How long-haul travel will change post-Covid

[reader]

From the BBC

Australian flag carrier Qantas made history recently by ferrying passengers nonstop between South America and Australia. The aeroplane – a Boeing 787 Dreamliner – departed Buenos Aires shortly past noon local time. Some 9,300 miles (14.973km) and 17-plus hours later, QF 14 landed in Darwin.

In doing so, the carrier set two internal records: longest distance covered and longest time in the air for a commercial flight. Captain Alex Passerini, who commanded QF 14, later said: "Qantas has always stepped up to a challenge, especially when it comes to long-haul travel, and this flight is an excellent example of the capabilities and attention to detail of our flight planning team."

Contrary to popular belief, flying for so many hours isn't entirely new. In the 1930s, Pan Am jets hopscotched across the Pacific Ocean with regularity. Passengers on board the Honolulu clipper could expect 20-hour flight times when shuttling between Hawaii and the continental United States. Qantas followed suit a decade later. In 1943, the Flying Kangaroo launched service between Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and Australia, its flying boats taking up to 33 hours to complete the trip. Passengers who did were subsequently admitted to "The Rare and Secret Order of the Double Sunrise", so named because of the two sunrises they would see during the trip.

The 21st Century has seen the long-haul, nonstop trend continue. In 2004, Singapore Airlines made headlines when it launched service between New York and Singapore; a 9,500-plus mile (15,289km) haul that can – depending on prevailing winds – take up to 19 hours. Less punishing (though not by much) is Qatar Airways’ Doha to Auckland, New Zealand service which clocks in at 9,000 miles (14,484km). Passengers on board the Boeing 777 cross 10 time zones and virtually the entire length of the Indian Ocean, continental Australia, and the Tasman Sea before arriving in the City of Sails. Trip time? 18 hours. Similar feats of flight are expected later this year when United and American Airlines launch services between the United States and India.

Continues at

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220513-how-long-haul-travel-will-change-post-covid

[TotallyOz]

I use to take the NYC to Bangkok non-stop and LOVED it. It was always busy but shut down as the airline said they didn't make much money as they could not carry as much cargo.

[PeterRS]

14 hours ago, TotallyOz said:

I use to take the NYC to Bangkok non-stop and LOVED it. It was always busy but shut down as the airline said they didn't make much money as they could not carry as much cargo.

The problem with TG's non-stop NYC service was that it had purchased 6 of the long range 4-engine Airbus A340-600s especially to serve its USA routes to NYC and LAX. Apart from its inability to carry  much cargo, with a mix of business and economy seats the aircraft had to sell most of the seats to break even. It never did. A bit like the A380, it was the wrong aircraft at the wrong time. Almost as soon as the long distance version was being manufactured, changes in the ETOPS regulations meant that cheaper twin jets like the 777 were thereafter able to fly across the Pacific. The massive increase in fuel price around 2008 then all but killed it.

For many years TG tried to sell its A340 fleet without success. They are not listed on its present fleet but it is believed TG still owns them and they are stored at U-tapao airport.

[fedssocr]

Actually they were A340-500s. Used too much fuel and not enough seats. I think the Thai AF has at least one in their VIP fleet. I did the JFK trip once. But since I am not in NY I had to take a connecting flight anyway. So it makes a lot more sense for me to connect in Tokyo or Seoul from Washington to break the trip up better.

Singapore is flying between NY and Singapore but I think they're using a plane with mostly premium class seats which isn't feasible to Thailand.

[reader]

The A350 is the daily nonstop but Singapore also flies an A380 out of New York that stops in Frankfurt. It was just about full when I flew it this week.

[fedssocr]

3 minutes ago, reader said:

The A350 is the daily nonstop but Singapore also flies an A380 out of New York that stops in Frankfurt. It was just about full when I flew it this week.

the A380 or the A350? I did SIN-FRA-JFK on the 380 several years ago. That was definitely the long way around...but at least I was in a suite.

[PeterRS]

It's interesting how airlines were all but desperate to get rid of their A380s prior to covid but several have now taken some of theirs out of mothballs with the substantial uptick in travel demand. I know SIA, BA and Qatar have done so. I believe Emirates continued to fly them on some routes even during the pandemic.

[fedssocr]

China Southern is operating their A380s to LAX (at least). I thought I saw that QANTAS is putting theirs in service too?

