World's longest flights

[King Nuts]

External Link/Members Only

Interesting list of the world's longest flights. I know some people would hate the idea of being stuck on a plane for anything up to 18 hours without a break, but I'd do it. I've done plenty of 11- and 12-hour flights, and I think once you board the plane, you can psych yourself into being relaxed about it, and just accept you're going to be there for that length of time. Be British, and make the most of it.

I've been to Sydney a couple of times in the past, and the actual flying time is something like 19 or 20 hours each way. Both times I did it, there was a brief stopover in Singapore, but it wouldn't have bothered me if it were a nonstop. And I think nonstop to Sydney will happen soon.

[Watts.E.Dunn]

Cant imagine being cooped up in econ class for almost a day!..

Amazing engineering tho!.

[lewisjones23]

I’ve been to New Zealand and it is probably one of the furthest places you can fly do from the UK

In all honesty the journey is an ordeal, made up for by how stunning the country is

Last time I went I stopped in Kuala Lumpa so it was a 10 then 12 hour flight in to Auckland. Can’t say I’d be in any hurry to do a non stop flight all that way

I’ve found that lounge access is vital, its like £60 or something for the lounge if you don’t have access through your ticket, well worth the money to be able to relax, have a shower, eat and drink whatever suits.

Sets you up for the second part of the journey

[Markus]

Pre-pandemic I did a few flights over 18 hours flight time with a stopover in Abu Dhabi.  The lounge access for £60 or thereabouts is really good value for money.  Yes you only get 6 hours but that’s enough time to eat some great food,  have a shower and a have a nap or just relax in their comfy chairs. It makes the world of difference.  Not sure I could cope with non-stop flights even though it’s a marvellous feat of engineering.

[King Nuts]

I’ve found that lounge access is vital,

Agreed. I've been fortunate in that I've managed to get to fly in all classes over the years, and I've come to realise that while the marginally better food, drinks and so on at the front of the plane has some benefit (though not always worth the extra cost), it's the ground experience that makes the difference. Having lounge access before, and sometimes after the flight, plus the ability to bypass queues at check in and at security, is where the actual value is IMHO.

[Private Parts]

Agreed. I've been fortunate in that I've managed to get to fly in all classes over the years, and I've come to realise that while the marginally better food, drinks and so on at the front of the plane has some benefit (though not always worth the extra cost), it's the ground experience that makes the difference. Having lounge access before, and sometimes after the flight, plus the ability to bypass queues at check in and at security, is where the actual value is IMHO.

With you on that Nuts. 1st and club are overpriced.
Fast track on/off and lounge access is most important and a 20th of the cost.

Do they take a picture of you in 1st class to keep and cherish.
If money is no object no problem but I’d much rather meet the Christmas payroll and bonuses.
And it’s only taken the same time.
Priority in my book

[Gordon Bennett]

Wonder how much fuel is left in the tank on arrival? Maybe you wouldn't want to know, but I'd assume there are rules about having a fair bit in reserve to cater for emergencies or strange weather.
Those US to Aus routes look like there's nowt but ocean below if anything goes awry with fuel consumption but I presume there are islands planes could land on if there was a problem.

[Thephoenix]

I've lived, worked and visited Australia since the 1960's.
I used to just just do the flight in the shortest time possible, but in recent years I can't face that distance without a stopover.
At least it gives opportunities to have breaks in all the far East countries en route.

Things have changed a lot from my first flight out there on an old British Eagle Bristol Britannia which took 36 hours, with breaks in Kuwait, Colombo (Ceylon as it was) and Singapore. And that was only to W.A.

[Bogof60]

Wonder how much fuel is left in the tank on arrival? Maybe you wouldn't want to know, but I'd assume there are rules about having a fair bit in reserve to cater for emergencies or strange weather.
Those US to Aus routes look like there's nowt but ocean below if anything goes awry with fuel consumption but I presume there are islands planes could land on if there was a problem.

Strict rules GB including a divert hold, return and a generous reserve. If a plane runs out of fuel its usually a cock up.

Also you can glide a fair distance from 35+000 ft even in an airliner

[PepeMAGA]

Never done that, 12 hour flights go past pretty quick if you can find a few good films to watch

[King Nuts]

Wonder how much fuel is left in the tank on arrival? Maybe you wouldn't want to know, but I'd assume there are rules about having a fair bit in reserve to cater for emergencies or strange weather.
Those US to Aus routes look like there's nowt but ocean below if anything goes awry with fuel consumption but I presume there are islands planes could land on if there was a problem.

I expect they've thought of that. If you look at the flight map from, for example, Los Angeles to Sydney, the plane goes over about 200 yards of land in total, and all the rest is ocean.

I do recall that up till the mid-90s or thenabouts, airlines had to use planes with a minimum of three engines to cross the Atlantic. So the DC10, L1011 got used a bit, as well as the trusty 747s of course. And the plane had to be within 60 mins or maybe 90 mins of an airport.

[Marmalade]

I do agree about lounges, especially when you can just pay for a one-off rate when stuck in transit for a few hours. The better economy ones include shower facilities as well as food, and Singapore has beds. In fact Singapore main airport is more like a mini-holiday anyway, gardens, cinemas all air-side.

But I’d rather not have to transit. Just go direct. The exception is when you can stay over somewhere interesting for a day or so before resuming the journey.

[chrishornx]

I expect they've thought of that. If you look at the flight map from, for example, Los Angeles to Sydney, the plane goes over about 200 yards of land in total, and all the rest is ocean.

