LHR-SYD Non-stop B787

[SpringHeeledJack]

Currently (14th November 2019) a B787 of Qantas is flying between London and Sydney nonstop in approximately 19 hours. VH-ZNJ if you want to see it's position on the flight tracker sites. A celebration of 100 years in the aviation business for Qantas.

[DaveReidUK]

There seems little doubt that it's going to break the previous LHR-SYD non-stop record, also set by Qantas 30 years ago with a B744.

As of 10 minutes ago, it had just under 3,000 nm to run and about 6 hours 45 minutes in which to make it.

[SpringHeeledJack]

The record was broken, total flight time 19hrs and 19mins, which is pretty impressive. I'm not sure I'd want to be in an aircraft for so long, but I'm sure that there are many who would use the service. Anyway, well done Qantas and Boeing!

[KelvinD]

When I was living near Capetown in the mid 1970s, I turned up at Capetown airport early one morning to watch the arrival of South African Airways' first 747SP. I don't remember all the numbers etc but this aircraft had flown non-stop from Seattle. In order to do this, most of the seats had been removed and additional fuel tanks installed and I seem to remember it was carrying 14 crew. A heck of a long flight!

[treadigraph]

Well done Qantas, the world is still shrinking! :)

Longest I've done is 13 odd hours to Hong Kong - or was it back? - and that was more than long enough, even in the relative comfort of business class.

[OMAAbound]

The record was broken, total flight time 19hrs and 19mins, which is pretty impressive. I'm not sure I'd want to be in an aircraft for so long, but I'm sure that there are many who would use the service. Anyway, well done Qantas and Boeing!

Without sounding pedantic, you could argue you’re on/in it for longer! Especially the crew, upwards of 21 hours sometimes.

Pax or Crew, I’ll swerve this one thanks!

OMAA

[WHBM]

I see it positioned in to London from LAX, arriving just 12 hours before the departure. Did anyone travel all the way through ?

[DaveReidUK]

I see it positioned in to London from LAX, arriving just 12 hours before the departure. Did anyone travel all the way through ?

I'm sure some brave soul did, though they probably got off in the meantime. :O

[WHBM]

Unfortunately an 0600 local time departure from London meant zero (that I saw) media publicity here. Journalists don't get up that early !

So I didn't see it go either. But I did see its predecessor 747 some 30 years ago, which passed right over our office at a much more civil time just before 0900 a few miles into its run, notably low actually. The track of the 747 was quite different, over the Middle East and (I think) south of Singapore. The 787 seems to have gone south of Moscow and overhead Hong Kong. Wonder what the mileage difference was. Shame the captain of the 747 passed away not long ago, and couldn't be on board today. There was an interesting account on the Web (can't find it now) by the steward of the 747 flight, with details of all the catering they provided.

[treadigraph]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/oceania/australia/articles/qantas-london-to-sydney-on-board-report/

[India Four Two]

It looks like they flew very close to the great circle route - nearly 300 nm shorter than via the Gulf:

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/752x702/screen_shot_2019_11_15_at_8_02_53_am_da5535721b38d078b2f2492 fb94dcf1dfdfe22a7.png

Great Circle Mapper (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=lhr-svo-hkg-syd%3Blhr-dxb-syd%3Blhr-syd&MS=wls&DU=nm&SG=475.6&SU=kts)

[Sobelena]

I'm sure it will be an sufficiently attractive option for the relatively younger generation of passengers. I'm not sure if the oldies will be that enthusiastic though. Speaking for myself I find 12.5 hours more than enough at my age. I much prefer to break a trip to Oz and back with a 1 or 2 day stopover in Singapore.

[India Four Two]

Sobelena,

I think at any age, it's a bit much. The longest flight I've done is Los Angeles to Bangkok. I don't remember the exact time, but it was around 17 hours.

I remember it was longer than usual because we had to deviate around two big lows in the Bering Sea. We flew north out of Los Angeles, crossed into Canada and eventually coasted-out over the Yukon into the Beaufort Sea! Made landfall over Siberia, flew over the Sea of Ohkotsk, into China, with the obligatory rerouting in the Bejing area and then down to the Land of Smiles. How to cross the Pacific without flying over it!

