RainerBoeing777
Topic Author
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 7:22 pm

Today begins the first regular flight between Australia and Europe, Qantas launches Perth - London Heathrow, the new Airbus A350 XWB and Boeing 787 Dreamliners break the barriers of distance, the year before they started Singapore - San Francisco, Singapore - Los Angeles, Doha - Auckland, Dubai - Auckland, Dallas - Sydney, Los Angeles Doha and among many others, veterans like the Boeing 747-400, the A340 family and Boeing 777 gave a great step to this era of non-stop flights, for you which will be the new ultra long-range route to the near future and not close?

Image

YUL BOM
YUL DEL
BOM GRU
DEL DTW
DEL ATL
HNL CDG
HNL AMS
HNL LHR
AMS DPS
AMS MNL
MNL FRA
MNL FCO
BOM ATL
BOM ORD
BLR DTW
IST EZE
IST MEX
BNE ORD
BNE DFW
MEL DFW
SEA SIN
ADD IAH
IST MEL
IST GIG
IST SCL
SYD MEX
NRT PTY
PEK PTY
IAH HKG
IAH PVG
MIA NRT
MIA PEK
MIA HKG
MIA TPE
MIA ICN
SIN GRU
SIN ORD
SIN YVR
AKL GRU
AKL ORD
AKL YYZ
AKL EWR
PER CDG
PER FRA
PER FCO
BNE SFO
SFO BKK
SFO SGN
SFO HAN
LAX SGN
LAX HAN
BKK YVR
BKK LAX
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
devmapper
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:15 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:35 pm

Is there any significant demand for Montreal-India non-stops? I'd have thought that most of the traffic is funneled through Toronto anyway. Also, ATL and DTW do not have enough traffic to justify non-stops. Most of that traffic will be funneled through one stops via AMS.

GRU to India is an interesting proposition. Is there any significant J class demand to justify a non-stop, considering it is likely going to push the limits on any aircraft flying the route.
 
notconcerned
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:49 pm

SIN-SEA/YVR are not really ULH routes. They are well within 777 range and SQ/AC could have flown those routes years ago if there was sufficient demand/yield. Same goes for SFO-BKK/HAN/SGN; it might be more economical now to fly with A350 or 787.
 
mildaiv
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 9:34 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:57 pm

ULR flights are non event compared to increased range of last narrowbodis NEO and MAX witch opens thousands of new routes
 
Boeingphan
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:29 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:55 pm

mildaiv wrote:
ULR flights are non event compared to increased range of last narrowbodis NEO and MAX witch opens thousands of new routes


I beg to differ considering the thread on QF from Perth-London has 6 pages worth of play by play...
 
davescj
Posts: 1275
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:46 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:11 pm

What is going to drive this is cost of fuel vs revenue generated. I remember the 777s arriving into fleets and being amazed at the length they could fly (and for relatively cheaper costs at the time). Fuel costs of course have gone up, and that does make a difference in ULH routes. But as cost goes down (less gas) it allows 'smaller' destinations to be linked and opened for business, tourism, etc.
Can I have a mojito on this flight?
 
User avatar
KrustyTheKlown
Posts: 347
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:45 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:29 pm

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
...
IST MEX
...
SYD MEX


IST-MEX can be done with a 787 as is actually shorter than the existing MEX-NRT. But I doubt Aeromexico is interested on this route due to the small O/D market. Turkish has been long rumored at MEX but never actually announced it (probably due to lack of slots at MEX, but more likely due to the small volume expected for such route).

SYD-MEX could be challenging as is as long as MEX-PVG but it will have to be launched non-stop. It could make sense if the new TPP increases commerce between Australia and Mexico but with no local Oneworld partner at MEX Qantas may never start such route.
 
HHScot
Posts: 145
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:11 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:48 pm

Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18109
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:26 pm

mildaiv wrote:
ULR flights are non event compared to increased range of last narrowbodis NEO and MAX witch opens thousands of new routes

I agree. The NEO, MAX, A321LR, and later MoM will change the market.

ULH is facinating. It takes a premium market at each end to make a profitable route.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1378
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:39 pm

HHScot wrote:
Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!

