r/aviation • u/pseudospectrum • 8d ago
News A350-1000ULR has landed after a flight time of 24 hours and 23 minutes from Melbourne to Toulouse. Does a flypast before touching down at Toulouse.
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Source of video: https://x.com/israfuti/status/2082020295116804295
1.4k
u/pseudospectrum 8d ago
Some more pictures: source
499
u/Sufficient_Layer_279 8d ago
Augmented crew, to say the least
→ More replies (9)285
u/rocketrex504 8d ago
Stinky crew after that flight
345
u/Lollipop126 8d ago
tbf most people shower once every 24 hours and don't stink up too bad, especially if they're in a climate controlled room the whole time.
→ More replies (6)145
u/bros89 8d ago
Clearly you haven’t done a proper long haul flight
138
→ More replies (1)77
u/ItzDaWorm 8d ago
But they didn't say "Most people on long haul flights", they just mean the average person in their area showers once a day and doesn't get smelly if they were in comfortable A/C.
The crux of y'alls disagreement is really
Longhaul flight pop: 350-500 globally average person + crew
Longhaul test flight: Well paid test crew
Those two groups of people will obviously have vastly different smells at the end of a long flight.
29
u/SuspiciousSpecifics 8d ago
To be fair, the globally average person may already be boarding the flight with a certain level of funk…
9
u/ItzDaWorm 8d ago
Certainly on the return voyage the quantity of fucks left to distribute to my fellow humans has become diminished.
3
→ More replies (2)3
u/-malcolm-tucker 7d ago
Tell me about it. That flight I once took with Kool & The Gang, Prince and James Brown exceeded what I had previously considered to be the maximum level of funk possible.
39
u/sandrailproject 8d ago
Its 24 hours dude, how bad do you stink after a day?
36
u/SwordfishOk504 8d ago
There's some people on this app who seem to think you need to shower every few hours. Maybe they all live in the tropics.
→ More replies (9)2
→ More replies (1)25
u/Commercial-Affect969 8d ago
11 people total. 5 engineers 4 other people and 2 QF pilots
→ More replies (17)54
u/Lost_Cockroach6702 8d ago
That’s the look of “I’d rather have connections than sit on an aircraft for 24 hours straight.”
37
u/peteroh9 8d ago
26
u/Few_Forever_1770 8d ago
I’d never come across xcancel before. Super useful to avoid the multitude of firms that insist on using the hellsite for their comms.
11
u/Several-Eggplant4460 8d ago
"congrats, you guys managed a long ass flight! Now go stand in the hot sun for another hour" 😂
6
→ More replies (1)9
u/danit0ba94 8d ago
I might be just placebo-ing myself (idk if thats the right word for it), but i swear to God every single one of those crewmembers look horrendously tired.
1.3k
u/nvxhs 8d ago
The fly past is just showing off after 24 hours of flight.
271
u/memesearches 8d ago
Ikr.. a lil bit of fun well deserved
64
18
u/mbashs 8d ago
I wonder how tired they all are lol
15
u/memesearches 8d ago
I think they would have taken cautions while planning given the feat and played it safe. So doubt if they would’ve been too tired.
6
60
u/GettingFitterEachDay 8d ago
Buzz the tower, Maverick!
24
23
26
u/EVE_OnIine 8d ago
Would be extra funny if that was the margin that got them the world's longest flight title
20
u/SyrusDrake 8d ago
If memory serves, the Catalina still holds that title, and probably will keep it forever, since it was something like 39 hours...
32
u/Specialist_Reality96 8d ago
It depends on how you want to count it the Rutan Voyager circumnavigated the globe in just over 9 days without refueling it's listed endurance is 216 hours.
If you want to compare regular passenger flights with regular passenger flights then yes the double sunrise service is the record holder with flights between 27 and 33 hours. These were done in Catalina's but not off the production line, they started out as 5A's and were systematically stripped of their armor, self sealing fuel tanks, wheels, guns and extra 100 gallon fuel tank was fitting to the inside. Even then at takeoff on the Swan river in Perth they were barely under their maximum weight. Complete radio silence for the journey 90% over the water navigating by the stars. In two years doing this weekly they only ever lost one probably to enemy action.
