The AKL Thread
 

This NZHerald article describes a possible QR nonstop DOH-AKL flight.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=11580263

Is this feasible ?

It's within the 772LR range. May have a penalty depending on temp/winds during seasons.

The aircraft can handle it, but can the Y passengers. The smells from the lavs, meal trash and passenger B.O. will be overwelming after 18 hours.

In my younger years I flew in the back of a Boeing 707 for many 18 hour flights (in-air refuled) and it was always a wear on the body. I now limit my flights to 6 hours in Y or 14 hours in J. If travel requires longer flights, I work in a stopover.

Possibly an interesting option as one who travels from LHR to AKL occasionally. I could not understand why its 18 or more hours. DOH to SYD is 14 or slightly less. SYD to AKL is 3 hours or a bit less. So I would have thought a flight DOH to AKL would be approx. 16 (still a long flight) or is it that the plane is slower through the journey from extra fuel (doesn't sound right)

I think modern aircraft can handle this better than the 707s. I think the lavs will be cleaned halfway, and wastes will be stored outside the cabin I assume in a sealed container.

And the 18hrs flight is on the westward flight, when it is a night flight it will be a very long night.
But, indeed, for Y passengers a stop in SIN would be more relaxing.

Also being discussed here:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/qatar...l#post26087452

Would an A380 have the legs to fly this route?

Not without significant penalty at current standard 3/4 class configurations.

What is "penalty" meaning in this sense? Weight reduction and therefore reduced pax capacity?

Yes there are "penalty" calculations based on winds, temperatures-climate conditions, cargo & passenger loads. For a route like this the airline would have to reduce the weight of the plane by variable amounts of cargo (huge profit center) or passengers to allow the plane to cover the distance in the current conditions + minimum safe distance requirements.

And then EK nip in and add a non-stop DXB-AKL flight using a 77L from 01 March!

(Block time 15:55 + 17:15)

EK448 DXB AKL 1005 1000+1
EK449 AKL DXB 2020 0535+1

Shots fired!

:eek: How many EK planes does AKL see every day?!

I am honestly positively worried for Y pax on these routes, especially since EK and QR are going to set a run-of-the-mill 77L over. Even SQ's crazy route to Newark had much better seats back in those days (either the 100 Js, or the Executive Economy with wider seats and better width at the very least!)

I believe it will be 4 - non-stop & 3 via MEL, SYD & BNE.

There are more chances of me swimming to New Zealand than flying on one of EK's 10 across 777's for 17 hours :D

But it makes a lot of sense I suppose - even with the 9 1/2 hours on the ground in AKL. Considering the LR's hold about 100 less than some of EK's 777-200's there can't be many routes that are ideal for the LR's. This and PTY I guess.

War is declared =)

QR's proposed AKL service will make it the longest in the world (if indeed they decide on it). DOH is slightly farther than DXB to AKL.

The Block Time would be almost 16:15 + 17:45 (YIKES!). The super business class better be there!

Well, such ULH flights have a disadvantage:

* extra crew set required: 2 pilots + 10 (stewardesses / pursers) who take 10-12 extra seats otherwise paid for and costs another 1200kg of non paying weight (crew + luggage). A single set of crew is not going to be on duty for 17 hours.
* more fuel to transport, which requires even more fuel to transport, totally several extra tons
* pax have to be feed for 17 hours instead of 10 which requires more load
* loos get dirty, particularly in Y, unless cleaned halfway in flight.
* food and loo waste kept on the plane for a long time

The EK448/449 is just an answer to QR's announcement, but does it really take place ? The EK251/252 to PTY is already postponed to Mar 31.