many new ULR flights, as for this type of flights, you would basically be flying an oil tanker with a few pax rather than a normal aircraft with pax and cargo. The only way this would work is that there are enough people who want to pay an extremely high price for the non-stop service. e.g. Thai Airways has found it impossible to make money out of its ULR routes with its A345.

 

[The Rok]

So what about a non stop PER/SYD/MEL to LHR in just business class? Surely they could fill a plane full of J once a day who will pay for the time saved? And if the whole plane is configured as J then the yield would justify the flight?

 

[harvyk]

I'd hate to spend 20 to 24 hours in a plane... 14 to 15 is bad enough and I know from about the 10 hour mark onwards I am checking out the clock every few minutes waiting for the time to destination to be zero.

If nothing else the terminal inbetween give you a chance to get out and stretch your legs... I don't know about others, but I'd probably spend no more than a couple of minutes per hour on average during a flight out of my chair...

 

[anat0l]

So what about a non stop PER/SYD/MEL to LHR in just business class? Surely they could fill a plane full of J once a day who will pay for the time saved? And if the whole plane is configured as J then the yield would justify the flight?

If the saving amounts to 2 hours - or even 4 hours - I don't see that as worth paying a premium for.

If at the same price level then I'd justify my comfort (and possibly more status credits) by flying in two sectors. That stretch off the plane does a little bit of good.

 

[Noob]

According to the latest from Boeing, PER-LHR is just possible on the 787-8. It would be the very limits of its range.

 

[Paul_PER]

So what about a non stop PER/SYD/MEL to LHR in just business class? Surely they could fill a plane full of J once a day who will pay for the time saved? And if the whole plane is configured as J then the yield would justify the flight?

I understand that the 772LR can do PER-LHR. But remember that LHR is a slot constrained airport ... the profit of flying an A380 from the east coast to LHR beats the profit of flying PER-LHR.

And I'm sure people wouldn't be happy with Gatwick, Luton, or Stansted as alternatives.

Also flights to other countries are dependent on whether landing rights can be obtained, Qantas for example has never been able to get the Paris landing rights it's wanted, EK can't get A380's into many European destinations, SA never got Aust-US rights, etc, etc, etc.

 

[Awesom Andy]

So what about a non stop PER/SYD/MEL to LHR in just business class? Surely they could fill a plane full of J once a day who will pay for the time saved? And if the whole plane is configured as J then the yield would justify the flight?

While having the whole plane loaded with F/J passengers may be able to justify the costs in itself, chances are, they may not be able to provide a return as high as, say, a 747/A380 making one-stop. In which case, it would be silly to provide the non-stop service, unless they can achieve other competitive advantages by doing so.

 

[Andyzx]

The logistics of ULR flights are more of the issue than actually the range. The 772's have no problem getting here from say LHR but as others have said the number of PAX and cargo will be the issue.

The requirements for a full days food and liquids for that period, 2-4 shifts of cabin staff and pilots would mean that the number of pax would have to be reduced to accomadate this. I remember some talk of a seasonal (787) PER LHR flights due to favourable wind conditions for the flights. I can't remember if this was summer or winter.

Another option my be the Airbus A350. The 800 version will get to most parts of Oz with normal operating loads.

Just speculating on the timeframes, I would think this is would be a 16-18 hour flight. Probably 18 in reasonable cruise speed of 850-900kmph

The A350-800 is designed to carry 270 passengers in a typical three-class cabin layout over a range of up to 8,500 nm/15,700 km, powered by RR Trent XWB engines

But I would add a couple of recommendations, more o2 and clear air scrubbers, compulsory showers for all pax and staff and addtional drinks for AFF members!

 

[dajop]

I'd hate to spend 20 to 24 hours in a plane... 14 to 15 is bad enough and I know from about the 10 hour mark onwards I am checking out the clock every few minutes waiting for the time to destination to be zero.

Don't knock it until you try it In business class it works really well (or at least in SQ's ultrawide seats).

I've done the SIN-EWR route a few times and love it. It allows you to plan the whole journey, sleep, eat, watch some films, do some work if you need to etc. Once I even had a three hour delay after boarding due to de-icing requirements and was on the plane for about 21.5 hrs, and it was fine as well. Last visit to US did SIN-EWR and returned SFO-HKG-SIN and the HKG stopover was much more painful than having the extra hours in direct flight.

But in economy, I don't think I'd be so happy.

 

[gumpy]

Lets face it ULR in Y would basically kill you.

So if they made it 100% J or 20% F 80% J or 15% F 60% J 25% Y+would it help the situation in terms of load weight seeing there will be fewer pax?

When flying for business I know a fair few of my colleagues would pay a slight premium for a direct flight to LHR or JFK.

 

[RSD]

To give an example, SYD-DFW is pretty far as it is already, but QF are struggling to make the journey with their 747-400ERs. To be fair, incidents which push fuel consumption like adverse weather is what is stuffing them up.

How are the SYD-DFW flights doing? Are you saying that they are struggling to make the journey non-stopand having to divert to refuel?

 

[vertisol]

There's no finer feeling than being able to shower or sit on a proper poreclain dunny (not airplane plastic) in an asian hub QP.

A direct flight would have to knock more than a couple of hours off the trip to make it worth it.

 

[gumpy]

yeah it'd need to be hypersonic flight or something like that...

I fear the day because it means I'll have to travel Y to LHR. hehe