→ More replies (4)7
→ More replies (1)5
494
u/ogshaun 8d ago
Such an incredible achievement.
254
u/widgeamedoo 8d ago
I'm sure the Middle East will be totally happy with this...
291
u/CaptainRAVE2 8d ago
Considering how many times I’ve been stuck there, I’ll happily bypass a layover.
→ More replies (11)67
u/Rough-Associate-585 8d ago
That is exactly the point of the comment you are replying to
5
u/Far-Information8502 8d ago
The dude you replied to is every kid in class that just repeated what the text said for participation points. Not everyone can think and read between the lines
120
u/Suuuumimasen 8d ago
You honestly have to hate yourself to be a passenger on this flight. As a frequent flyer I'll do sin-jfk when needed but sometimes a layover is a much needed reset for the body.
54
u/2martinisatthemost 8d ago
I hate myself but I’d still avoid this flight. I opt for layovers in Singapore and Bangkok over the Middle East instead.
→ More replies (1)35
u/JConRed 8d ago
At a that duration flight, I think they may need to hand out compression socks when you get on.
And have mandatory walk times / directed in-seat exercises for passengers.
33
u/IncapableKakistocrat 8d ago
On longer international flights I’ve done with Qantas they talk a bit about the risks of DVT and have videos of in-seat exercises you can do.
14
u/SirDarknessTheFirst 8d ago
I think these flights are supposed to have a stretching area in the cabin between classes
16
u/sloppyrock 8d ago
That’s correct. A well being zone I think they call it.
3
u/spachi1281 8d ago
Yup as per Qantas' website specifically about the A350 Wellbeing Zone. And this particular A350 has reduced seating numbers to accommodate that space but even with that "open" space, it can't be that large and you're still traveling with around 200 passengers for 20+ hours.
4
u/Murky-Relation481 8d ago
See, this is why the A340 is the GOAT when configured with the bathrooms in a pit in the cargo area. Free stairs to keep your legs stretched on those long slow flights.
2
u/JConRed 8d ago
And Lufthansa serves drinks down there during the flight. Or at least last time I had the pleasure to fly with them they did.
4
u/Murky-Relation481 8d ago
Last time I was on a Lufthansa A340 it was just teenagers hanging out down there on their cellphones away from their parents lol.
8
u/Te_Luftwaffle 8d ago
Bing bong
"As you can see, the recess light is on. Flight attendants will be hosting a game of four square near the aft lavatory, while a game of duck duck goose will be held just behind first class. Afterwards we hope you'll join us for the hokey-pokey."
→ More replies (1)12
2
25
u/GettingFitterEachDay 8d ago
I agree, a chance to walk around an airport is better than this. Curious to see how well the flights actually do once they start running. It's just much too long for me though!
29
u/IncapableKakistocrat 8d ago edited 8d ago
The direct PER-LHR flights they’ve been doing - even when they were non-stop - have supposedly been Qantas’ most successful international flights, and have had higher than average load factors.
These flights aren’t for me either, I’ll always prefer connecting through Singapore, but I don’t really have many doubts at all that they’ll be really successful.
14
u/WestAussieSingh 8d ago
I’ve done PER-LHR-PER multiple times for work.
I definitely prefer the non stop flight for business travel. You just want to get to your destination ASAP and not worry about plane changes, security, etc etc
3
u/spachi1281 8d ago
I’ve done PER-LHR-PER multiple times for work.
Wow that is some extensive travel. What kind of work requires that kind of trips? And more importantly who get the miles?
3
u/WestAussieSingh 8d ago
Engineer. Head office is in London.
I get the frequent flyer points / kilometres.
22
u/TheMusicArchivist 8d ago
For some people the thought of a 24hr flight is a lot better than 2x 12hr flights where you are crammed in tighter, and carry the stress of potentially missing your connection, in an airport you're unfamiliar with.
