SYD-PER-LHR sounds like you can save a couple of hours but it cost me 4 days of severe back pain during which it was a struggle to go to the restaurant for breakfast let alone go out anywhere. Returned LHR-SIN-SYD and had much milder back pain for a day that ibuprofen was able to control. Incidentally I have done long-haul flights on a number of other airlines and not had the back pain issues so the QANTAS seat may be an issue particularly as the seat pitch is inferior to a number of its competitors.
These ultra long haul flihgts on the 787 once again prove how capable this aircraft really is. Even though there are aircraft with longer range (such as the 777-200LR and A340-500), the 787 is the first aircraft that is versatile enough to fly both ultra long haul and shorter flights efficiently and profitably. And on top of that, the 787 has allowed low-cost long haul airlines to be profitable for the first time. I think the 787 has surpassed the expectations of almost everyone (including Boeing).
That is I think why the 787 wins. Another aircraft may do 14 hours of flying and then sit at the gate for 10 hours, while a 787 can operate a shorter leg within the same 24h period.
I flew Melbourne - Dallas a few months ago, the first leg of a mammoth journey back to London. Incredible that for hours there is nothing but the Pacific below....
I would never consider such long flights in coach, recently flew at night from Paris to Mauritius for only 1.500€ in business class with a flat bed, it's really worth the money imho
I wouldn't mind multiple legs if I had a seat that I could sleep on. Trade the weight and space occupied by the long distance fuel for weight and space occupied by passengers in economy. Not that it would happen even if technically possible, because the airline is not about to cannibalise its business class market.
My thoughts, 1-hour is 59 minutes to long to be in a 787 NightMare Liner. If I wanted to fly any of those routes, I'd wait for the a350's to take over.
The QF5/6 flight numbers used to be used for SYD-SIN-FRA, which they cancelled just before the partnership with Emirates started. Qantas just confirmed that the seasonal flights to Rome would happen again in 2024. QF7/8 also used to go to Europe (Rome) prior to it being used for the SYD-DFW flights. QF3/4 used to be used for SYD-HNL, which has now been renumbered QF103/104. MEL-DFW is using the old flight numbers from SYD-NRT. Qantas was weeks away from starting BNE-ORD (slightly longer then AKL-JFK) in March 2020 when everything shut down due to Covid. There has not yet been any word about it still going ahead at some point.
Interesting and for the old Route of QF9/10 Melbourne Tulmarine to London Heathrow was via Singapore Changi Airport nowadays Melbourne Tulmarine Perth London Heathrow where you can transfer to British Airways London Heathrow to EWR/JFK. On the return trip where do you clear customs for QF9/10 London Heathrow to Melbourne Tulmarine Airport is it at Perth or Melbourne? If Perth continue domestic to Melbourne
@@EpicThe112 People going to Melbourne (on QF10) use International transit in Perth. Qantas flights under QF400 use international terminals. You clear immigration and customs on those flights, even if you are just on a domestic sector. So people flying only between MEL and PER on QF9/10 clear ABF on each end. If you are on QF10 into PER and are connecting to somewhere else in Australia *other* then on QF10, you clear immigration/customs at PER.
Honestly project sunrise will be worrying for middle eastern airlines once other airlines take note of nonstop direct flights to all parts of the world.
Bro these super ultra long haul flights that last anywhere between 18-20 hours can be comfortable for business class or first class passengers but never for economy class passengers
Furthermore, longer the flight higher the fuel consumption, in this regard, connecting through Singapore for travelling from Australia to Europe will be a more affordable option, likewise through Japan for Australia to USA
The Middle Eastern airlines will consistently be able to undercut the nonstop carriers in price though, that's part of their business model in some ways.
Hi Qantas People I have email Qantas with no reply - poor service What a pity the managemnet can't think outside the square Here on service that no one is doing and that is Queenstown and Christchurch to Adelaide a city of a over a million people with no service to the south Island of New Zealand'with a population of over a million people A service which would have no competition Come on Qantas get your act together!!!!!
