---

................ heard a group from the flight talking about the best landing they had ever had..............

---

---

---

---

It is faster than the Airbus

---

---

and much better in turbulence than the 777.

---

---

---

---

...The idea for our long range flight came originally from a suggestion that we should fly a 747SP non-stop from London to Perth. The SP was, until development of the 747-400, the longest-range commercial aircraft in the world. The SP has been used for some years by QANTAS on non-stop Pacific routes from the east coast of Australia to the west coast of the USA.

The 747SP held then the current non-stop distance record for a commercial aircraft. This flight by a Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7F powered SP flew a great circle distance of 8, 872nm in 17hrs, 22min with the assistance of a 36kt tail wind. Increased takeoff gross weight and the use of a 2000 USG pillow fuel tank in the cargo hold were required to achieve the flight.

The 747SP was developed in ‘76 to satisfy long, thin route requirements. It was a derivative of the basic 747 with a shorter fuselage and aerodynamic improvements in the wing/body fairing and engine strut area.

The 747-400 was a new aircraft incorporating some more aerodynamic improvements such as wing tip extensions and winglets, an improved wing/body strake fairing (derived from the SP) and a re-rigged elevator. With 3000USG of fuel in the horizontal stab, and engine improvements to the RR RB211-524G engines more than offset the larger size and extra weight. This resulted in the -400 having 14% more range capability than the SP. Of this 14%, approximately 4.5% came from the aerodynamic improvements and the rest from the improved engines.

The London to Perth non-stop did not happen.

During the early planning of the 747-400 introductions, it was suggested that we should fly this aircraft from London to Sydney non-stop to promote the image of QANTAS as a pioneering long haul carrier.

Initially the idea was regarded as crazy, for the aircraft did not have enough range. The nominal range of the -400 is 7900nm and the proposal to fly it 9700nm non-stop. Surely someone was dyslexic!

Well, not really, that 7900nm was for an aircraft with a nominal full volumetric load. What was the aircraft capable of if it was flown empty? Just over 9000nm.

Was it really possible to fly London the Sydney non-stop? QANTAS traditional flag route had always been the Kangaroo route and what a coup if we could be the first to fly it non-stop.

Not only non-stop, but almost halfway around the world and between two of the most distant city pairs on the globe.

The idea gathered momentum and, as the project pilot for the aircraft, I was charged with making it happen. The non-stop part of the project was continued now in great secrecy and on a strictly need to know basis.
As with any project of this kind there will always be those who will tell you it cannot be done. I then had to adopt the approach of "Don’t tell me it cant be done, tell me what we need to do."

Gradually over a period of months, we got closer and closer to this all starting to make sense. The parameters for the flight were set. It would be extremely desirable to carry some passengers (about 20), the aircraft should not be stripped, and the operational rules should not be grossly different from the norm. Impossible! "Don’t strip the aircraft, add weight of passengers, that all costs fuel" said the doubters.

Boeing (only 3 people in Boeing knew of the attempt at this stage) produced some figures and charts that said it was theoretically possible, but only under ideal conditions. The aircraft would need to be perfect and we needed a good set of engines and the winds had to be favourable.

The build of the aircraft was controllable and we could talk to RR about the engines, but the winds...?

A study began of what winds we could expect at what periods of the year. Originally the first aircraft was due do be delivered in April 1989 and that was statistically one of the better times of the year for an attempt.

RR were approached at a high level to talk about the need for a particularly good set of engines. They agreed to do whatever was possible. A route study was done to plan the shortest possible ground miles for the flight. Numerous alternatives were also planned to allow for the best tracking on the day to take advantage of whatever winds would be blowing. Boeing’s original study had been done using Great Circle distances between major city pairs along the route.

This had produced a total distance of 9505nm. We did not believe that we could obtain over flight clearances for GC tracking in today’s busy skies. Utilising established airways our shortest route was 9624nm. Yet another 120nm to squeeze out of the aircraft.

Then the aircraft delivery was delayed. The further the delay, the worse the winds were likely to be. An August delivery was statistically the worst time of the year for winds.

How could we squeeze some more range out of the aircraft? We would reduce the bleed air demand from the engines for air-conditioning by operating the aircraft utilising only one of the three units. Air quality in the cabin was not a consideration with a maximum of 30 people planned to be on board. Using a single air-conditioning pack could theoretically gain us about 0.5% in range. But would the pressurisation hold at our maximum planned altitude of 45000ft with such a low inflow? We would not know until we flew the aircraft.

We could use the fuel in the horizontal stabilizer tank to our advantage by not using it until we absolutely had to. We would run the trim in flight down to its maximum aft centre of gravity permissible. This would keep the aircraft in its most efficient trim condition and use less fuel, gaining another theoretical 0.4% in range until the tank was empty.

