Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Future Non-stops  
User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3595 times:

Twenty-five years ago I flew on PA801 JFK-NRT which I believe, at that time, was the longest non-stop sector. The equipment was a 747SP.

Boeing then produced the 743 which enabled all airlines on the JFK-NRT run to offer non-stop service. In Europe, on the Australia run, it was normal to have 2-3 stops. Eventually with the 743 and the 744 these flights became one-stops. Now we have the A345 SIN-LAX & SIN-EWR non-stops.

My question is: All this has taken place over the last 25 years. What is the future of long-haul non-stops? I know Boeing will produce the 777LR but what do you think will be the replacement and aircraft flying non-stop NYC-SYD and LON-SYD? It surely has to happen.

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMoby From Netherlands, joined Jun 2004, 11 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3468 times:

My wild guess is that this can happen, as you know airliners are operating in a most cost efficient way, so if it's sure they can have the flight non stop Europe-Australia full for 80% they will do it, otherwise they will operate their schedules just as they do now.
Stop in SIN loads of people out and loads of new pax in.. It's all a matter of money.


But hey what do you prefer have a stop over and be able to wlak around the airport a little or sit another somany hours in a metal tube.


User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3420 times:

It was an article in the NY Times in which the correspondent flew EWR-SIN via AMS (Was not overly impressed with the 3 hour layover) and then the non-stop back to NYC. Much preferred the non-stop as he was able to sleep for 13 hours!

User currently offlineHz747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1668 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3404 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Slept for 13 hours!?! There must have been sleep enhancers used, probably alcohol.

Does Qantas fly to NYC via LAX on a code-share, or on its own jet? There is a Qantas sign at the JFK check-in but I never have seen a Qantas jet. I would think that the loads would have to be high for those flights, and that a SYD-NYC run would be profitable. Certainly, once in place it would create its own market.



Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17033 posts, RR: 67
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3383 times:

Remember that the longer the route the smaller the market, but conversely the longer the route the more expensive the development (and sticker price) of the plane.

Same problem as with larger aircraft. The larger the aircraft the smaller the market, but the larger the aircraft the more expensive the development (and sticker price) of the plane.

We will eventually see LHR-SYD and all those non-stop, but the question is how long it will take.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3254 times:

Does Qantas fly to NYC via LAX on a code-share, or on its own jet?

QF does offer its own metal to JFK.


User currently offlineTexdravid From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Here's hoping for India-U.S. nonstop flights.

I hate stopping in LHR or Frankfurt. It's better to just keep going and going until you reach your destination.




Tort reform now. Throw lawyers in jail later.
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3008 times:

Here's hoping for India-U.S. nonstop flights.

Dont get your hopes up any time soon:



AI sure as heck wouldn't be the pioneer.

CO has proposed a nonstop for the umpteenth time, only to back down again.... similar for UA.

DL already flies there 1stop, but lacks suitable aircraft to completely the route. Ditto AA.

US... ha!

NW could launch a nonstop, but why bother at this point?



User currently onlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5991 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2824 times:

.. so for now you'll have to settle for AC's YYZ-DEL flight (which I believe is still running).

And the article previously mentioned can be found here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/06/business/06road.html

If you don't want to sign up, use http://www.bugmenot.com

[Edited 2004-07-10 00:12:19]

User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6764 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2813 times:

Any non-stops to Vietnam from the US? I hear Vietnam is on the virge of an economic boost, and the supposed new "it" market.


Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2898 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2416 times:

There's a lot of non-stop flights that are currently possible to fly with the aircraft available on today's market, but are not offered simply because they wouldn't be profitable. One can obviously think of many examples.

On the other hand, there are a few non-stop flights that cannot be offered by today's aircraft, but that would (probably) be profitable if and when technology is able to deliver. There aren't that many city pairs that would justify the development of a new aircraft with a range even bigger than the A340-500 (and soon the 777LR) - let's face it, with these planes you can already cover almost the entire world. But let's think, which would those city pairs be?

LHR-SYD: certainly
LHR-AKL: possibly
NYC-SYD: likely
JNB-LAX: perhaps

Most of these are Australia-related. Most other places on the planet can already cover any destination with today's planes, and certainly any commercially interesting destination.

There might be more cash-cows that I haven't thought of. But it's a niche market, as the A340-500 and the 777LR already are.

And there's of course the shorter flights you can operate with less weight restrictions. That might actually be a better argument than those ultra-longhaul flights.



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineLEO777 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1883 times:

A possible long haul flight in the future might also be ORD-JNB.
Others:
ORD-MEL
ORD-BKK
ORD-SYD
There is also a sign at ORD that reads Qantas but if I am correct that is on codeshare with AA.
ORD-SIN could possibly open up again as the demand increases between both cities.



You got to be careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there.
User currently offlineArcano From Chile, joined Mar 2004, 2407 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1840 times:

This would be beautiful:

SCL-NRT
or
SCL-PEK



in order: 721,146,732,763,722,343,733,320,772,319,752,321,88,83,744,332,100,738, 333, 318, 77W, 78, 773 and 380
User currently offlineMalb777 From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 462 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1780 times:

Not to keen on the nonstops my self. I remember my first flight to Australia back in 1974, London, Frankfurt,Bahrain,Kuala Lumpur,Singapore,Sydney Melbourne. on a QF 742.Took a long time but at least we could walk around airports stretch out, Last flight to UK was Brisbane ,Bangkok ,London return, on TG 777 & 7474 Quicker but I think I suffered jetlag more on this flight than before. Either that or I am just getting older


thank god i was not born a bird. this type of flying is much better
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Should US Reinstate The Florida-LGA NON-stops? posted Wed Aug 2 2006 18:41:11 by John
Why No Lax-anc Non-stops posted Sun May 28 2006 10:44:54 by Qantas787
MUC And Future Non Star Alliance Longhaul Flights? posted Mon Aug 29 2005 00:32:02 by Avianca
Why No Non-stops From NYC-PSP? posted Thu Apr 21 2005 18:16:46 by FA4B6
Southwest Announces New Non-Stops At MDW posted Thu Nov 18 2004 22:33:22 by ScottB
AA Reducing FLL-LAX Non-stops? posted Tue Nov 16 2004 15:00:22 by Navion
AA Ends Non-stops Between LGH And JFK posted Fri Oct 8 2004 05:34:38 by Dantiger
CO: How Many Daily Non-stops MEX-EWR? posted Wed Sep 15 2004 01:14:41 by EddieDude
Non-stops US-Western Europe posted Tue Aug 31 2004 04:09:33 by TriJetFan1
New DL Non-Stops posted Tue Aug 17 2004 21:55:47 by DAYFL