I am in the same 9-across boat. :cry: I wouldn't even go TATL at 10.
 
RainerBoeing777
Topic Author
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 12:15 am

KrustyTheKlown wrote:
RainerBoeing777 wrote:
...
IST MEX
...
SYD MEX


IST-MEX can be done with a 787 as is actually shorter than the existing MEX-NRT. But I doubt Aeromexico is interested on this route due to the small O/D market. Turkish has been long rumored at MEX but never actually announced it (probably due to lack of slots at MEX, but more likely due to the small volume expected for such route).

SYD-MEX could be challenging as is as long as MEX-PVG but it will have to be launched non-stop. It could make sense if the new TPP increases commerce between Australia and Mexico but with no local Oneworld partner at MEX Qantas may never start such route.


and why not Aeromexico? in Australia they have Virgin Australia that has a JV with Delta this would help a lot in the future to open this route in the same way Aeromexico still has 7 pending Dreamliners
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
BlatantEcho
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2000 10:11 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 12:18 am

[photoid][/photoid]
HHScot wrote:
Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!


Definetly disagree 100%. I am happy to pay significant premium for the non-stop. And the longer the flight the better.
More chance to sleep, be productive, relax.

Walking around an airport like a zombie for a few hours sounds like the worst thing to add to what is already a long trip.
Not only does it add hours, and likely distance travelled, it adds another round of de-plane, get stuff out of lockers, wait, go to gate, mill around, re-board, repack stuff in lockers....

All for the joy of walking in an airline terminal for a few hours?

Yikes, that sounds like misery unless you have lounge passes.
 
User avatar
adambrau
Posts: 263
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:44 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:57 am

Obviously less pleasant to be in economy than up front on an ULH flight, however I think now that I am older I prefer a stop after 15 hours or so. Get in a shower at a lounge. As long as it lasts, GS gets me into the FCL in NRT as long it lasts, and that's a pretty nice quiet place to be.
Let's keep the skies friendly.
 
Aircellist
Posts: 1525
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:43 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 4:07 am

I'd love to see YUL-SGN…
"When I find out I was wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?" -attributed to John Maynard Keynes
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12487
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 4:45 am

Wouldn't be a thread on ULH flights if everyone didn't inject their personally "OMG, I'd never ____!" as though anyone else actually cared. :roll:

But that said, I've never been able to comprehend the second-hand anxiety that some people apparently get, just based on the fact that these such flights are an *option* now.

There are and will likely always be, easy ways to break up a journey of any given distance. But to someone for whom time is a preference or a requirement; they now have an expedient option as well. From that perspective, nobody loses with these.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
dredgy
Posts: 415
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:13 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 5:01 am

HHScot wrote:
Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!


It's really not that bad, I've never understood why people think it will be so horrible. The difference between a 12 hour flight and a 17 hour flight is quite insignificant. I've only flown a few ULH flights, but they feel about as long as a 12 hour flight. If its the cheapest or most convenient option, airlines won't have a problem filling economy seats.
 
redroo
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 5:09 am

As a skippy (Australian) I am all for the non stops.

I recently did UK and back in a couple of days. The stop in Dubai to “stretch the legs” was a waste of time. Land, taxi, off the plane, security, expensive coffee, walk, walk, avoid people trying to sell you duty free, board, taxi and away again.

Give me the non stop. But I appreciate everyone is different and I do think of the 5 hr flight to Sydney from Perth as a short hop.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4512
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 5:26 am

Why would you go to the UK and back in a couple of days? That’s out there......

The jury’s out, some ULR may work well, I suspect it will remain niche, going for 17 hours in an economy seat is not something many people might do more than once. There will likely be an explosion of interest, a bubble of you will which will either settle into a profitable PER-LHR sector or the market may give it a go and over time discover why they went via Dubai and Changi in the first place.
 
redroo
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 5:34 am

skipness1E wrote:
Why would you go to the UK and back in a couple of days? That’s out there......

The jury’s out, some ULR may work well, I suspect it will remain niche, going for 17 hours in an economy seat is not something many people might do more than once. There will likely be an explosion of interest, a bubble of you will which will either settle into a profitable PER-LHR sector or the market may give it a go and over time discover why they went via Dubai and Changi in the first place.