Even with weight restrictions, how does an airplane consistently fly beyond it's published longest possible flight range? How come no one asks this question? The answer is NO-WHERE on the internet or on the Boeing website.
I have flown the 787 LHR - PER route several times, and although its a long flight, I much prefer it to my previous Emirates A380 with 2 hour stop over at Dubai. I dislike the excessive waiting around and re-security checks at Dubai.
The Auckland stop is due to people having to clear customs with their baggage at their first US port of call. The LA break was very long. In Auckland, it is change crew, fuel up and take on a few more passengers. Qantas charges a 20% premium for the ultra long hall flights. However, they link Australia to the main overseas centres of finance and work for Australians.
You spend approx 20% on any stopover and you never get time back. Extra 2 days holiday or extra 2 days in a sh*show of any airport ,over priced food ,budget accomodation ,transfers, delays ,touts ,the unwashed and local transport.Non stop every time.
I have done the PER-FCO flight last year, and doing it again this year. It's a long flight but seeing my return flight last year contained just running across airports to change planes, it actually feels like you spend so much more time in a plane actually having any layover because you don't get to feel like you aren't in a plane.
My first ever flight was from Heathrow to Sydney via New York San Francisco Hawaii and Fiji. No lengthy stopovers just refueling and then we were on our way. The flying time was 36 incredible hours. No big jets in the late 60s just the trustworthy 707. I was a teenager on my own and on my way forever to a new life on Australia. It took every bit of courage i could muster to head into the unknown.
Interesting how the inbound Trans-Pacific flights are so much longer than even the European flights. Personally would never fly the 787 in economy on these routes. So bring on the A350.
When Qantas used to fly MEL-AKL-LAX and SYD-AKL-LAX in addition to the direct LAX flights, I always chose the AKL flights just to get off the plane for 2 hours. Longer in total, but AKL-LAX was only around 12 hours if I recall correctly. Much better than up to 16+ hours direct. Likewise I always fly via Asia to Europe, taking at least a day's stoppover. After being loyal to Qantas for decades I ditched them altogether when they opted for DXB instead. I see no reason to change that. I have zero interest in direct flights to JFK or LHR or DFW.
I once flew from LAX to SYD with a 3 hrs stop in AKL on a PA 747SP. I was fortunate enough to be upgraded to F Class, but after 15hours in the air, I had all the movies I could watch, all the fine food I cared to eat, all the drinks I cared to sip and all the naps and sleep I could do, whether it was in First or Coach, all I wanted after takeoff from AKL was OFF that Airplane! It's quite an interesting experience that I did do again, but it does get a little long. it makes a flight from SLC to HNL seem like short haul.
Flight time on those routes is just bananas. I'd be more concerned about the health of the aircrew flying that distance even though there are spare pilots. Looks like the 350-1000 ULR is going to blow the Boeing 789 out the water
SYD-PER-LHR sounds like you can save a couple of hours but it cost me 4 days of severe back pain during which it was a struggle to go to the restaurant for breakfast let alone go out anywhere. Returned LHR-SIN-SYD and had much milder back pain for a day that ibuprofen was able to control. Incidentally I have done long-haul flights on a number of other airlines and not had the back pain issues so the QANTAS seat may be an issue particularly as the seat pitch is inferior to a number of its competitors.
Love Qantas
Sound like a domestic violence beaten wife....
Same
These ultra long haul flihgts on the 787 once again prove how capable this aircraft really is. Even though there are aircraft with longer range (such as the 777-200LR and A340-500), the 787 is the first aircraft that is versatile enough to fly both ultra long haul and shorter flights efficiently and profitably. And on top of that, the 787 has allowed low-cost long haul airlines to be profitable for the first time. I think the 787 has surpassed the expectations of almost everyone (including Boeing).
That is I think why the 787 wins. Another aircraft may do 14 hours of flying and then sit at the gate for 10 hours, while a 787 can operate a shorter leg within the same 24h period.
