Originally Posted by
RipCityFlyer
I believe the OP asked about the efficiency of flying a plane, not the profitability of a commercial flight. At least that was my impression.
Exactly. You use more at the beginning and less as you go on. Not sure how you're disproving my point. Certainly not saying I can't be wrong, but I'm not sure how that proves it.
If some intermediate range was more efficient that the maximum, why don't all of these long haul flights stop somewhere along the way to take advantage of it?
Because the economics of fuel burn aren't the only factor with ultra-longhauls. Airlines operating ULH's are working in and balancing several factors. Airlines that are operating the ULHs command a premium in fare that offsets the economics of two shorter flights because the travelers on those flights values time and convenience over the cost of the ticket (ie, they'll pay more for the ULH nonstop because of the time they'll save over the time lost due to connecting at some intermediary point). Even if it would be "more efficient" in terms of fuel burn to incur a fuel-stop along the way, such a stop would cause the flight to lose much of its value over other options, thus not commanding the fare premium. Of course, economic factors are constantly changing and hence why SQ is discontinuing it's ULH's of SIN-EWR/LAX.