I believe they have to stop on the reverse trip JNB->JFK. Something to do with the altitude of Johannesberg and not being able to get enough lift with a full tank.
It’s too far to make that worthwhile. London to Sydney by the shortest great circle route (i.e. over Asia and Europe) is 10,557 miles. Since the diameter of the Earth is ~24,000 miles, that implies it is around 13,500 if you go “the other way”. Alternatively, London to New York is about 3,500 miles, and New York to Sydney is then 10,000 miles - I doubt you could shave off enough miles by going directly from Sydney to London that way round to get near the 10,500, meaning that even with the jet stream, the plane would not have enough fuel.
Roughly speaking, it will have at least enough fuel to complete the trip, divert to any designated alternate airport if necessary, and also an extra amount to provide a safety margin - in the US that would be at least 30 minutes flight.
In any current airliner for a 18 hour flight, all of this will pretty much fill the tanks to capacity.
Is this new? I did that route last summer.
And I’ll be on that flight in three weeks (with my 18 month old grandson).
The planes can’t make it non-stop from DFW-SYD due to typical headwinds. They stop in Brisbane on the way to Sydney. Even then, it occasionally stops in Noumea, about 900 miles short of Brisbane if the headwinds are strong.
I wouldn’t even fathom getting on a 10+ hour flight without taking some Vicodin or Ambien with me. Vicodin knocks me out super fast.
We are such wimps. How did our ancestors survive long ocean voyages or stagecoach trips?
How many pilots do these flights carry? And how often do they rotate?
And how much time do they get off before doing the next one?
I can’t imagine doing these flights. Longest I think I’ve ever flown is Frankfurt to Dallas, which was about 11 hours if I recall correctly. Was excruciating because I was going to Cleveland, which we flew over with about 2.5 hours left in the flight.
That was the longest of the many, many transatlantic flights I took between 2002 and 2006.
My dad was complaining about the flight from LA to Sydney to his brother, saying the 12 hours or so was a real burden. My uncle reminded him that in WW II he (my uncle) was a navigator on B-24s in the Pacific theater, flying 18-22 hour missions in unheated, unpressurized, noisy cabins, working the entire time and people were shooting at them. My dad elected to take a pass on mentioning the poor airline food.
I don’t know, but it seems more likely that the nonstop is new. The altitude of the takeoff field does make a difference in how much weight a plane can carry - higher alts mean lower air pressure so less lift on takeoff.
Perhaps newer equipment types can manage the route nonstop. Or it could be related to regulations - commercial aircraft are not pushed anywhere near their technical limits on revenue flights. But yeah, I’d be interested if anyone knows about this.
Indeed. At least I don’t have to worry about getting scalped or having to resort to cannibalism.
Airstrips from WWII?
Well, not unless I’m flying over the Andes anyway.
Years ago I flew LA - Bangkok. The seats were ridiculously cheap. I think around $199 RT. When I boarded I found out why. The seats were ridiculously close together!
Turns out the planes were being used to bring the Vietnamese refugees to the US from Vietnam. As a rule the Vietnamese people were quite small so the seats were configured for them. I’m only 5’11", but had to spend much of the flight walking around the cabin.
Stagecoach trips? No idea. long journeys that way sound torturous. Of course, back then, 50 miles was a very long trip.
However, ocean voyages, at least in the ocean liner days of the early 1900s would have been much more comfortable than a modern airplane. At least they had beds! (though steerage was admittedly in less than awesome quarters.)
On ocean voyages in the 1800s and earlier? Well, a lot of people DIDN’T survive.
We flew from Bangkok to NYC on China Airlines in April, with stops in Taipei (an overnight stop) and Osaka. I am tall but had sufficient leg room, because we sat by an emergency exit on all three legs to NYC. But the seats were so narrow! I could not sit down easily without activating the overhead-light and the call-stewardess buttons! If I’d been the slightest bit wider, I could not have fit into any of the seats. The long Osaka-NYC leg was especially uncomfortable. I was dreading the flight back, as it was almost 24 hours’ traveling with the same stops but no overnighter. Fortunately, flying back they used different types of planes and the seats were more my size.
You all might like the great circle mapper. It comes with a tab to show ETOPSallowances. B.A.-Singapore is a fave, for OMG! that’s a long flight.
Until the very long 330 minute allowance for the 777, and I guess 787 too, you simply couldn’t legally fly between a lot of points that you may have had the fuel for. Now, I’m reading that Airbus wants a 350 minute ETOPS for their newest.
Amazing.
The longest flight theoretical flight I could come up with was Taipei, Taiwan to Asuncion, Paraguay of 12,350-60 miles courtesy of Google Earth.
One odd fact: there’s a province call Formosa in Argentina across the river from Asuncion. I thought it might be an antipodal reference to the Island-formally-known-as-Formosa-but-now-referred-to-as-Taiwan. But apparently this is a coincidence-- the name is an archaic Spanish word meaning beautiful and has nothing to do with the ROC.
Stagecoachs stopped at inns for the night and on ships it was alot easier to find space to fornicate than on an airplane.
My great aunt (was was extremely well traveled) always said that air travel has been going downhill since the Hindenburg. They may’ve gotten alot faster, but no airline has been able to match the lever of comfort DZR offered.