He starts the listing @ 2:56
I flew Melbourne - Dallas a few months ago, the first leg of a mammoth journey back to London. Incredible that for hours there is nothing but the Pacific below....
Lesh go, first comment. Living in Sydney, this is quite cool
I flew DFW to SYD on 1st june, 16hrs and 31 mins in the air, thankfully in business class!
I would never consider such long flights in coach, recently flew at night from Paris to Mauritius for only 1.500€ in business class with a flat bed, it's really worth the money imho
I wouldn't mind multiple legs if I had a seat that I could sleep on. Trade the weight and space occupied by the long distance fuel for weight and space occupied by passengers in economy.
Not that it would happen even if technically possible, because the airline is not about to cannibalise its business class market.
Yessss
My thoughts, 1-hour is 59 minutes to long to be in a 787 NightMare Liner. If I wanted to fly any of those routes, I'd wait for the a350's to take over.
When your flight path looks like a satellite trajectory map, it's a long flight. 🤣
I remember flying SYD LAX, 15 hours when the 747-400 was new and what a marvel that was. Now that route is a yawn, any old twin can do it.
The QF5/6 flight numbers used to be used for SYD-SIN-FRA, which they cancelled just before the partnership with Emirates started. Qantas just confirmed that the seasonal flights to Rome would happen again in 2024.
QF7/8 also used to go to Europe (Rome) prior to it being used for the SYD-DFW flights.
QF3/4 used to be used for SYD-HNL, which has now been renumbered QF103/104.
MEL-DFW is using the old flight numbers from SYD-NRT.
Qantas was weeks away from starting BNE-ORD (slightly longer then AKL-JFK) in March 2020 when everything shut down due to Covid. There has not yet been any word about it still going ahead at some point.
Interesting and for the old Route of QF9/10 Melbourne Tulmarine to London Heathrow was via Singapore Changi Airport nowadays Melbourne Tulmarine Perth London Heathrow where you can transfer to British Airways London Heathrow to EWR/JFK. On the return trip where do you clear customs for QF9/10 London Heathrow to Melbourne Tulmarine Airport is it at Perth or Melbourne? If Perth continue domestic to Melbourne
@@EpicThe112 People going to Melbourne (on QF10) use International transit in Perth. Qantas flights under QF400 use international terminals. You clear immigration and customs on those flights, even if you are just on a domestic sector. So people flying only between MEL and PER on QF9/10 clear ABF on each end.
If you are on QF10 into PER and are connecting to somewhere else in Australia *other* then on QF10, you clear immigration/customs at PER.
Honestly project sunrise will be worrying for middle eastern airlines once other airlines take note of nonstop direct flights to all parts of the world.
I think there would still be value in non-direct flights, not everyone wants to be in economy for 18 hours.
@@lhk7006 never know, quite a few people said that before Transpacific flights became nonstop and now they're extremely popular.
Bro these super ultra long haul flights that last anywhere between 18-20 hours can be comfortable for business class or first class passengers but never for economy class passengers
Furthermore, longer the flight higher the fuel consumption, in this regard, connecting through Singapore for travelling from Australia to Europe will be a more affordable option, likewise through Japan for Australia to USA
The Middle Eastern airlines will consistently be able to undercut the nonstop carriers in price though, that's part of their business model in some ways.
Do the flight carry enough Australian beers to keep the passengers content the whole time?
excited to see air new zealand use a potential syd-lhr as a jumping off point for a non-stop service from akl-lhr as aircraft range grows
5:52☕🌻
Hi Qantas People
I have email Qantas with no reply - poor service
What a pity the managemnet can't think outside the square
Here on service that no one is doing and that is Queenstown and Christchurch to Adelaide a city of a over a million people with no service to the south Island of New Zealand'with a population of over a million people
A service which would have no competition
Come on Qantas get your act together!!!!!
