Singapore Air Takes Delivery of Jet for World's Longest Flight | Hacker News Reader

Singapore Air Takes Delivery of Jet for World's Longest Flight

bloomberg.com

37 pointstzury36 comments

My ancestors, not so many generations ago, got on a boat to the other side of the world not even sure how long it would take (75 to 120 days) or if they would get there: it's extraordinary to me that I can do the same journey 2 or 3 times a year, in 26 hours: 17 hours from Auckland to Dubai, 2 hour wait, 7 hours to London.

I fly a lot between hemispheres and I have to say, I LOVE the long range flights rather than being interrupted after 12 hours in Singapore then having to mentally prepare for another 12 hours. I prefer to just sink into myself on the 17 hour flight and then be excited for "only" another 7 hours. The day I can fly direct from Auckland to London I'll be delighted.

SpaceX will fulfill your dream soon. And, only they can do it - fly to anywhere in the world in less than 30 mins

Probably not even as comfortable(!) as a plane, however.

I'm not sure about you, but I think I can pretty easily deal with non-luxury accommodations for 30 minutes.

You will need to wear your high-G suits for that flight.

Agree with this, assuming price and risk of death are within reason.

For 30 minutes, I can just take some sleeping pills and be done with it, really.

Why? Source?

Rocket out of atmosphere, circle globe at ungodly speeds, fall back down to the ground.

Sure. It’s fast. But your body is gonna be pissed about it for awhile.

Auckland to London won’t happen - new Airbuses don’t yet cut it. But they can do Berlin, Istanbul or Copenhagen.

> Auckland to London won’t happen

Well I’m sure they said that about transatlantic flight at one point.

I’m sure it’ll happen one day.

Are there any technical reason why this can't be done? Surely it is a business issue? ( Not enough Long Route with passengers that justify developing a special plane for this purpose )

Current A350-900 range is 9700nm[0] which is ~1000km short of London. I doubt that there's going to be enough interest for that route alone.

0: https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/news/en/2018/09/ultra-long-r...

Interesting side note (for me anyway, or for any aviation or geography nerds or budding "Action" Jack Barkers out there): If they adhere to the shortest Great Circle distance, they'll be going north almost directly over the pole. (Because the two cities are almost 180º of longitude apart.) The flight will likely track north across SE Asia, China, Mongolia, Siberia, the Arctic Ocean, then south through Greenland, Canada, Upstate New York and finally New Jersey.

One article said that they choose the route based on the prevailing winds. If you look at the route that SQ21 takes compared to SQ22 you can see that EWR-SIN is the route you said but the reverse is over the north Pacific/Canada.

Interesting. Makes sense - the jetstream has enough of an effect that it's worth it to go a little out of the way, just to have an eastward component to your vector, Victor.

Found this kinda cool site... what came next will shock you! Just kidding, not affiliated with them:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SIA21

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SIA22

I’m just wondering if this will increase efficiency therefore reducing environmental impact, or whether it will drive demand therefore cancelling any reduction in resource consumption. Air travel is one of the worst offenders in terms of environmental impact (next to shipping... what the hell is wrong with people wanting unripe kiwis or wine shipped from the antipodes when we could - or rather should - regain touch with our surroundings and consume whatever local products the season has to offer!?)

It's less efficient than stopping half way as you have to lug more fuel and less passenger. So not a win environmentally.

Surely cruising is more efficient than landing and taking off again? I would have thought a significant volume is fuel is spent on the takeoff, and it’s burnt over an inhabited area.

For long enough flights, the one-time costs of descending, re-fueling, and climbing back to cruising altitude are worth it to reduce the continuing cost of the additional weight during cruise.

OTOH, they are moving way less passengers. We need to do some math

I live in Singapore, I love New York, I wanted to visit LA sometime next year too - I couldn’t be more excited for this!

I was surprised to see this flight was using an airbus plane. I remember the time when airbus choose the strategy of big huge planes going from hubs to hubs with the A380, and boeing decided to go for long distance direct flights. The second strategy seemed much better to me, and indeed i think the A380 isn't seeling that well.

It seems that it took them only a few years to catch up, and here we are, with airbus offering the best long distance flight plane. That's definitely a great company.

https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iDdGphMz2nP...

Does anyone else think something looks off about this picture? The left engine seems unusually large.

It was taken with a long zoom lens, which makes objects along the axis of the lens look closer together.

Modern high efficiency airliner jets have very large fan blades on the front of the jet. Here's an info sheet on the engine https://www.rolls-royce.com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/docu...

Also mentioned the efficiency comes partly from being able to run the combustion at 2000K which would melt metal parts but they handle it with a ceramic coating. That's been a bit of a limit on jets - if you crank them too high the middle bits melt.

Wow, finally. Can't wait for London to Sydney, which apparently is coming in the next few years. https://www.ft.com/content/fcd01444-bc01-11e8-94b2-17176fbf9...

Toilets in the flight will be absolutely filthy during the last few hours of the flight.

There will only be ~160 passengers sharing 6 toilets, should be better than average for long hauls.

Toilet use is definitely linear in respect to time in my experience. 9 hour flight is very different from 12 hours. Many people want to 'hold it' but longer the flight less of them will.

The cabin crew can clean them in flight.

The flight attendants don't clean the toilets during the flight. They may do some tidying up but it depend on the carrier. Probably something to do with the hygiene during the flight because they are also serving the food.

Maybe they could switch clothes and scrub themselves well, but it seems that it's not just done.

I think they can have one crew dedicated for cleaning. Long flights might save extra amount on transit fees and other charges for shifting luggages etc. They can use that for additional crew!

Uhh. Plastic Gloves?

It's possible this is true of some airlines, but it is not true in general.

I know cabin crew on two different airlines and cleaning the toilets during the flight is part of the job.

This is 100% untrue for every long-haul carrier I’ve travelled on.

I take it you've never flown Singapore Airlines. In business, each toilet is cleaned every time a passenger uses it, and economy isn't far behind.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com