Short or Long Haul - What do you prefer and why?

[AllInGoodTime]

G'day

Just wondering if all you short and long haul airline pilots would like to share your views with us. What do you prefer to fly, long or short haul? What are the pro's and con's of them both.
Keen to hear your differing opinions.

[tinpis]

Try doing a search of the forum boreds

[Tagneah]

It all depends on the type of person you're sitting next to! :}

[18-Wheeler]

Got a four-hour arse.

No plane should be able to carry more than four hours of fuel and if that's not enough make it faster.
Talked about this with some other 747 drivers and they agree, and that the 747 should really have an Mmo or around mach five or so.
That'd be a good thing.

[tinpis]

Good ideas 18 weeler and it should be illegal to fly over the same piece of red dirt twice in one day in Aussie.

[the wizard of auz]

Tinpis, Maaaaaaaaate, I gotta agree with ya there. Aught to be made illegal in fact. :ok: :E Make my job a bit harder to do though.

[Capt Claret]

My long haul experience amounts to regular 3.5 - 4 hour sectors to cover 1000nm. Bluddy hell but that's too long!! :}

[Keg]

I couldn't care less where I fly as long as I get as much time off at home with the family! Invariably that means longer haul stuff due to it being more 'efficient'. :} :ok:

[robroy]

A P-51 Mustang has , or can have, over 8 hours of fuel,.
I only have a 6 hour bladder. There is no dunny, only a tube.

IF IT AIN'T BOEING, I AIN'T GOING !!!!!!!

robroy