[reader]

On 5/19/2022 at 6:47 AM, fedssocr said:

the A380 or the A350? I did SIN-FRA-JFK on the 380 several years ago. That was definitely the long way around...but at least I was in a suite.

The A350 performs the nonstop service between JFK and SIN. Now that it’s avoiding. Russian airspace the duration can be as much as 19 hours. depending on winds aloft.

The 380 is filling the seats with Euro-bound and Asian bound travelers. As others have pointed out, Singapore has positioned itself ideally to provide efficient point-to-point and conventional routing through passenger rich heart of Europe. And it’s completive pricing in all classes is filling the seats.    

My mid-day arrival was swift and efficient. With no checked luggage, I made it from sky bridge to City Line train in about 20 minutes, most of it a welcome stroll through the sorely missed familiarity of Swampy (and I say that with affection). The ride up the escalator at Silom was a near emotional experience after a 26-month period of deprivation.

[Guest]

18 hours ago, reader said:

The A350 performs the nonstop service between JFK and SIN. Now that it’s avoiding. Russian airspace the duration can be as much as 19 hours. depending on winds aloft.

I thought these ultra long haul flights tended to prove uneconomic during previous periods of high oil prices, due to the cost of flying the fuel.   Now, not ruling out either outcome:

Either I'm wrong, or such flights will become uneconomic as oil prices increase, following low investment in new oil production (for environmental reasons). 

 

18 hours ago, reader said:

My mid-day arrival was swift and efficient. With no checked luggage, I made it from sky bridge to City Line train in about 20 minutes, most of it a welcome stroll through the sorely missed familiarity of Swampy (and I say that with affection). The ride up the escalator at Silom was a near emotional experience after a 26-month period of deprivation.

More deprivation than ideal, but welcome back and I thoroughly approve of using the train.   

Extra points for no checked luggage.    I think you're in an elite group who go to Thailand with only carry on bags (along with Vinapu).   

Even I check a bag for Thailand, but it's a 15kg rucksack, so I'm fairly mobile. 

I do just carry on bags for short haul trips in Europe.  I've got as far as thinking about it for Thailand. 

 

[reader]

You raise a good point about the economics of operating a low passenger load flight under current conditions: I’d hazard a guess that Singapore it going to test how much premium passengers are willing to pay for convenience.

One big advantage of that particular route is the proliferation of well-heeled customers at both ends. Couple that with the carrier’s reputation for excellence and it becomes a case of if anyone can pull it off it’s probably Singapore.

[PeterRS]

On 5/21/2022 at 4:17 AM, z909 said:

I thought these ultra long haul flights tended to prove uneconomic during previous periods of high oil prices, due to the cost of flying the fuel.

I remember years ago being told by someone in the airline industry that a full 747-400 flying from Asia to Europe will burn off 25% of its fuel just to reach cruising altitude - i.e. in less than first 25 minutes. But the more efficient design of the 787s and A350s and their having 2 engines rather than 4 no doubt make them a good deal more fuel efficient.

[ggobkk]

As a sidebar to this topic, it's a challenge to find a flight from the west coast of the US to Thailand that flies across the Pacific.  I should note there are some but with very high prices or long layover.  Most of the routings suggested would send me to Frankfurt or Vienna to layover and catch a flight on Thai to Bangkok.  Adds several hours to my past travel times.  I can handle that but the connection from Europe to Thailand has a high probability of cancellation.

[vinapu]

8 hours ago, ggobkk said:

As a sidebar to this topic, it's a challenge to find a flight from the west coast of the US to Thailand that flies across the Pacific.  I should note there are some but with very high prices or long layover.  Most of the routings suggested would send me to Frankfurt or Vienna to layover and catch a flight on Thai to Bangkok.  Adds several hours to my past travel times.  I can handle that but the connection from Europe to Thailand has a high probability of cancellation.

In meantime Thailand is still waiting for your arrival so better rush up

[ggobkk]

On 5/23/2022 at 4:00 AM, vinapu said:

In meantime Thailand is still waiting for your arrival so better rush up

After I read  your report I'll finalize plans.  

[vinapu]

1 hour ago, ggobkk said:

After I read  your report I'll finalize plans.  

Glad to be an inspiration! 