It certainly wasn’t for pleasure :-(
 
User avatar
CitizenJustin
Posts: 502
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:12 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 5:53 am

HHScot wrote:
Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!


I can’t think of anything worse than stopping, deplaning, dealing with crowds etc. I just want to get to my destination period, no stops. So while your friends chose the non-stop, they’ll be partying in London while you’re still on your supposedly better flight lol.

ULH are a great achievement and will eventually lead to even more technologies that will enable us to fly these distances much faster. We should all be very thankful for the genius men and women who brought us to this moment in time.
 
User avatar
neomax
Posts: 945
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:26 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 5:57 am

CitizenJustin wrote:
HHScot wrote:
Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!


I can’t think of anything worse than stopping, deplaning, dealing with crowds etc. I just want to get to my destination period, no stops. So while your friends chose the non-stop, they’ll be partying in London while you’re still on your supposedly better flight lol.

ULH are a great achievement and will eventually lead to even more technologies that will enable us to fly these distances much faster. We should all be very thankful for the genius men and women who brought us to this moment in time.


I think you're mistaken, for us A.netter's, the flight is the party.

I'd rather be flying than just about anywhere else, so while your friends are drunk in London at 2AM "partying", I'll be cruising at 35K feet enjoying my delicious four-course meal, courtesy of my connecting flight which allows me to arrive well rested and relaxed with the shower you can only get on the A380. And besides, how else are you going to get two takeoffs and landings for the price of one? :D
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1621
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:19 am

The A340-500 and 777-200LR could both do ULH 17-18 hour long flights for over 10 years. Question is what has changed to make these routes suddenly popular?

The A340-500 and 777LR both can carry 30T payloads more than 9000nm. This is further than the 787-9, base model A350-900 and the new 777-9.

Only the 280T A350-900ulh and the 777-8X have improved range.
 
AirbusA322
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 6:38 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:25 am

The next era is going to be the UULH Flights.

Sydney-JFK
Sydney-LHR
 
bgm
Posts: 2173
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:34 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Wouldn't be a thread on ULH flights if everyone didn't inject their personally "OMG, I'd never ____!" as though anyone else actually cared. :roll:


Yet you obviously cared enough to respond, of course with your obligatory signature eye-roll.

CitizenJustin wrote:
So while your friends chose the non-stop, they’ll be partying in London while you’re still on your supposedly better flight lol.


Those must be some well energized friends, going partying after a 17 hour flight! ;)
████ ███ █ ███████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ [redacted]
 
User avatar
KrustyTheKlown
Posts: 347
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:45 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:42 am

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
KrustyTheKlown wrote:
RainerBoeing777 wrote:
...
IST MEX
...
SYD MEX


IST-MEX can be done with a 787 as is actually shorter than the existing MEX-NRT. But I doubt Aeromexico is interested on this route due to the small O/D market. Turkish has been long rumored at MEX but never actually announced it (probably due to lack of slots at MEX, but more likely due to the small volume expected for such route).

SYD-MEX could be challenging as is as long as MEX-PVG but it will have to be launched non-stop. It could make sense if the new TPP increases commerce between Australia and Mexico but with no local Oneworld partner at MEX Qantas may never start such route.


and why not Aeromexico? in Australia they have Virgin Australia that has a JV with Delta this would help a lot in the future to open this route in the same way Aeromexico still has 7 pending Dreamliners


Given that MEX is a hot & high airport I'm pretty sure the 787 cannot do the MEX->SYD leg without a fuel stop. Such stop would only make sense in Acapulco, Tahiti or Fiji (a kind of Fiesta route revival) but I don't see Aeromexico starting service to Tahiti or Fiji. Acapulco has lost much of its luster due to violence so I don't think it can sustain transpacific traffic and will have to be chiefly a fuel stop if Aeromexico ever launches such route.