The weight of the aircraft had to be pared to an absolute minimum within the bounds that had been established. The galley equipment would have to be kept to essentials only. No silver service for our VIP passengers on this flight! Water tank quantity should be the minimum required for the few on board. All non-essential equipment and the normal delivery flight stores would have to be transported to Sydney some other way - not on board as was our usual practice. Weight came down and the range edged up. Still, not enough.

Fuel for the flight became the critical factor. Fuel weight is limited by tank volume, but if we could somehow make the fuel more dense then we could carry more weight of fuel and it is mass flow that affects the engines. We investigated the possibility of chilling fuel, as this would increase the density slightly. But how to chill 60000 USG and would the effect of cooling be enough? Where could we get some dense fuel? So the search began. Someone suggested we use JP10, an incredibly dense synthetic fuel used by military for some missile applications. That was no good, Boeing advised, the wing structure is not designed to carry that kind of weight and besides, the winglets of this aircraft are not fitted with outrigger wheels. The search went on.

A slight increase in fuel quantity could be achieved by overfilling the fuel tanks. Normally the fuel tanks are never quite filled, to leave some airspace for expansion and prevent fuel spillage if it warmed after fuelling. By overriding the volumetric ****-off of the fuelling system, we could overfill the tanks by about 500 USG. We knew at least one airline used this procedure on a regular basis, provided fuelling was completed just prior to departure.

We kept paring weight out of the aircraft. All normal galley equipment not required on the flight would be shipped to Sydney via Los Angeles. Safety equipment, except the amount required for the actual passengers on board would also be shipped. The same would apply to any cargo restraint equipment. The holds would be empty. The operating weight of the aircraft came down and the range capability edged up.

We started to run actual plans through our flight-planning computer. We were tantalizingly close. The fuel for the flight was critical. The search went on...

Approaches were made, quietly, to various oil companies in Europe to see if they could produce the fuel we needed. One after another they said no. Even if they had the feed stock they would need to crack such an exotic brew, thus the 60000 USG we wanted was either too small or too large an order and the price would be horrendous.

The fuel was all we needed now to make this flight theoretically possible, but time was running out. The aircraft delivery date had now been fixed for the 9th of August. We would soon have to announce our intention and to seek the cooperation of ATC over Europe to expedite the flight and ensure we would be able to get our required route and altitude. Lower than normal altitudes would cause excessive fuel consumption and that could terminate out attempt in the very early stages of the flight. The achieved altitudes in the first two or three hours of the flight would be critical.

Because the flight was a one off, we also had to obtain over flight clearances from all the countries over which we would fly, and that can take around 30 days. We needed that fuel. ***** *******, our fuel director, felt his telephone bill would keep OTC going for many years.

Behind all this was some doubt about how the aircraft would actually perform. We would not know until we flew it across to London and actually measured its performance. One percent in fuel mileage could make the difference, and that kind of variation from aircraft to aircraft was not unusual.

Finally Shell said they could make the fuel. At last! We could now announce the flight and start real preparations. Shell then said they would move to make the fuel in West Germany because that was where the feedstock was. How would we transport the fuel to London? Tankers we said. Not that easy they said; we don’t have them to spare. Another hurdle. Then we found some tankers, not the usual behemoths, small ones, but tankers nonetheless. Nine would be required.

By this stage I was in Seattle preparing for the aircraft acceptance and delivery. Weekly conference calls and other ad hoc calls were keeping the telephone lines warm, smoothing out the final details.

The pieces were starting to fall into place. An enormous effort by what was now a fairly large team of people, all experts in their own speciality. But how would the aircraft perform? The last unknown. Were our calculations correct? We would not know for sure until we flew the aircraft to London from Seattle. That would be the final test.

The aircraft delivery was going to be delayed about a week because of some late part supplies to Boeing. Reorganise the schedule, use up the pads I had built in and reschedule the departure date from London a couple of days back. Could we achieve the necessary crew training in one day instead of three? Yes, it could all be done and the over flight clearances were still valid. We could still achieve a weekday departure from London (necessary because of congestion over Europe during weekends caused by the incredible number of charter flights taking tourists to and from holiday resorts in the height of summer) and a weekday arrival into Sydney.

Shell announced another small hitch with that all essential fuel. It had been prepared in two batches and they would not mix. Solution; put it all in a rail tanker and shunt it up and down a sliding to shake it up. A gigantic cocktail shaker! It worked. The resultant fuel was analyzed and their final masterstroke - this special brew not only complied with the civil Jet A1 specification, but it also had some very special characteristics. It was as dense as that specification allowed and it had an extraordinary freeze point. I told shell it had to have a freeze point of at least -50*c to stop the fuel freezing in the tanks during a very long flight at the expected cold temperatures. Shell said they had tested it to -70*c and would that do, or did I want them to test it further. Since the coldest OAT that I had ever seen was -69*c and the fuel should not get much colder than -40*c, I said that -70*c was probably about enough. They shipped the fuel to London.

