Originally Posted by
cyclogenesis
My view: A medium long followed by a short is the most painful option..
I am happy to split a trip into equal-ish parts especially if I have lounge access in the middle..
Case in point is that dreaded LAX-ORD after my SYD-LAX.. the 13 hours has broken my soul and the 4 hours on a domestic leg with all the fun of being on a narrow body finishes me off
That said, there are many factors: Good airports, equipment (RJ = no thanks) A direct on a modern widebody trumps two narrow bodies any day (eg 777 vrs 757+757)
I'd concur. I once did Durban to Johannesburg (just the warm up at 2 hours) followed by Johannesburg to London Heathrow (a quick 10 hours) and then jumped straight onto a plane from Heathrow to Dallas that 'only' took 12 hours, mainly due to strong headwinds. Then a hop from Dallas to Austin at 40 minutes. It didn't help that BA and AA had exactly the same IFE menu but the worst was it was all in coach and it was packed solid on both flights. Somewhere over Greenland I had a very strong desire to get off the plane.
Back to the OP, I think this totally depends on whether you are up front or in the back. I could endure almost any duration if I am able to turn, sleep, read and eat (i.e in the front). Being on the plane doesn't bother me at all. So in summary if you are in coach I'd split it, if you are in Business/First, I'd go direct, non-stop.