The 777-8 may be able to fly MEX-SYD non-stop but Aeromexico has not show any interest in buying them. If AM ever gets some 777-8 it won't be before the late 2020's
 
User avatar
CitizenJustin
Posts: 502
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:12 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:45 am

neomax wrote:
CitizenJustin wrote:
HHScot wrote:
Probably I'm just repeating what many have said before, but I can think of nothing worse than sitting for upwards of 16 hours in an economy class seat. I'd much rather have a one stop flight to break the journey up even if it cost a bit more. It may be different for those at the pointy end, but to make money the airlines will also need to fill a lot of seats down the back!


I can’t think of anything worse than stopping, deplaning, dealing with crowds etc. I just want to get to my destination period, no stops. So while your friends chose the non-stop, they’ll be partying in London while you’re still on your supposedly better flight lol.

ULH are a great achievement and will eventually lead to even more technologies that will enable us to fly these distances much faster. We should all be very thankful for the genius men and women who brought us to this moment in time.


I think you're mistaken, for us A.netter's, the flight is the party.

I'd rather be flying than just about anywhere else, so while your friends are drunk in London at 2AM "partying", I'll be cruising at 35K feet enjoying my delicious four-course meal, courtesy of my connecting flight which allows me to arrive well rested and relaxed with the shower you can only get on the A380. And besides, how else are you going to get two takeoffs and landings for the price of one? :D


Why land at all then? Maybe you should buy your own plane, have it constantly refuled and live as one with the birds? Lol, but seriously. You make some valid points and I get. However, I still prefer the nonstop. OH and BTW I don’t drink :))
 
User avatar
CitizenJustin
Posts: 502
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:12 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:48 am

bgm wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Wouldn't be a thread on ULH flights if everyone didn't inject their personally "OMG, I'd never ____!" as though anyone else actually cared. :roll:


Yet you obviously cared enough to respond, of course with your obligatory signature eye-roll.

CitizenJustin wrote:
So while your friends chose the non-stop, they’ll be partying in London while you’re still on your supposedly better flight lol.


Those must be some well energized friends, going partying after a 17 hour flight! ;)


The pub we created in our hotel room, while laying in bed, slowly taking sips every few hours when we have to go to the bathroom. Lol idk.
 
KLAM
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 6:31 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:12 am

KrustyTheKlown wrote:
RainerBoeing777 wrote:
KrustyTheKlown wrote:

IST-MEX can be done with a 787 as is actually shorter than the existing MEX-NRT. But I doubt Aeromexico is interested on this route due to the small O/D market. Turkish has been long rumored at MEX but never actually announced it (probably due to lack of slots at MEX, but more likely due to the small volume expected for such route).

SYD-MEX could be challenging as is as long as MEX-PVG but it will have to be launched non-stop. It could make sense if the new TPP increases commerce between Australia and Mexico but with no local Oneworld partner at MEX Qantas may never start such route.


and why not Aeromexico? in Australia they have Virgin Australia that has a JV with Delta this would help a lot in the future to open this route in the same way Aeromexico still has 7 pending Dreamliners


Given that MEX is a hot & high airport I'm pretty sure the 787 cannot do the MEX->SYD leg without a fuel stop. Such stop would only make sense in Acapulco, Tahiti or Fiji (a kind of Fiesta route revival) but I don't see Aeromexico starting service to Tahiti or Fiji. Acapulco has lost much of its luster due to violence so I don't think it can sustain transpacific traffic and will have to be chiefly a fuel stop if Aeromexico ever launches such route.

The 777-8 may be able to fly MEX-SYD non-stop but Aeromexico has not show any interest in buying them. If AM ever gets some 777-8 it won't be before the late 2020's


I do not think a MEX-AKL-SYD would qualify as an ULH, but is seems to be perfectly feasible (MEX-AKL is around 790 mi longer than SCL-AKL, and 200 mi shorter than MEX-NRT). However, I do wander if there is a market for it (Although it would be a dream if it happened).

As for ACA as a good stop (ACA-SYD 7938 mi long), I would think PVR or SJD would fare better in terms of distance (PVR-SYD is 7758 mi long, while SJD-SYD is 7519 mi long).