Delivery of the aircraft came and went with a few hitches, but nothing serious. We completed our training and set off to London with one of the most experienced and high-level crews that QANTAS had ever assembled. With me now for the flight to London and for the non-stop were: -
Ray Heiniger - then - Flight Operations Training Director
Rob Greenop - then - Flight Standards and Safety Director
George Lindeman - then - Manager Flight Simulators

We also had Captain Chet Chester from Boeing as an additional pilot for the long flight. Also on board were Jim Clarke, Manager Performance Engineering and a performance engineer from Boeing and one from RR.

The aircraft performed flawlessly during that flight. Once the performance engineers had processed their observations through a laptop computer in London, they announced that it was that critical one percent better than we had expected. The London to Sydney non-stop was now GO!

On the strength of the positive news about the performance, I agreed to allow one more passenger on the flight. The total on board would now be 23, comprising 5 pilots, 2 cabin crew and 16 passengers. I was to wonder about adding that extra passenger about half way thought he flight.

On the day of the flight the wind forecast was the worst that we had seen for some weeks, the overall component was only +14kts and we had been seeing upwards of +20. However, the forecast for Sydney was good and we still had adequate reserves of fuel.

The fuelling, which had been substantially carried out the day before, was completed. Each tank was filled until it overflowed out the wing tip vents with a fire truck standing by to wash away any spilt fuel.

My feeling of relief was considerable when the first engine started normally. Although there was no reason to doubt that they would start, this was the first time this fuel had been used.

The co-operation we received from ATC and the authorities generally was absolutely superb. It all started with our departure from London when ATC allowed us to be towed out to the runway which saved us about 1/2 tonne of fuel. They also made our slot for departure on the arrival runway so our departure would not be delayed. We received all the route and altitude clearances that were needed even across the incredibly busy skies of central Europe. ATC in all countries displayed interest in our flight, wished us well, with a couple passing official greetings from their government.

All went totally according to Hoyle, until we passed over Muscat. About then we climbed to 37000 ft and the winds, already forecast to be headwinds proved to be much stronger than we had expected. Which just goes to prove that weather forecasting is not yet an exact science. These adverse winds persisted for about 3 hours until we passed Colombo. During this time we could do nothing, but watch as our fuel reserve started to diminish.

Then, over the Cocus Island and now at 41000 ft, we were passed a revised forecast for Sydney. It was not the sort of news I wanted to hear at that stage of the flight with our already reduced fuel reserve. The forecast was for INTER TS about the time of our arrival. That meant that we had to have an additional thirty minutes of reserve fuel above our minimum reserve of 30 min. Simply, at that stage, we did not have even 30 minutes of reserve fuel let alone 60.

Fortunately, the winds had already swung around to the tail and started to become stronger than forecast. We began to make up lost time and our fuel situation started to improve.

We flew on knowing that the weather in Adelaide and Melbourne was good in case the weather in Sydney turned really foul, but it would be a real disappointment not to make our objective. To say nothing of the fact that I had been told not to expect to fly home on the aircraft if we did divert. Our director of Flight Operations had made it known that he considered a bus much more appropriate form of transport if we did not make Sydney.

Overhead Adelaide and now flying at 45,000 ft (or nearly 14km high) the winds continued to be more favourable than forecast and we received a revised forecast for Sydney which changed the TS to heavy showers. The import of this was that we no longer needed that extra 30 min of reserve fuel. Sydney was now assured!

I was to discover later, that some negotiation had been going on between our Director of Flight Operations and the weather forecasters to see if they would consider removing the mention of TS from that earlier forecast. They agreed to do this and at about the time this conversation was finishing there was an enormous thunderclap at Mascot. This was heard over the phone by the weather man who exclaimed "What the **** was that?" Legend has it that the response was something to the effect that no one at Mascot heard anything and the weatherman must be hearing things.

The rest is history, except to say that our welcome in Sydney exceeded anything I had expected. To see so many people waiting for us as we turned the corner around the hangar onto the QANTAS maintenance area was a very humbling experience.

We arrived in Sydney with 5.6 tonnes (or just over 45 min) of fuel remaining, of the 183.5 tonnes we had on board out of London.

20 hrs 9 min and 5 sec after liftoff at London and almost half a world away, we achieved that which we set out to achieve many months before. Two world records and two Australian records were set in the process. It was an enormous sense of achievement for me and for the whole team who worked on this project....

---