I don't need a stopover, but I do find a change of plane is nice, just to be able to walk around, even if it adds a few hours to the journey.

[TURIN]

I've done the run from MAN-LHR-SIN-SYD, and then on to Brisbane all in one hit. Took a while but I would much rather cut out the middle men and go direct, non-stop. Only in Business though. Economy? Forget it.

[Mr Mac]

Turin
Done Singapore - New York (Newark) once on 340 all Business Class. Not sure I would want to London - Sydney even in Business or First if Qantas have it ! Also only flown with them once, and not impressed.
Cheers
Mr Mac

[DaveReidUK]

Hard to add much to the 400-odd posts from the thread at the time LHR-PER non-stop was announced: Qantas non-stop PER to LHR? (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/584439-qantas-non-stop-per-lhr.html)

[Sobelena]

Then, don't say anything Dave ;)

[WHBM]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/oceania/australia/articles/qantas-london-to-sydney-on-board-report/
I see the Daily Telegraph article mentions Double Sunrise without any reference to the significant aspect this very expression played in the long-ago history of Qantas. Possibly someone at Qantas said it to them without explanation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Sunrise

[SpringHeeledJack]

When I was living near Capetown in the mid 1970s, I turned up at Capetown airport early one morning to watch the arrival of South African Airways' first 747SP. I don't remember all the numbers etc but this aircraft had flown non-stop from Seattle. In order to do this, most of the seats had been removed and additional fuel tanks installed and I seem to remember it was carrying 14 crew. A heck of a long flight!

It took 17hrs and 22mins for the 10,200miles and they had reserves for another 2.5hrs left upon landing. Amazing endurance whatever the configuration!

[KRviator]

It took 17hrs and 22mins for the 10,200miles and they had reserves for another 2.5hrs left upon landing. Amazing endurance whatever the configuration!Now add enough enough passengers and freight to make it pay its' way and see what they have left on landing...:confused:

[belly tank]

Alan Joyce was commenting yesterday that the 787 flights are crew and pax research only. They are considering the the new 777x or the A350-1000 for the ULH routes.

[crewmeal]

So could the B789 go SYD-LHR non stop given headwinds in the northern hemisphere are stronger at this time of the year?

[SpringHeeledJack]

Now add enough enough passengers and freight to make it pay its' way and see what they have left on landing..

It was a delivery flight AND a record attempt, not a normal service.

[Harry Wayfarers]

Unfortunately an 0600 local time departure from London meant zero (that I saw) media publicity here. Journalists don't get up that early !

So I didn't see it go either. But I did see its predecessor 747 some 30 years ago, which passed right over our office at a much more civil time just before 0900 a few miles into its run, notably low actually. The track of the 747 was quite different, over the Middle East and (I think) south of Singapore. The 787 seems to have gone south of Moscow and overhead Hong Kong. Wonder what the mileage difference was. Shame the captain of the 747 passed away not long ago, and couldn't be on board today. There was an interesting account on the Web (can't find it now) by the steward of the 747 flight, with details of all the catering they provided.

It's not neccessarily mileage that determines, it'can be en-route winds, get a favourable wind then some additional miles don't matter.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Almost zero PR at LHR for something this epic. Could they not have gotten a daytime departure? The cameras would have been out in force for sure. Disappointing lack of marketing here.

[SpringHeeledJack]

Probably as it was test flight and the main interest was in Australia, it sort of makes sense that there was a fanfare that end after the successful flight, rather than at the beginning of the endeavour. That said, I was surprised that there was no mention on the breakfast news etc.

[DaveReidUK]

That said, I was surprised that there was no mention on the breakfast news etc.

There was certainly some footage of it, might have been BBC South news.

[javelinfaw9]

err No 787 is not the plane long term. . A350 will dominate this market. 77X like the Max is a development too far.
"flogging a dead horse" springs to mind.

[rog747]

Already being discussed that 777 is not going to work for ULH LON-OZ but BA have talked to Airbus re the A350 for non-stops to SYD
If BA get that then that cocks a snoop at QF with PER, but seems all has gone quiet on this...

SYD non-stop is the holy grail but will flight deck crews (senior older ones) really want to do this?

