Longest Duration for a Non-Stop Flight from Europe

ixoy

I've looked around the web and wondering if anyone here can answer a question: What's the longest duration for a non-stop flight from Europe at the moment or even better the top five?

IrishB.ie

Interesting page here.

Longest from Europe seems to be Rome to Buenos Aires 14hr 20min.

Shortest from Westray to Papa Westray 02min.

ixoy

Somehow, despite reading that page earlier, I had missed out on the details! The Singapore flight is quite long too - 14hr (the guy beside me in work would take that one).
It came out of a curiosity when I did the LHR - Tokyo Narita flight last year (12hr 30 mins) and I was wondering how it notched up against other long-haul European flights.

flynnke

Paris CDG - Santiago, Chile (AF406) has a total block time of 14:15, beats Lufthansa Frankfurt to Buenos Aires which is 13:50 and Singapore - London with a BA 772ER which is 14:05

According to Alitalia's website: AZ680 Rome FCO - Buenos Aires is 14:00

Su Campu

Not sure of flights from Europe but the longest passenger flight in the world is Singapore - Newark, 18h30m. Imagine being sat at a window seat next to a 40-stone American!

IrishB.ie

flynnke wrote: »

Paris CDG - Santiago, Chile (AF406) has a total block time of 14:15, beats Lufthansa to Buenos Aires which is 13:50 and Singapore - London with a BA 772ER which is 14:05

I wonder how long times like these will stay 'top of the table' when you read the likes of

both Airbus and Boeing have hinted at interest in developing variants to their long-haul airliners to make a London–Sydney non-stop flight economically feasible, for which purpose the Airbus consortium will offer the special Airbus A350-900R XWB variant to British Airways. The straight-line distance between London Heathrow Airport and Sydney Airport is 16,995 km.

That must be about a 22 - 23hr flight. Too long for me (can't sleep on aircraft & I smoke).

flynnke

Su Campu wrote: »

Not sure of flights from Europe but the longest passenger flight in the world is Singapore - Newark, 18h30m. Imagine being sat at a window seat next to a 40-stone American!

Singapore's A340-500s are configured as completely business class now. Makes sense as it would be impossible to bear 18 hours in economy

IrishB.ie

Su Campu wrote: »

Not sure of flights from Europe but the longest passenger flight in the world is Singapore - Newark, 18h30m. Imagine being sat at a window seat next to a 40-stone American!

or worse, the missus :eek:

IrishB.ie

flynnke wrote: »

According to Alitalia's website: AZ680 Rome FCO - Buenos Aires is 14:00

Thats true, but the one I quoted from that table was Aerolíneas Argentinas AR 1141 using an Airbus A340-200. Alitalia use a Boeing 777-200ER.

flynnke

IrishB.ie wrote: »

Thats true, but the one I quoted from that table was Aerolíneas Argentinas AR 1141 using an Airbus A340-200. Alitalia use a Boeing 777-200ER.

Yes I stand corrected IrishB.ie, I just noticed that on Wikipedia! 14:20in total. Didn't realise they flew to Rome FCO. Apologies

14:20 with Aerlineas would be awful, their IFE is terrible

IrishB.ie

Flew ATL HNL in 1992 on an L1011. Was ok for the first 10hrs or so. When we landed though, they had to order a replacement aisle carpet. Returned through LAX. Never again.

highlydebased

Would be at least 19 hours London-Sydney on a good day. An awful amount of time to spend aboard! I wouldnt do it.

Stinicker

Neon-Circles wrote: »

Would be at least 19 hours London-Sydney on a good day. An awful amount of time to spend aboard! I wouldnt do it.

There is no non-stop flights between London and Sydney, even Concorde could not do it at Subsonic speed. The airlines going down under usually stop off in either Singapore, Hong Kong or Bangkok and some Middle Eastern Airlines like Etihad also stop off in Singapore also.

The new A350-900R when it comes along in 2013 will be capable of London to Auckland (and Australia) non-stop, and some newer versions of the Boeing 777 will be launched on a non-stop Perth to London service this year by Virgin. The big problem with such long haul flights is the prevailing winds and a plane flying eastwards to London to Sydney will inherently be quicker than one flying westwards against the jetstream.