Even with weight restrictions, how does an airplane consistently fly beyond it's published longest possible flight range? How come no one asks this question? The answer is NO-WHERE on the internet or on the Boeing website.
I think they're tankering fuel across the world for no good reason and should arrange a stop at a convenient in-between location.
Love the flight done it loads to perth to see my family goes fairly quick do it now every new year
I have flown the 787 LHR - PER route several times, and although its a long flight, I much prefer it to my previous Emirates A380 with 2 hour stop over at Dubai. I dislike the excessive waiting around and re-security checks at Dubai.
Silly to put Australia out there in the corner behind expansive continents and oceans!
Absolutely dread ULH flights.
Interesting 😊😊😊
I think once the Project sunrise comes effective that will be the longest flight in the world
The Auckland stop is due to people having to clear customs with their baggage at their first US port of call. The LA break was very long. In Auckland, it is change crew, fuel up and take on a few more passengers. Qantas charges a 20% premium for the ultra long hall flights. However, they link Australia to the main overseas centres of finance and work for Australians.
You spend approx 20% on any stopover and you never get time back.
Extra 2 days holiday or extra 2 days in a sh*show of any airport ,over priced food ,budget accomodation ,transfers, delays ,touts ,the unwashed and local transport.Non stop every time.
I have done the PER-FCO flight last year, and doing it again this year. It's a long flight but seeing my return flight last year contained just running across airports to change planes, it actually feels like you spend so much more time in a plane actually having any layover because you don't get to feel like you aren't in a plane.
Boeing id definitely on the way out
Sydney and melbourne to uk and usa
A350 , simply the best
My first ever flight was from Heathrow to Sydney via New York San Francisco Hawaii and Fiji. No lengthy stopovers just refueling and then we were on our way. The flying time was 36 incredible hours. No big jets in the late 60s just the trustworthy 707. I was a teenager on my own and on my way forever to a new life on Australia. It took every bit of courage i could muster to head into the unknown.
the flight time doesn't include ground time in FR24 IIRC. Flightradar is counting flight time from wheels-off runway to wheels on the runway
Interesting how the inbound Trans-Pacific flights are so much longer than even the European flights.
Personally would never fly the 787 in economy on these routes. So bring on the A350.
When Qantas used to fly MEL-AKL-LAX and SYD-AKL-LAX in addition to the direct LAX flights, I always chose the AKL flights just to get off the plane for 2 hours. Longer in total, but AKL-LAX was only around 12 hours if I recall correctly. Much better than up to 16+ hours direct. Likewise I always fly via Asia to Europe, taking at least a day's stoppover. After being loyal to Qantas for decades I ditched them altogether when they opted for DXB instead. I see no reason to change that. I have zero interest in direct flights to JFK or LHR or DFW.
I'm from NY and I was hoping that there would be a direct flight from JFK to SYD. No luck.
I once flew from LAX to SYD with a 3 hrs stop in AKL on a PA 747SP. I was fortunate enough to be upgraded to F Class, but after 15hours in the air, I had all the movies I could watch, all the fine food I cared to eat, all the drinks I cared to sip and all the naps and sleep I could do, whether it was in First or Coach, all I wanted after takeoff from AKL was OFF that Airplane! It's quite an interesting experience that I did do again, but it does get a little long. it makes a flight from SLC to HNL seem like short haul.
a
They did a experiment flight, direct from Sidney to London, i think 19 hours
Those economy seats looks pretty torturous for an ultra long haul flight. I am glad I will never have to take any of those flights 😝
Where are project sunrise flights?
What happened to your guys fleet deep dive series love that one
All I’ll say is I can’t imagine.Being on a commercial plane.For almost a full day!
If you can shrink the planet, fine. If not, we have NO choice.
Boeing 787
⬇️⬇️
Flight time on those routes is just bananas.
I'd be more concerned about the health of the aircrew flying that distance even though there are spare pilots.
Looks like the 350-1000 ULR is going to blow the Boeing 789 out the water
Must be very boring
There are IFEs onboard...