Basically a 24+ hour day (or longer) starting from home, then report, fly the thing, going east, dreadful time zone changes - Then eventually arrive at the hotel and hope your room is ready.
Likely minimum layovers - then do it all again going back West. (yuk)
Inadequate crew rest areas & bunks that will need radical changes to enable heavy crewing to get satisfactory rest.

[wiggy]

Already being discussed that 777 is not going to work for ULH LON-OZ but BA have talked to Airbus re the A350 for non-stops to SYD
If BA get that then that cocks a snoop at QF with PER, but seems all has gone quiet on this...


Probably went quiet because somebody mentioned the cost of need for adequate crew rest :oh: and the cost of need for hotel rooms being ready on time;...:oh: :oh:

[SpringHeeledJack]

In some modern office, somewhere within the HQ of one of the majors there's an executive working on a cunning plan to have an AI flight crew with human observers overseeing the fun that will enable all those impatient long distance customers to do silly nonstops hither and thither.

[Peter47]

Looking at various sources of data (as a non pilot) it would seem that an 359 or 351 can fly for about 21hr 30 min with a reasonable (just under 20 tonne) payload. Allowing for reserve and day to day variations in wind speeds this equates to a roughly 19:30 hr flight or a 20 hr block time. This would allow JFK - SYD in both directions, LHR - SYD but not SYD - LHR with any meaningful payload. I recently checked an M.Sc. thesis which calculated (from Jepperson data) that calculated that a 77L with maximum fuel but a reduced TOW could carry 72 pax (data below) but I then calculated that fitting three auxiliary tanks it might be feasible.to carry a sensible payload. My question is would SYD - LHR be possible? I don't know about the 778 but you would either need a higher gross weight 359 (probably just under 30 tonnes) or a shortened 351 (think of the 747 SP) with additional tankage. Obviously both would require development & certification which may not be justifiable for a short production run - and there is unlikely to be a high demand. Do you think that we will see SYD - LHR nonstop in the near future or will we need an extra stop. (Many years ago SQ flew LHR - SIN non stop witha 743 but but had to make a technical stop in the reverse direction.)

Thoughts anyone?

Technical appendices (from a novice)
359 - OEW 136.5, Payload 19.5, Fuel 124.0 TOW 280.0 tonnes

77L SYD - LHR winter (worst time of year)
Forecast duration: 21:14 Total reserves 2:03 (more than required, but make an allowance for adverse winds, routing, altitude, etc)
OWE 144,846 kg
Trip fuel 134,643
Contingency 10,916
Total fuel 145,559
Payload 6,583
TOW 296,989

However this is below the 77L MTOW which is about 345 tonnes and if the three optional fuel tanks are included and an additional 17t of fuel is carried the payload will increase by roughly the same about allowing a full load in high premium configuration.

[Asturias56]

"SYD non-stop is the holy grail "

Why? I haven't seen any passengers asking for it

[SpringHeeledJack]

"SYD non-stop is the holy grail "

Why? I haven't seen any passengers asking for it

Out of interest, what ULH pairs are passengers asking for that aren't already served ?

[wiggy]

Just a thought but I guess SYD-LHR or LHR-SYD might be a "holy grail" if destinations with a common language ( on second thoughts) is a driver....

OTOH if people travelling on a non-stopper then connect into/out of LHR for mainland Europe in significant numbers ( and they certainly do on the current direct services...) then maybe FRA -SYD would make more sense to target as a non-stopper.

[rjtjrt]

Just a thought but I guess SYD-LHR or LHR-SYD might be a "holy grail" if destinations with a common language ( on second thoughts) is a driver....

OTOH if people travelling on a non-stopper then connect into/out of LHR for mainland Europe in significant numbers ( and they certainly do on the current direct services...) then maybe FRA -SYD would make more sense to target as a non-stopper.
Maybe AKL-LHR is an alternate holy grail.

[Asturias56]

For most people in the UK an Emirates flight from a local airport with a change in Dubai is far more preferable than a change at LHR to a non-stop

If you read the Australian thread you get the impression LHR-SYD is only of interest to Qantas who can't run a profitable service against the other, newer, airlines that compete