planecane wrote:tullamarine wrote:Gemuser wrote:I disagree Tullamarine. IMHO the key bit is the research by the Charles Perkins Centre [USYD] & Monash [MEL] and its firstly for CASA and secondarly for the pilots because if CASA don't buy off on it the project is dead. Having real research numbers from two respected universities will very definately improve th chances with CASA. That statement assumes that the results are supportive and if not they may well lead to new ways of doing things that satisfy both CASA & the pilots.
So if it is only to test the effect on the flight crew, why have any passengers at all particularly as a largely empty cabin won't prove much? I can't believe QF have be talking about and spending money on Sunrise for over 2 years without knowing if it is even practical even if there is a capable plane; this doesn't make business sense. If QF do it quietly without press onboard, I may have more faith but they know how to milk free advertising and I think we all know they won't miss the opportunity.
I think they want to evaluate how passengers handle such a long flight. If people don't tolerate it well they won't sell many tickets especially not at price premium.
I can't imagine sitting in economy for 20 hours straight. Not being able to lay down when you'd be awake almost a full day sounds like a nightmare to me. You've got to get to the airport which takes some time and arrive there 2 hours or so before the flight. If the flight time is 19 hours+, by the time you land you would have had to have woken up a good 22 hours earlier. If you can't get some decent sleep enroute you'll be miserable when you arrive.
I have extreme difficulty falling asleep for more than a few minutes in an economy seat. I've slept most of two flights in my life. Once when I was really sick with a high fever and probably shouldn't have been flying. The other after a very late night/morning at the end of a business trip in Las Vegas. Basically I have to be completely exhausted to sleep in economy.
This is all just conjecture on my part, but they'll probably have to test cabin crew as well, not only flight crew. This justifies having some pax in order to simulate what the workload will be for the (I assume) 2 shifts of cabin crew. I assume the number of 40 pax is not pulled out of a hat, it probably has to do with how many pax one cabin crew has to handle during most times they're on active duty.