Another thread got me thinking: is there (or has there ever been) a nonstop TATL flight that spends more time/distance over the waters of actual Atlantic, than ATL-JNB?

I know the present and former nonstops between JFK, EWR, MIA, IAD, and FLL from S.Africa do not.




So figured someone might know off hand: using the GC distance (as actual route planning and flight timing can vary by the day), what flights are the longest over the waters of both the Atlantic and Pacific?

For the Pacific, it’s probably EZE/SCL-AKL/SYD, no?

Cubsrule wrote:

For the Pacific, it’s probably EZE/SCL-AKL/SYD, no?

There were reasons why it was a 4 engine route for so long - so, yes.

Kent350787 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

For the Pacific, it’s probably EZE/SCL-AKL/SYD, no?

There were reasons why it was a 4 engine route for so long - so, yes.

If proximity to islands does not count, it looks like LAX-MEL takes the prize. LAX-SYD is —excepting for literally less than half a mile— entirely over water, but by GC reckoning, we will see that the landfall occurs a number of miles south of Botany Bay. This is also 150nm further than EZE-SYD, which also has significant land sections in SA.

I think the four engine requirement was owing only to the lack of islands in the far South Pacific. And even in recent times, it was as much a favor to the existing aircraft in the relevant fleets as anything else. CASA would have moved faster if QF really wanted them to.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

For the Pacific, it’s probably EZE/SCL-AKL/SYD, no?

There were reasons why it was a 4 engine route for so long - so, yes.

If proximity to islands does not count, it looks like LAX-MEL takes the prize. LAX-SYD is —excepting for literally less than half a mile— entirely over water, but by GC reckoning, we will see that the landfall occurs a number of miles south of Botany Bay. This is also 150nm further than EZE-SYD, which also has significant land sections in SA.

I think the four engine requirement was owing only to the lack of islands in the far South Pacific. And even in recent times, it was as much a favor to the existing aircraft in the relevant fleets as anything else. CASA would have moved faster if QF really wanted them to.

It seems to me that proximity to islands (or islands with airfields?) probably affects the answer to this. LAX-Australia passes relatively close to - though as you rightly point out not over - some decently large by Pacific standards islands. AKL-SCL passes over literally nothing.

Cubsrule wrote:

It seems to me that proximity to islands (or islands with airfields?) probably affects the answer to this. LAX-Australia passes relatively close to - though as you rightly point out not over - some decently large by Pacific standards islands. AKL-SCL passes over literally nothing.

Yeah. The thread referee is going to have to define this for us. I went with the LAX runs because the TATL map he has up shows a lot of close passes —though not as close— to islands/archipelagi on that side too.

I did GUM-IAH earlier this some direct in 747 ferrying a aircraft. It was all water.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

For the Pacific, it’s probably EZE/SCL-AKL/SYD, no?

As far as I was able to find out, those routes aren't flown at the moment.

Another candidate for the Atlantic might be KLM AMS-EZE, it's no winner but not much shorter than ATL-JNB either. In fact AMS-EZE is even longer than AKL-EZE, however because it passes closer to land it can be flown by a twin. I believe KLM uses a 777 on this route.

FYI, AKL-EZE was flown by a 772 and a period of 789 ops by NZ between 2015-2020, the route is not returning, and AKL/SYD/MEL-SCL was flown by LA 788/789 equipment since 2015.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

For the Pacific, it’s probably EZE/SCL-AKL/SYD, no?

There were reasons why it was a 4 engine route for so long - so, yes.

If proximity to islands does not count, it looks like LAX-MEL takes the prize. LAX-SYD is —excepting for literally less than half a mile— entirely over water, but by GC reckoning, we will see that the landfall occurs a number of miles south of Botany Bay. This is also 150nm further than EZE-SYD, which also has significant land sections in SA.

I think the four engine requirement was owing only to the lack of islands in the far South Pacific. And even in recent times, it was as much a favor to the existing aircraft in the relevant fleets as anything else. CASA would have moved faster if QF really wanted them to.

LAX/MEL usually crosses the Australian coast around Wollongong south of SYD, so normally not much further than LAX/SYD overwater. YVR-SYD is almost entirely overwater at 12484 km, 7757 miles and 6741nm.

LTEN11 wrote:

LAX/MEL usually crosses the Australian coast around Wollongong south of SYD, so normally not much further than LAX/SYD overwater. YVR-SYD is almost entirely overwater at 12484 km, 7757 miles and 6741nm.

That is probably the winner for TPAC. Also, I did not consider DFW-SYD. While most days it veered north to enter the pacific at SAN —itself a longer over water by a few miles than LAX— there were times when it did follow a more GC route over Mexico. It is hard to spot an airfield along Baja to reference the distance, so I just used GMaps and came up with 7488nm for that sector. Still not longer than YVR, but a contender.

Depending on where you consider the boundaries of the Pacific, flights from LAX/SFO to SIN could be a thought. While there is the South China Sea along the way, heading to Australia there is the Coral Sea as well.