ElroyJetson wrote:mjoelnir wrote:ElroyJetson wrote:One other quick thing. The current longest flight in the world is DOH-AUK which is flown using a 77L. The distance is 7848 nm. The flight westbound is 18 hours 20 minutes.
If the 9700 nm number is to be believed than the A359ULR should currently be able to fly SYD-LHR with full pax and bags. If so, than the poster above is correct and the existing A359ULR has already won Project Sunrise and fully meets its requirements.
So what is your point?
The A350-900 will fly SIN - EWR, 8285 nm, and that is further than DOH - AKL, 7,484 nm.
The 777-200LR is given up for 9,200 nm pax and bags. Should therefore be able to do SIN - EWR, but is not bought or used for it. The point is not about a frame being able to do something, but is the frame able to do that flight economicaly, with the configuration and load the airline specifies.
It is no question the 777-200LR can do rather long distances, but it uses a lot of fuel to do it. It seems nobody uses the full up 3 ACT version. The new frames will do similar distances with less cost aka lower fuel burn.
If you look at the longest 10 flights today and what frames are used.
1 the longest 777-200LR 7,848nm
2 787-9 7,829nm
3 A380 7,668nm
4 787-9 7,621nm
5 787-9 7,470 nm
6 A380 7,454
7 777-300ER 7,403
8 777-200LR 7,384
9 A350-900 7,340
10 777-200LR 7,334
So you have quite a few different frames, 777-200LR, 777-300 ER, A380, A350-900, doing the long flights, with more coming in. You can add the A350-1000 and soon the 251 t A330-800, as frames possible to do the current flights. Even the 787-8 should be able to stretch its legs so far.
It is interesting in your comments regarding ULH flights you failed to mention the 789 (see bolded above) which currently flys the second longest commercial flight in the world 3 of the top 5 longest flights. Must have been an oversight. However, I agree with your point regarding the economics of various frames. I have not seen a direct comparison of fuel burn between an A359ULR and a 77L on let's say a 7000 nm mission. However, I would feel comfortable in saying the 359 will burn considerably less fuel. SQ is one of the best airlines in the world. They already know the SIN-EWR flight from the A340-500 days. I have no doubt they made the best choice in terms of existing aircraft to fly the route....that being the A359ULR.
My point is the A359ULR does not push out the range envelop beyond existing technologies. It does does meet QL's requirements, they have made that clear. So the question is which of the airframe manufacturers will make the next big leap in range because the A359ULR does not cut it, at least in terms of Qantas requirements.
Yes, I forgot to mention the 787-9, but the list I refereed to includes her. Does not change that there are a lot of frames that are able to do about the same UHL flights.