I do recall that up till the mid-90s or thenabouts, airlines had to use planes with a minimum of three engines to cross the Atlantic. So the DC10, L1011 got used a bit, as well as the trusty 747s of course. And the plane had to be within 60 mins or maybe 90 mins of an airport.

think you are right with all of that apart perhaps the time from an airport as there are times a jet had to be up to 4 hours from land in order to cross oceans

[chrishornx]

Agreed. I've been fortunate in that I've managed to get to fly in all classes over the years, and I've come to realise that while the marginally better food, drinks and so on at the front of the plane has some benefit (though not always worth the extra cost), it's the ground experience that makes the difference. Having lounge access before, and sometimes after the flight, plus the ability to bypass queues at check in and at security, is where the actual value is IMHO.

Lounge access and quick security clearance is very beneficial for long haul flights but I don't think the benefits of flat beds and a bar area on the A380 business can be dismissed too lightly, particularly on the longest flights without a stopover from the UK like Singapore KL and HK 

[Bogof60]

Fucking hate long haul flights.
In fact hate airports full stop.
Spent far too much of my life in either shithole airports or shitty airplanes.
Thoroughly glad.I don't have to get on a frigging airoplane for work ever again.

[timsussex]

I expect they've thought of that. If you look at the flight map from, for example, Los Angeles to Sydney, the plane goes over about 200 yards of land in total, and all the rest is ocean.

I do recall that up till the mid-90s or thenabouts, airlines had to use planes with a minimum of three engines to cross the Atlantic. So the DC10, L1011 got used a bit, as well as the trusty 747s of course. And the plane had to be within 60 mins or maybe 90 mins of an airport.

yes it was - and still is - tied to the ability to reach an emergency airport if one engine fails

the A350 rating being over six hours, Airbus states that this enables the A350 to clock up an impressive 4,630 kilometers on a single engine,

on a related note
External Link/Members Only

[Watts.E.Dunn]

And an excellent explanation of how the wings don't come apart in flight!..

External Link/Members Only

[Gordon Bennett]

Fucking hate long haul flights.
In fact hate airports full stop.
Spent far too much of my life in either shithole airports or shitty airplanes.
Thoroughly glad.I don't have to get on a frigging airoplane for work ever again.

Yeah. Seemed so much simpler 10+ years ago. That "Shoe Bomber" cunt seemed to be catalyst for the implementation of 2hr delays at security and irritating restrictions on hand luggage.

I used to fly out of London City occasionally and you could arrive 15 mins before take off after online check-in. Even with normal holiday flights from my local regional airport I regularly arrived at airport under an hour before take off, you never had to worry about ludicrous queues eating time. Even if a bit of a queue had built up they'd come and get you out of the queue if your flight take off was imminent.

Nowadays I get a distinct feeling that Airports revel in the delays and stress they cause... they definitely like the idea of travellers kicking around the departure lounge bored witless for a couple of hours and driven to spending money on food, drink and random tat.

I'd already be tired and tetchy getting on the plane, so 15 more hours sat on that plane in the air would be torture.

I admire the engineering of these long-haul planes but the total door-to-door travel experience they bring just isn't for me.

[RedKettle]

Yeah. Seemed so much simpler 10+ years ago. That "Shoe Bomber" cunt seemed to be catalyst for the implementation of 2hr delays at security and irritating restrictions on hand luggage.

I used to fly out of London City occasionally and you could arrive 15 mins before take off after online check-in. Even with normal holiday flights from my local regional airport I regularly arrived at airport under an hour before take off, you never had to worry about ludicrous queues eating time. Even if a bit of a queue had built up they'd come and get you out of the queue if your flight take off was imminent.

Nowadays I get a distinct feeling that Airports revel in the delays and stress they cause... they definitely like the idea of travellers kicking around the departure lounge bored witless for a couple of hours and driven to spending money on food, drink and random tat.

I'd already be tired and tetchy getting on the plane, so 15 more hours sat on that plane in the air would be torture.

I admire the engineering of these long-haul planes but the total door-to-door travel experience they bring just isn't for me.

On this we are in agreement!!

[King Nuts]

Yeah. Seemed so much simpler 10+ years ago. That "Shoe Bomber" cunt seemed to be catalyst for the implementation of 2hr delays at security and irritating restrictions on hand luggage.

I used to fly out of London City occasionally and you could arrive 15 mins before take off after online check-in. Even with normal holiday flights from my local regional airport I regularly arrived at airport under an hour before take off, you never had to worry about ludicrous queues eating time. Even if a bit of a queue had built up they'd come and get you out of the queue if your flight take off was imminent.

Nowadays I get a distinct feeling that Airports revel in the delays and stress they cause... they definitely like the idea of travellers kicking around the departure lounge bored witless for a couple of hours and driven to spending money on food, drink and random tat.

I'd already be tired and tetchy getting on the plane, so 15 more hours sat on that plane in the air would be torture.

I admire the engineering of these long-haul planes but the total door-to-door travel experience they bring just isn't for me.

You're right in that in the old days (pre 2001) you could fetch up at an airport much closer to the departure time. In the 1990s I used LHR Terminal 1 quite a bit, and it was advertised as a 10-minute check in for hand baggage only and for domestic and Ireland flights. I put it to the test many times, successfully.

The problem with 'security' is that once some kind of intrusive, time-consuming and labour-intensive process is introduced, there are too many vested interests in keeping it going. It'll be years before we can go back to a 10-minute check-in, and we most likely never will do.

Airport 'security', like Covid 'prevention' measures, is a big business. Employs thousands and earns millions. And you can never entirely prove or even disprove that any of it actually works.

And we only need one more shoe-bomber type of twat, and it'll be two steps back again.