As a point of reference, currently AM longest flight departing MEX is flight AM 58 to NRT (7004 mi long) on a 787-8. This flight departs at around 1 am (Is it due to hot conditions? I have never felt MEX to be particularly hot).
flyOM
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:26 am

If you are going to stop - then really stop ie for a couple of days.Then it can be a load of fun- most of the way point cities are..But that's adding leasure.If it's a pure business trip then you just want to get it done the fastest way.As above what the attraction is of wandering around like a zombie for an hour or two in some god forsaken airport lounge in the middle of the night completely misses me.
Perhaps someone can explain.I have done it many a time,it was never pleasant in any way what so ever.Perhaps these guys drive Tesla's and just love killing an hour waiting for their cars to charge up in 'fantastically interesting' gas stations???
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12487
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:49 am

bgm wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Wouldn't be a thread on ULH flights if everyone didn't inject their personally "OMG, I'd never ____!" as though anyone else actually cared. :roll:

Yet you obviously cared enough to respond, of course with your obligatory signature eye-roll.

...so in other words, you can't tell the difference between a lambasting a concept and caring about a personal situation. Eye roll indeed.


KLAM wrote:
As a point of reference, currently AM longest flight departing MEX is flight AM 58 to NRT (7004 mi long) on a 787-8. This flight departs at around 1 am (Is it due to hot conditions? I have never felt MEX to be particularly hot).

MEX's problem generally isn't heat, it's altitude. But the heat can/does have an effect as well.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
HHScot
Posts: 145
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:11 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:02 am

I can only assume most one here "all for" sitting for 17 hours in a small uncomfortable seat i) have never flown any more than 2 hours in economy class before ii) have never had the "pleasure" of sitting in the middle seat of a row of 5 between people with questionable personal hygiene iii ) are less than 160cm/5foot5 and 60kg iv) can sleep just about anywhere, v) only ever fly in Business or First or vi) are into S&M and sometimes pay to enjoy pain! :lol:

Each to their own, and it's good to at least have the option. But I'd never spend the best part of the day squashed into a seat, dehydrated and prevented from moving more than a few steps to the rest room.
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 6073
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range fl

Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:28 am

CitizenJustin wrote:
ULH are a great achievement and will eventually lead to even more technologies that will enable us to fly these distances much faster. We should all be very thankful for the genius men and women who brought us to this moment in time.

I am not saying it isn't an achievement as far as technology is concerned. However, the possibility of a 17-hour flight (in today's hypercrammed Y with ultrathin seat cushions and unbearable seat pitch/width) does not appeal to me as a potential passenger/customer at all.
 
JustSomeDood
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:05 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:36 am

HHScot wrote:
I can only assume most one here "all for" sitting for 17 hours in a small uncomfortable seat i) have never flown any more than 2 hours in economy class before ii) have never had the "pleasure" of sitting in the middle seat of a row of 5 between people with questionable personal hygiene iii ) are less than 160cm/5foot5 and 60kg iv) can sleep just about anywhere, v) only ever fly in Business or First or vi) are into S&M and sometimes pay to enjoy pain! :lol:

Each to their own, and it's good to at least have the option. But I'd never spend the best part of the day squashed into a seat, dehydrated and prevented from moving more than a few steps to the rest room.


You must never have flown TPAC from somewhere like Southern China then.

I flew from HK to Chicago in Y quite a bit in the last few years and just about any realistic one-stop option (NRT, ICN, YVR, SFO, LAX) is going to require one sector that's at or over 12 hours anyways. At that point, might as well fly the extra 3 and get to the destination rather than split it into something like a 4 & 13 hour flights with all that extra hassle of connecting.

My friend flew from HK to Boston, flying via NRT at first because no non-stop option, he was the sort of guy who wouldn't mind stopping over at Japan for a few days, but when CX offered the non-stop he didn't hesitate to take the 16hr flight rather than splitting it into two flights.
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:47 am

RJMAZ wrote:
The A340-500 and 777-200LR could both do ULH 17-18 hour long flights for over 10 years. Question is what has changed to make these routes suddenly popular?


The A340-500 and 777-200LR were both very high CASM if I remember correctly. This restricted the routes they could be viable on.
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 985
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:51 am

mildaiv wrote:
ULR flights are non event compared to increased range of last narrowbodis NEO and MAX witch opens thousands of new routes

Also, ULR era will end as soon as the price of oil rises again....
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 985
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:55 am

RJMAZ wrote:
The A340-500 and 777-200LR could both do ULH 17-18 hour long flights for over 10 years. Question is what has changed to make these routes suddenly popular?

