Skip to main content

24 hours to hell and back - The fresh hell that is ultra long haul flying

Yes, 24 hours to hell and back is the name of a show by Gordon Ramsay, but it could also be the story of your next ‘ultra long haul’ flight. On the menu, we have several routes, the most noteworthy being Singapore-Newark, Doha-Auckland and the very ambitious ‘Project Sunrise’ of Qantas. Project Sunrise is Qantas’ ambition to operate the Kangaroo route non stop. To put it lightly, this is mildly insane. These are 21 hour flights, readers! Qantas should rename this as ‘Project Sunset’ in lieu of the sun setting on their passengers’ sanity. You may build a gym, spa, cafe or a golf simulator on board, but nothing will take away from the fact that you’re stuck in a metal tube hurtling through the sky for 21 hours. Too much is too bad, and in this this case, too much is simply terrible. Flying for this duration will LITERALLY kill you. Welcome to the world of deep vein thrombosis, dehydration and massive build ups of gas. Flatulence will be the new normal, and airborne microbes will be the norm.

Fly the Kangaroo route to be tired like this kangaroo (Courtesy - National Geographic)
Alright, things probably won’t be as apocalyptic as is made out to be here, but it is certainly something to think about. A saying comes to mind - ‘We seek neither convenience nor ease, but to live at the edge of possibility. Unfortunately with these ULH flights, were neither nailing the convenience nor the ease. Were just living at the edge of possibility, which happens to be 21 hour flights. While Singapore Airlines seems to have acknowledged that these ULH flights will be tough for economy passengers and have configured their A350-900ULR aircraft with premium economy and business, the same cannot be said of Qantas. They have explicitly stated that they would like their ULR aircraft in a 4 class configuration. Which means, First, Business, Premium Economy and Economy. May God help those economy passengers.  It all boils down to this - how important is convenience to you, and how much more are you willing to pay for it?

SIA's A350-900ULR, which operates the SIN-EWR sector
For instance, take the Singapore-Newark flight. One week from now, you can either fly Singapore Airlines non stop for almost 18 and a half hours, or you can fly EVA Air for almost a third of the price and a stopover at Taipei, resulting in only about two and a half hours of extra travel time. During the layover, you get to visit a REAL bathroom, grab a bite and perhaps take a shower in the lounge as well. These are conveniences that you get only with a layover. I know what youre thinking, Emirates offers all these facilities to their first class passengers, but what about those who arent in the top 1%? Whatever magic an airline might do, these ULH flights are generally terrible for economy class passengers as well as cabin crew. The logistics of operating a ULH flight itself are maddening. With multiple sets of crew, the whole horde of meals, amenity kits, these flights are not picnics for those who are organizing it or for those who are flying it. Yes, with the non stop SIN-EWR and SYD-LHR flights, airlines will probably fill planes due to the convenience of non stop flying, but at what cost?

Qantas 787-9 departing London
It is wonderful to see the massive strides being taken in aviation with these ULH flights, but we must draw a line somewhere. There is already a significant amount of ultra long haul flying in store for mankind in the future, what with Elon Musk wanting to colonize mars and all. For now, we should all embrace the layover, take it a little easy and fly like normal humans and not like astronauts, who cannot get off midway at all. One day, 18+ hour flights might be pleasurable, with food from ‘Ottolenghi, a Six Senses Spa on board, and full length beds with en suite bathrooms and showers, but today is not that day. So unless Emirates decides to being their April Fools gag to life, all Id like to say is - thanks but no thanks.   




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CORSIA - Its implications

  Sustainability- it’s the latest buzzword around the world and more so in aviation. With the rollout of  CORSIA(Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation), we now have a new yardstick with respect to sustainability in aviation. The SARP(s)(Standards and Recommended Practices) mentioned under CORSIA is potentially risky for aircraft lessors and financiers. Several hundreds of aircraft operators will soon be forced to comply with the aforementioned scheme. Those operators which have more than 10,000 metric tons of CO2 will have to record and report emissions data on a yearly basis. Operators were also made to submit an emissions monitoring plan. The reported data will then be used to calculate the compliance requirements in the upcoming years. This makes things incredibly tricky for operators, who need to be well into their planning with respect to emission monitoring plans CORSIA consequently creates a number of credit and reputational risks for airlines and con

777X - The White Elephant in the room

Let’s not make any bones about it, Boeing has had a rough 2019, and their year from hell just seems to be getting worse. The 777X, successor to the much exalted 777-300/200 series is facing roadblock after roadblock. The legendary GE90 powered the older generation of the 777 series while the GE 9X will power the 777X. The GE9X will be the largest turbofan engine ever built, by far. Issues have cropped up with the engine’s durability due to high exhaust temperatures. Certification is turning into a nightmare for GE, in turn affecting Boeing. Most recently, one of their cargo doors exploded outwards during the final phases of load testing. In this test, the wings are made to flex much much more than it would ever flex during a routine commercial flight. While the plane withstood all the forces and depressurisation, the cargo door gave way in the last minute, thus putting another spoke in the wheel. While this is not a very major issue, it is definitely a setback for Boeing and will lea

A sneak peek into the performance of some airlines at BLR

While most avgeeks have a general idea of how an airline is faring from a certain airport, it is very rare that we get to see specific numbers of Passenger Load Factor and cargo tonnage. In this blog, I will put out a few numbers for certain airlines operating out of BLR. This will give us a fairly decent estimate of how well these airlines are doing. While we need the yield to numbers to perfectly ascertain the performance of an airline on a certain sector, we will discuss PLFs and cargo tonnage while assuming that yields are above average. Let's go ahead and check out some numbers now! (All mentioned numbers are for May 2019) 1. British Airways - Historically, BLR has been a good market for BA. At one point in time, they even used to fly their 747-400s to BLR. While they seem to have taken the sector for granted by sending their rickety old 777-200ER, that doesn't seem to have affected passenger numbers. Average arrival PLF - 85% Average departure PLF - 94.88%