[fedssocr]

On 5/22/2022 at 10:45 PM, ggobkk said:

As a sidebar to this topic, it's a challenge to find a flight from the west coast of the US to Thailand that flies across the Pacific.  I should note there are some but with very high prices or long layover.  Most of the routings suggested would send me to Frankfurt or Vienna to layover and catch a flight on Thai to Bangkok.  Adds several hours to my past travel times.  I can handle that but the connection from Europe to Thailand has a high probability of cancellation.

I wonder if that is due to restrictions in East Asia still being up while Europe is more open so there aren't as many flight options through Asia. Since European airlines can't overfly Russia they might be taking longer routes as well.

[Sherlocked]

Hello everyone! I had a question about recent flight prices, that I'd be grateful if someone could answer :). I know it's slightly off-topic for this thread, but I didn't know where else to put it. Just joined this website over the weekend, so I'm still trying to figure things out.

My question was - have the frequent flyer members on this forum noticed a significant increase in flight prices due to the war and resulting rise in oil prices globally? I'm in Canada right now, and was looking to fly down to Texas to visit family, but I'm not sure on whether I should wait it out now and fly later. I'm not a frequent flyer, so don't really have an idea of what normal prices were for this route. If it's too expensive right now due to the war, I'll postpone my trip till things settle down. Thank you!

[vinapu]

9 hours ago, Sherlocked said:

 

My question was - have the frequent flyer members on this forum noticed a significant increase in flight prices due to the war and resulting rise in oil prices globally?

yes, if cost me 20% more to fly to BKK in May-low season than in December 2021 high season

[macaroni21]

It's going to be tricky drawing conclusions from experiences of members flying long haul routes from Europe or North America to Asia, when one is planning a Canada to Texas trip. There are innumerable factors that can impact pricing of Asia routes that may not apply to intra-North America routes. One that I can immediately think of is the re-routing many airlines have had to make to avoid Russian airspace. Another is the fact that travel into and around Asia only resumed quite recently, whereas in the US, it never really plunged to the same degree. The weak passenger demand of late 2021 would have meant depressed prices, and consequently today's prices may look high simply because one is comparing against a low base.

By sheer chance, I took a number of intra-US flights in April and May. I may be able to give you a different perspective. I pulled up data on what I had paid, then checked for prices of the same flights for July period, taking care to match day of week and avoid holidays. The July prices varied considerably from the prices I had paid, but on average, they are 20 to 25 percent more. 

That having been said, there are all sorts of deals available, and if one shops around on Expedia, etc, one can even get lower prices today compared to what I had paid. Most, though, would involve flights at unpopular hours.

 

[Guest]

I had a quick look at prices last week.   

Some airlines are more expensive than recently and more expensive than before covid.   In particular, some of the Premium Economy prices were a lot higher.

However, there are still cheap indirect options from the UK to Thailand, with acceptable airlines and stopover times.    That included going via Helsinki, which must have one of the worst detours around Russia and Ukraine for European flights to Thailand.  

[alvnv]

The airfares in the US - both, $ and FF miles - increased dramatically. Some blame crew shortages with resumed busy Summer travel, combined with higher oil prices. FF miles required tripled for international travel to Asia, as well as Europe. $ increased from 25% to 75% for premium cabins (business and first).

[vinapu]

2 hours ago, alvnv said:

The airfares in the US - both, $ and FF miles - increased dramatically. Some blame crew shortages with resumed busy Summer travel, combined with higher oil prices. FF miles required tripled for international travel to Asia, as well as Europe. $ increased from 25% to 75% for premium cabins (business and first).

market economy at work

[reader]

I think worldwide inflation is already taking its took on the long haul travel market. Carriers are beginning to acknowledge that fare increases are having negative effect on bookings 2-4 months out. They’re finding just how much the consumer is willing to pay, especially for premium seats. 
 

This creates a cash flow problem in the near term. Airlines are caught in an ever tightening bind due to rapidly rising fuel prices. In the past they relied on hedging but that runs the risk of committing to higher prices now without knowing if world events might result in change in fuel costs going forward.

From the customer point a view, there appears to be a window of opportunity to find promotional fares now for travel in the fall.

[Sherlocked]

On 6/7/2022 at 9:06 PM, vinapu said:

yes, if cost me 20% more to fly to BKK in May-low season than in December 2021 high season

I was originally planning on travelling to Bangkok and Chiang Mai later this month, but put my travel plans on hold because of the recent monkeypox scare and cases increasing globally. Then I thought of visiting relatives in Texas instead, but the prices have my head spinning!