The A340-500 and 777LR both can carry 30T payloads more than 9000nm. This is further than the 787-9, base model A350-900 and the new 777-9.

Only the 280T A350-900ulh and the 777-8X have improved range.

Well, the lower fuel burn of the B787 and A350 together with much lower oil prices makes it more viable currently.

If oil prices go back to about USD 150-200, airlines will find it very hard to justify ULR services as yields will be very low.
 
asctty
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:23 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:09 am

How many folks on here would want to sit in the same people tube as those next to you in economy for such a length of time? Choices will direct the demand for such a service. A transfer at DXB/SIN or nowhere to go with all the lights off as seems to be the rage on AUS flights?
 
User avatar
neomax
Posts: 945
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:26 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:18 am

JustSomeDood wrote:
HHScot wrote:
I can only assume most one here "all for" sitting for 17 hours in a small uncomfortable seat i) have never flown any more than 2 hours in economy class before ii) have never had the "pleasure" of sitting in the middle seat of a row of 5 between people with questionable personal hygiene iii ) are less than 160cm/5foot5 and 60kg iv) can sleep just about anywhere, v) only ever fly in Business or First or vi) are into S&M and sometimes pay to enjoy pain! :lol:

Each to their own, and it's good to at least have the option. But I'd never spend the best part of the day squashed into a seat, dehydrated and prevented from moving more than a few steps to the rest room.


You must never have flown TPAC from somewhere like Southern China then.

I flew from HK to Chicago in Y quite a bit in the last few years and just about any realistic one-stop option (NRT, ICN, YVR, SFO, LAX) is going to require one sector that's at or over 12 hours anyways. At that point, might as well fly the extra 3 and get to the destination rather than split it into something like a 4 & 13 hour flights with all that extra hassle of connecting.

My friend flew from HK to Boston, flying via NRT at first because no non-stop option, he was the sort of guy who wouldn't mind stopping over at Japan for a few days, but when CX offered the non-stop he didn't hesitate to take the 16hr flight rather than splitting it into two flights.


Yeah, 12+ hours is very common, and depending on where you live 14-15 is so common you just get learn to get used to it. I fly the ME3 very regulalry so my personal limit is anything above 15 and then by 16 I'm done.
 
brad1823
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:48 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 12:03 pm

I don't understand the fear of a 17 hour flight, it's just sitting. People use the argument of a stopover allows you to get off the plane and stretch your legs, why can't you just walk around the plane? Also if you did have a stopover you would be sat in that dreaded seat for a few more hours then you would if you just went non-stop. Saying there isn't demand is ridiculous, there are flights this length or near this length everyday and there have been for years, people don't seem to mind flying them.

I for one would pay a premium to fly non stop for 17 hours as apposed to stopping off on the way, I know many others who would do the same as well.
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1969
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 12:34 pm

I hope some day as planes become more efficient airlines start competing by offering increased personal space. Meanwhile, ulh isn't so bad if you cough up the money for business class. You can just sleep for most of the flight if you have a lie-flat seat.
 
User avatar
Irehdna
Posts: 388
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 12:40 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 1:45 pm

Out of curiosity, does anybody remember flight routes that were operated more than 1x daily with the 77L?

I do know that AI DEL-SFO went from daily to 9 weekly starting today (AI183 is already in the air), making it one of the first few 77L routes to be served more than 1x daily.

IIRC DXB-LAX was also 2x 77L at a moment before they got the A380.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3129
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Sun Mar 25, 2018 3:15 pm

From my reading oil prices will likely be stable for the next few years. And shortly after that the hit from electric cars and trucks will hit some time between 2022 and 2027.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 3659
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:11 am

brad1823 wrote:
I don't understand the fear of a 17 hour flight, it's just sitting. People use the argument of a stopover allows you to get off the plane and stretch your legs, why can't you just walk around the plane? Also if you did have a stopover you would be sat in that dreaded seat for a few more hours then you would if you just went non-stop. Saying there isn't demand is ridiculous, there are flights this length or near this length everyday and there have been for years, people don't seem to mind flying them.