What will probably happen eventually is a plane will depart Heathrow for Sydney or Auckland and return back to Heathrow via the Western Hemisphere flying north across the Pacific and across the US and Canada with the jetstream behind it the whole way.

What will the future hold is the question at the moment; the airlines operate 747's and A380's which are geared towards Hub and Spoke wheras ultra long haul is P2P eliminating the need to have base in the likes of Singapore etc. However spending 18+ hours in an economy seat sounds like hell and the longest I did myself was 14.5 hours from Sydney to Los Angeles on the A380 with Qantas, which I found grand, however in a smaller plane like the A350 or 777 it would be tougher.

The market will eventually decide and unless ticket prices fall by enough to encourage passengers to endure the ultra long slog of Sydney-London then ultimately passengers will still prefer to make that stop off somewhere enroute.

electric69

Stinicker wrote: »

The big problem with such long haul flights is the prevailing winds and a plane flying eastwards to London to Sydney will inherently be quicker than one flying westwards against the jetstream.

I think you are getting a bit confused here. The prevailing winds are different all around the world and generally opposite in the Southern hemisphere from what they are in the Northern hemisphere. The jetstream and prevailing winds also move quite a lot pending on what time of the year it is and the ITCZ has an influence on the winds also.

Stinicker wrote: »

What will probably happen eventually is a plane will depart Heathrow for Sydney or Auckland and return back to Heathrow via the Western Hemisphere flying north across the Pacific and across the US and Canada with the jetstream behind it the whole way.

I have a feeling the airlines and also most passengers will disagree with you. the routes are flown to what is generally the most economical for the airlines (i.e shortest distance from A to Flying the return leg from Sydney in a NE heading is going to add on a couple of hours flight time, not to mention the amount of time you are going to be off radar and the fact that 80% of the flight is over open seas and the other 20% over the frozen Arctic!
In the event of the unlikely i would much prefer to be flying over land than the Pacific ocean with the nearest runway over 1000miles away!

amen

over 1000miles away

but with ETOPS 180 (available today) and you can over 1000 miles flying distance from a runway allowing for a ground speed of 400mph and three hours flying time

highlydebased

Stinicker wrote: »

There is no non-stop flights between London and Sydney, even Concorde could not do it at Subsonic speed. The airlines going down under usually stop off in either Singapore, Hong Kong or Bangkok and some Middle Eastern Airlines like Etihad also stop off in Singapore also.

.

I know that. Thats what it would be if an aircraft had the range.

electric69

amen wrote: »

but with ETOPS 180 (available today) and you can over 1000 miles flying distance from a runway allowing for a ground speed of 400mph and three hours flying time

If your engines fail and you are over 1000miles from the nearest runway/piece of land with nothing but the pacific ocean underneath you..... ill let you put 1+1 together.

donkey balls

electric69 wrote: »

If your engines fail and you are over 1000miles from the nearest runway/piece of land with nothing but the pacific ocean underneath you..... ill let you put 1+1 together.

You should have a look at the Santiago De Chile -Auckland flight nothing but you and the South Pacific ocean under you once pass Easter Island:eek:,I know when I headed to Argentina with BA the flight was about 14hrs long I just checked it on their site and it is now 15hr 30 mins I wonder is it due to a B744 operating rather than the B772.

highlydebased

donkey balls wrote: »

You should have a look at the Santiago De Chile -Auckland flight nothing but you and the South Pacific ocean under you once pass Easter Island:eek:,I know when I headed to Argentina with BA the flight was about 14hrs long I just checked it on their site and it is now 15hr 30 mins I wonder is it due to a B744 operating rather than the B772.

Well neither is any slower than the other. However winter weather may slow it up.

A320

whats the story with polar routes?? do Air NZ fly up north from heathrow to NZ

pclancy

I just did NZ7 San Francisco-Auckland and that was about 12.5 hours. Nothing on the map for so long except the odd tiny pacific island. Was on a 777-200ER. Sleeping tablets a must.

highlydebased

A320 wrote: »

whats the story with polar routes?? do Air NZ fly up north from heathrow to NZ

They dont fly operate direct. Operates via Hong Kong. Or you can go heathrow-LAX with them either.