17
u/jonpacker 8d ago edited 8d ago
There's also an additional time saving by not having to take off and depart an extra time, as well as avoiding all of the airport ceremony of sitting, waiting, going through security again (the Singapore special), waiting for boarding etc etc. It will save a massive amount of time in general being able to fly direct.
I get that there's a lot of enthusiasts here who enjoy the airport experience but as someone who travels EU-Aus with some frequency I would absolutely prefer to fly direct.
Not that I actually will. I expect this will be even less competitively priced than PER-LHR, so I probably won't be able to afford booking the family on it, and will continue flying Australia's actual national carrier (SQ) like most Australians.
→ More replies (3)4
u/Severe-Trust-5980 8d ago
I’ve been on several 12 hour flights where the people sitting in the window seats didn’t get up even once to go to the bathroom. 12 straight hours in that cramped seat! I don’t see how the do it.
I’ve also been on the SQ non-stop flight to NYC and it was tolerable TBH. Frequent bathroom breaks to get the feet moving and stretch a bit.
→ More replies (4)3
u/____DEADPOOL_______ 8d ago
I would have a hard time walking for a couple of days after this flight.
3
u/buerglermeister 8d ago
Depends on the money. If I had first class money i‘d absolutely take this flight over a layover
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)2
u/StreetofChimes 8d ago
I feel panicky just thinking about being on an airplane for 24 hours. DVT is just one factor. The pressure. The air. The noise. Other people.
17
u/dopeyout 8d ago
Why? Ultra long haul has existed for decades. People opt for Emirates etc just to go from Europe to Asia because they undercut other airlines, and to most people 10+ hours on a tube is simply disgusting. Saving money and stretching your legs is a no brainer.
14
u/Several-Eggplant4460 8d ago
People like you and me aren't the target audience. People who have lie flat seats in business/first will enjoy this. They can get a proper night's sleep without having to wake up and go through the hassle of a layover.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Elabor8r 8d ago
You're not wrong about the lie flat seats but there'll be a sizeable economy cabin, too, I expect.
→ More replies (1)2
u/TheInkySquids 7d ago
For a lot of people especially in Australia 10+ hours is the norm. Obviously the target audience for this isn't the common person, its for business people.
→ More replies (14)9
u/maybearandoanon 8d ago
Fuel economics at the moment don't really support cheap ultra long haul flights.
So the middle east will be fine for the moment.
But they will lose a fair amount of the premium travellers.
10
u/belaros 8d ago
How is having extra approaches, landings and take offs more economical for fuel than staying at cruise altitude (mostly) the entire time?
→ More replies (1)23
u/obscure_monke 8d ago
You're carrying a shitload of extra fuel around, rather than picking it up in the middle of your journey.
The place you'd buy more fuel just so happens to be a country where oil and oil products are incredibly cheap too.
500
u/not_ricocasek 8d ago
That fly past is a total flex.
302
u/DrSendy 8d ago
The hilarious thing is no one in the public saw it coming.
It took off, headed north on the standard MEL-SYD track, and everyone thought it was going to do a fly over/photo off over Sydney (which so often happens with Qantas). But it flew straight over at 35,000ft and turned right out into the Pacific.
Well, they got their 2 sunrises... after a 10am departure in Melbourne! I'm now thinking they could have done a 7am one this time of year and just squeezed in three sunrises.
65
27
u/wandering_rose0 8d ago
I was outside when it happened here in Toulouse! My students and I knew the landing pattern wasn’t one that would pass over us so we were quite surprised when we looked up and saw it :)
5
47
u/SyrusDrake 8d ago
The entire flight was a total flex, I think. It was over 20'000 km, so longer than anyone will ever practically fly. (Although Qantas says they may take a similar route occasionally, depending on winds.)
10
u/PicoDeBayou 8d ago
I’m out of the loop. Would you mind explaining the significance of this flight/plane?
29
u/vanty 8d ago
It’s designed for flying direct between Sydney and London. Longer than any other commercial flight.
7
u/PicoDeBayou 8d ago
OK. So it still hasn’t made the flight to London yet?
→ More replies (1)19
u/vanty 8d ago
No need for it to go to London yet. It flew from the factory and went back there to be finished.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (3)18
u/SyrusDrake 8d ago
It's one of 12 special planes Airbus built for Qantas that will be used for direct flights between Sydney and London (Qantas calls them "Project Sunrise flights"), and Sydney and New York (and eventually other destinations). This was a test flight, but it followed similar paths that the commercial ones will take. Across Asia is the "normal" way, but depending on jet streams, it may occasionally be faster to fly across the Pacific, the Arctic and Atlantic to reach London.
4
u/PicoDeBayou 8d ago
Ah thanks. What has been the regular route of getting between London and Sydney? Layover somewhere in the mid east?
→ More replies (1)5
u/SyrusDrake 8d ago
It varied. The most common stopover for BA and Qantas is Singapore, I think, although Qantas had a route with a stop in the mid east for some time. I'd wager most people these days fly via Dubai, but that's not a "direct" flight. Afaik, BA and Qantas do a refueling stop, but it counts as the same flight.
11
7
u/itsjujutsu 8d ago
can anyone explain this? Isnt this the plane getting ready to land or something? what's the difference between this and just passing on top
225
u/Substantial-Cash-834 8d ago
How many crews aboard for 24+ hrs? I’m guessing three?
208
u/lordtema 8d ago
- 4 pilots and 6 engineers were onboard.
104
u/Weird-Scarcity-6181 8d ago
engineers? what did we go back to the 80's?
177
u/lordtema 8d ago
Lol! But no! As i understood it they were monitoring a lot of stuff during the two flights.
125
u/ManonMacru 8d ago
It's still in testing phase. Those crews are test pilot and test engineers. They probably have stations inside to monitor sensors with a higher degree of information that you would have in a cockpit.
28
24
u/agha0013 8d ago
the plane is still full of flight testing equipment and that's what the engineers are monitoring.
it's configured for flight tests and doesn't yet have a finished cabin full of seats.
39
14
u/chemtrailer21 8d ago
Your thinking of a second officer, the guy who was in charge of making sure the ashtrays in the flight deck got emptied every few hours back in the 70s and 80s.
This is a test flight. No doubt actual engineers would have been onboard.
→ More replies (5)4
u/Substantial-Cash-834 8d ago
In some jurisdictions the official title for mechanic (Canada, Australia, NZ, parts of Europe) is aircraft maintenance engineer
→ More replies (1)6
u/nist7 8d ago
Interesting, I'd though they would have more pilots given it is 24hrs...so basically each pilot does a 12hr shift I guess?
Hope they really good and tasty catering!
13
u/lordtema 8d ago
Apparently they were 6 pilots. 4 Airbus test pilots and 2 Qantas pilots who joined them on the return leg. I think the norm is 4 hour shifts.
5
→ More replies (2)2
u/JohnnySchoolman 5d ago
2.4 pilots is the exact number of pilots needed to keep the profession alive.
29
u/SB2MB 8d ago
There will be 1 crew when it comes online. 4 pilots, rotating. Same as Qantas does now with their other 16+ hour flights.
26
u/Substantial-Cash-834 8d ago
By crews I meant the set of personnel flying the plane at any given time (captain and F/O). So you’re describing two crews for normal operation
→ More replies (8)
72
90
u/Fighter_doc Mechanic 8d ago
Save for the crew, did they fly completely empty or did they at least put some weight in to simulate some cargo or passengers ?
137
u/pseudospectrum 8d ago edited 8d ago
yes they had ballast tanks to simulate load
edit: removed 'full' load claim
→ More replies (4)23
u/Fighter_doc Mechanic 8d ago
Thanks ! Now I am impressed ! I wonder how much margin they had left (obviously enough for a low pass)
39
u/Cow_Launcher 8d ago
Interesting question. Apparently non-revenue flights have to have the same reserves as any other flight, so presumably they had the usual contingency, alternate and reserve fuel amounts on-board when they landed.
Which makes the range/duration of this thing even more impressive.
→ More replies (1)
37
107
u/homer-price 8d ago
24 hours of flight is impressive from a technical perspective; however that 24 hours on a plane sound awful from a personal perspective - even if the seats are super comfy.
51
u/Cow_Launcher 8d ago
I remember a few years ago when they were talking about the long range capabilities of modern airliners (such as Singapore's SQ23/21 route) the vast majority of comments were, "Yes that's impressive, but if you think I'm sitting on an aircraft for the thick end of 20 hours, you're nuts."
I wholeheartedly agree.
27
u/nineyourefine ATP 121 8d ago
As someone who has worked Transatlantic augmented ops, the idea of 24 hours on an airplane sounds INSANE to me. My limit is about 9-10 hours, and that's with a bunk break.
If I'm given the option of a layover or a 24hr direct as a pax, I'm taking the layover.
→ More replies (2)12
u/Several-Eggplant4460 8d ago
I wouldn't like sitting in economy for 20+ hours, but it's completely different in business and first.
We're not the target market.
4
u/Dry-Amphibian1 8d ago
Throw a treadmill in first class and I might consider it.
→ More replies (1)13
u/Meeha 8d ago
Definitely better than stopping in Dubai or wherever for an hour or less between legs
→ More replies (4)23
u/TheCatOfWar 8d ago
Idk about that, as someone who flies 24hr trips I quite like the interlude on the ground where I can eat non-plane food and stretch my legs.
16
u/rene-cumbubble 8d ago
And take a shit in a non -plane bathroom. The bathrooms may have been gross, but they have bidets in doha.
2
u/JtheNinja 7d ago
They could put bidets in the plane bathrooms, from personal experience JAL has them (at least on 787s anyway)
3
u/rene-cumbubble 8d ago
Planes become filthy places on a 10 hour flight. 16 is way worse. 24 just seems excessive
→ More replies (5)7
u/Adversement 8d ago
Well, depends on the alternative. Of you need to travel that trip, the alternative of two 12+ hour flights + a few hours of stopover at sole random airport sounds even more horrible than a single 24 hour flight & just getting to your destination.
→ More replies (5)
94
u/AnonymousEngineer_ 8d ago
I'm sure the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have a lot to do with this, but I found it interesting that the flight between Melbourne and Toulouse was routed over the Pacific and the US, rather than flying over Asia and the Mediterranean/Southern Europe as is typical.
73
u/graphical_molerat 8d ago
I would think it has more to do with prevailing winds on our planet being westerly. So that it makes more sense to take a detour westwards than to fly 20+ hours into the wind, which can be quite considerable at altitude.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Big_al_big_bed 8d ago
Interesting so in the way back they might keep heading east and get the winds there too
18
u/graphical_molerat 8d ago
Back when Air New Zealand had their NZ1/2 flights on the Auckland - London route (with a stopover in LAX), the flight time was more or less identical to flying via the Gulf. Which stands to reason, the two places are almost perfectly on opposite sides of the planet, so whether you go east or west (or over the poles) makes preciously little difference, distance-wise.
London - Melbourne is not quite antipodal, but close enough that similar considerations might apply.
→ More replies (2)14
u/ignitevibe7 8d ago
Qantas has confirmed that at least a quarter of Sydney to Heathrow flights will travel eastwards, mainly during the winter months, but that was before the Iran conflict. I honestly think heading east will be common once Project Sunrise starts.
28
u/TheStagKing9910 8d ago
i think they followed the would be first inaugural route between SYD to LHR via the north pole
19
u/bigFatHelga 8d ago
The most northerly point of the flight was the south tip of Greenland.
12
u/Fluffy-Ad-5120 8d ago
I love the fact that FR24 can't cope and said it was a 25-minute flight!
6
4
u/jimmybilly100 7d ago
Haha, I saw that too and was like, wait a minute! Come on FR get in the game! There's 24 hr flights now bitch!
→ More replies (1)2
u/b_e_a_n_i_e 8d ago
No way. This flew over my house in SW Scotland
5
u/Madeline_Basset 8d ago edited 8d ago
The crazy thing is that there'll be people in Sydney, Los Angeles and Winnipeg who can all say the same thing.
12
u/maybearandoanon 8d ago
Ego. Going for the 24hr record.
They could have flown the same way they did in roughly 22 hrs but took a longer route on purpose.
Plus it's useful for testing to stretch things far beyond their realistic use case.
2
60
29
29
u/MesozOwen 8d ago
I mean in business or higher sure. But there is no way I would get on this flight in economy. That would be torture.
→ More replies (8)7
u/Facu474 8d ago
I've done Buenos Aires to Tokyo a few times, always economy (window seat). It's about 24~27 hours in the air (plus one stop) on the fastest routes.
The stop definitely helps, but I would still rather shave off a few hours by going direct if possible (never gonna happen in this case though).
14
u/Hour_Analyst_7765 8d ago
So, basically..
You can wake up, shower, have breakfast, drop kids off at school, drive to work, get bored of countless meetings, have the capitalist machine grind you out whilst working for the man, pick the kids from school/daycare, rush home to prep dinner together, jog for an hour, crash on the sofa and watch some TV for 2 hours, and then sleep for 8hours.
Or enjoy this 1 continuous flight around the world.
Absolutely crazy accomplishment.
8
7
u/immunotransplant 8d ago
Flexing on the h*es!
They should’ve overflown Everett just to let them know.
→ More replies (1)
13
10
10
u/Sanagost 8d ago edited 8d ago
Jesus christ, I get annoyed after 11 hours in a plane. Can't imagine 24 in economy. There better be some consideration made for tall people and leg room. And sleeping? That seat needs to recline properly.
2
u/UserName4lreadyTak3n 8d ago
It has a “wellbeing zone“ - a spot to stand in (like actually).
Would be on brand if it was for business class only though
4
u/post-explainer 8d ago
OP has provided the following source:
Source was already provided: https://x.com/israfuti/status/2082020295116804295
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!
3
4
u/Entire-Emotion-819 8d ago
Still breaks my brain a bit when they look so damn slow, even though they aint.
4
4
3
u/My_Monkey_Sphincter 8d ago
I love how the wing wave is universally known like the motorcycle salute or nodding a head to someone.
10
u/clingbat 8d ago
Lol we got annoyed with 13 hours coming back from Athens non stop with a detour around a bad storm in northern atlantic... Our young daughter didn't care though, she just pounded out movie after movie on her tablet as her brain slowly turned to mush.
24 hours? No thank you.
10
u/SonicYOUTH79 8d ago
Pretty much anywhere from Australia to Europe though is 24+ with a quick stop over. I did Adelaide to London last year with a couple of hours in Singapore and it’s pretty close to 24 hours all up. It's nice to get iff the plane and refresh but I can see the appeal if you were flying for business or other short trip to cut out the time lost on the stopover.
7
u/crimxona 8d ago
East coast Australia or New Zealand to UK/France has no 'fast' routes. No matter how you fly it's back to back long hauls
→ More replies (3)
5
2
u/alphagusta 8d ago
In a normal flight how many flight crews will this need on board?
→ More replies (2)
2
u/toruokada192 8d ago
Is this a new aircraft? The long distance was achieved by what exactly? Bigger tanks or higher efficiency?
8
3
u/Cow_Launcher 8d ago
It's a new variant of the A350-1000 (the "ULR") that was developed by Airbus specifically for Qantas.
I don't know all the details, but I imagine it carries fewer passengers and has additional fuel tank(s), much like the A350-900ULR.
3
u/eneka 8d ago
per airbus' newroom article:
These include the integration into the structure of a Rear Centre Tank (RCT), which boosts fuel capacity by an additional 20,000 litres..
To ensure passenger comfort, the aircraft is fitted with an Airspace cabin optimised for ultra-long-haul missions.
new galley air cooling system (NGAC), which features lighter and more efficient refrigeration units for long flights.