I for one would pay a premium to fly non stop for 17 hours as apposed to stopping off on the way, I know many others who would do the same as well.


I’ve flown as a pilot for near 14,000 hours including a 17.8 hour non-stop with refuelings and a 11.2 sitting on an ejection seat in an A-10. I’ve flown NYC-DXB and NYC-SIN a number of times as a passenger. And, several 12+ legs in a Global Express. I’m acquainted with long flights. When I’m spending MY money and it’s long, I’ll stop in the middle, check in to a hotel for a night’s sleep, nice dinner, show up refreshed. We’re planning a trip to New Zealand, night in LA sounds perfect.

GF
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 985
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:16 am

I think for most people, a 12-14 hour flight is probably the maximum they can take. That is because you can watch a movie and then have a nap in that time. Anything longer and you will be very bored.

There is another thing to consider too - can your pocket take the asking price of the flight? E.g. SYD-LHR will probably take 20-21 hrs and a flight that long means you got to pay a premium for carrying all that fuel for the whole flight - you got to burn extra fuel to carry the fuel load. It may need another generation of engine evolution before such flights become commonplace. This new engine will either allow the plane to fly faster (remember Boeing sonic cruiser concept?) but not burn more fuel, or it will burn 20% less fuel than the latest generation of engines on the A350/B787.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8704
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:55 am

They will work for trans-pacific flights, as there are no hubs on the way that could allow for a stop with very little increase in actual flight time. For all other routes, I do not think they will work, as there will be cheaper one stop connections that do not add much actual flight time, while many people will find the stop at the airport pleasant. And to be honest if you have the choice between 17 hours in Y on a 3-3-3 787 and 19,5 hours in Y on an A380, the choice is easy. And it is not much different for the better classes, especially as the stopover means time at the lounge for those classes. Which means, stretching, great food or even a shower.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 938
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:24 am

I'm just amazed by so many people here that seem to think anything over 5 hours is far too long.

For us Kiwis and Aussies you start at 5ish hours and go up. It really shows how much 'normal' can vary.

As for the OP. The next big one will be SYD-LHR/CDG/FRA. While I'd love to see AKL-Europe non stop I'm not sure the raw market size is quite there to support it. So that would probably remain a one stop. Though for Wellington a hop to Sydney followed by a non stop to Europe would get rid of one stop.
 
leghorn
Posts: 898
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:47 am

most Australian young adults are on Walkabout to London.
London is a prime business location.
I don't see any of the seats be they cheap or expensive being difficult to fill.

ultra long haul and air freight from china possibly using one stop through somewhere less out of the way like outer mongolia, kazahstan or afghanisatan on its way to Europe could reduce volumes through the emirates although this might be concealed by the general growth in international air travel in general.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 938
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:56 am

It will be interesting to see how Brexit affects this route. Then again it wouldn't be terribly difficult to move it from LHR to FRA or CDG.
 
User avatar
ojjunior
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:31 am

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 12:51 pm

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
BOM GRU
SIN GRU


BOM GRU - Never. No demand both ways, not too much business between both Countries. Never happened and never will.

SIN GRU - Happened for a while, SQ discontinued last year due low yields and it was via BCN. A direct route may work but for connections to Asia at most. Not too much interest for Brazilians in Singapore however the proximity to BKK would be very welcome.
 
BENAir01
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: The era of ultra-long-range flights

Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:14 pm

So a.net seems pretty split on taking a ULR nonstop vs stopping halfway. I personally am if the opinion that if prefer to take one long flight then two medium length ones. Also, if there is a ULR flight, you don’t have to take it! You can leave it to the people who actually prefer it!
However in Business class, which is what would keep these ULR flights making some money, I would much prefer one long flight then two medium ones. I’ve flown business on many flights ~7-8 hours and you can realistically only get about 2 hours of sleep which sucks. I would much prefer a 17 hour flights so I child get a solid 9-10 hours of sleep.
Why is flying so expensive? And why is flying well so much more?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos