Jump to content

STD-LHR nonstop ?


The Other Tom
 Share

Recommended Posts

Qantas wants to do it and has challenged the aircraft manufacturers to make a plane that will do it. 20+ hours. Wow if it happens !

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2017/08/24/qantas-planning-20-hour-non-stop-flight-london/599038001/

 

Uh-Oh. Typo in heading. Tried to the SYD but the dang spell checker got me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will never happen. There is no market for that many planes to justify the investment. Just think of the disaster the A380 has been (financially for Airbus). Airbus is balking at a 380NEO for a 100 unit order and that is just a minimum modification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will never happen. There is no market for that many planes to justify the investment. Just think of the disaster the A380 has been (financially for Airbus). Airbus is balking at a 380NEO for a 100 unit order and that is just a minimum modification.

 

Look to the experience of the A340-500 for Singapore. Designed with the range to go non-stop from Newark to Singapore. But there are payload limitations for such a long flight - much of the takeoff weight is in fuel, not passengers or cargo. Consequently, they made it an all business config with far fewer passengers. Still could not make it an economically viable proposition.

 

IMO, this is just QF doing some saber-rattling. They know they can't do the Kangaroo Route non-stop, won't get an aircraft that is economically justified, but the still want to demonstrate to the folks at home that they should stick with the Flying Rat because they care about their Aussie customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look to the experience of the A340-500 for Singapore. Designed with the range to go non-stop from Newark to Singapore. But there are payload limitations for such a long flight - much of the takeoff weight is in fuel, not passengers or cargo. Consequently, they made it an all business config with far fewer passengers. Still could not make it an economically viable proposition.

 

IMO, this is just QF doing some saber-rattling. They know they can't do the Kangaroo Route non-stop, won't get an aircraft that is economically justified, but the still want to demonstrate to the folks at home that they should stick with the Flying Rat because they care about their Aussie customers.

 

I thought the mascot of Qantas was a Kangaroo, not a Pigeon... (sorry, I had to do that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fly some ultra-long hauls on a fairly regular basis - DFW-SYD-DFW a few times each year, for example. 16 hours is definitely tough, but at that point I might as well just hang in there for 19-20 and get there instead of having to add several hours stopping somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...