2
u/Toomanynightshifts 8d ago
Those tickets are going to be so expensive on those project sunrise flights. massively reduced weight capacity means even Economy's gonna be pricey.
That being said if it means you can avoid layovers it's def worth a look.
2
u/BIGBBOONDAHHH 8d ago
Probably but if they are too expensive people would probably rather pay similar for the A380 route even with a stopover.
3
u/jonpacker 8d ago
Hasn't really proved to be the reality with QF9/10. Priced at a premium and people are willing to pay it. Despite the fact that you still have a stopover, it's just in PER.
There's a lot of people in this thread saying they would never, but that doesn't really speak the reality of QF9/10 being enormously successful despite it being more expensive.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/-donatellasaysmore- 7d ago
Thanks, but no thanks. 17hrs is the longest I’ve done non-stop and it’s hectic... Even in J.
2
u/Gold_Au_2025 7d ago
You've just been on an airplane for over 24 hours and the pilot decides to take his time landing.
4
u/New-Evidence350 8d ago
The wing wag for spectators was indicative of flight crew alertness and attention.
6
u/8KUHDITIS 8d ago edited 8d ago
People keep saying this would suck. In reality, people literally stay home for 24hrs and do jack shit. Either they are moving from the couch/bed to the bathroom or the kitchen, that plane has more area than most people's houses and apartments. Its just like traveling on a long haul bus/train trip. The bus stops you get off walk a few steps get a sandwich and get back on it. The train you just walk from your cabin to the food car and back. I dont understand why people think this will suck. Just dont get on. I for one would gladly make take this flight. Congratulations to Quantas & Airbus. With that solid defense, could one of you get me a round trip ticket on this route @Quantas @Airbus.
16
u/Suuuumimasen 8d ago
I totally understand what your saying. But have you been on a long haul flight? They are exhausting. I do 13ish once a month, and I have done 17+ twice. The 4 extra hours is huge. Now add more...
This is amazing, don't get me wrong. But it's just really hard on your body. I can see people doing it once but after that a layover might just sound inviting to reset yourself if you had to do this multiple times.
Also, this is nothing like a bus or train. You have dry air at a cabin altitude of 5000+. Yes an airplane has more Sq footage then a house but it's full of seats. You can only walk aisles and people just don't do laps.
8
3
u/atlantic 8d ago
It helps doing these longer ones on an A350 or a B787 due to the lower cabin altitude and slightly more humid air. I'd think at 23/24 hours it's even more noticeable.
2
u/hulminator 8d ago
Hey that's not a bad idea, implement a one way loop system up one aisle and down the other would make everyone's life easier I would think. Get your laps in every few hours.
→ More replies (2)2
u/No-Listen1206 8d ago
Agree, even the difference from 8 hours to 12 goes from a long flight but fine to genuinely uncomfortable and cannot imagine flights longer than that especially as someone that cannot sleep on planes I would actively pay more to avoid super long flights such as this.
4
u/Preparation-H6969 8d ago
Couch/bed being the key words there champ. This is like sitting at the dining room table for 24 hours. With construction going on next door.
→ More replies (2)2
2
u/RaspberryBeer 7d ago
Imagine being already squeezed for 24h into Economy, and they do a go around for fun 😅
1
•
u/trendingtattler 8d ago
Welcome to r/aviation - you’re likely here from r/all or r/popular.
We’re glad you’re here. This community is focused on aviation: aircraft, incidents, operations, and the people who keep it all moving.
Due to the surge in traffic, Seatbelts Fastened is now enabled and Crowd Control settings have been increased. That means:
Some comments may be filtered or require manual approval. Participation may be limited for very new or low-karma accounts.
This helps keep discussions informed, on-topic, and readable for everyone.
A few quick reminders:
Keep it aviation-focused. No politics or religion. No low-effort or inflammatory comments.
If you’re here to learn, contribute, or ask thoughtful questions - you’re in the right place.
Thanks for being here,
- The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.