Over the past decade we’ve seen a trend whereby airlines have added an incredible number of new ultra long haul flights. Admittedly the pandemic temporarily reversed that trend for a couple of years, given border restrictions and the decrease in business travel.
We’ve now turned a corner when it comes to travel demand, and have seen airlines resume most ultra long haul flights. Not only that, but in the past year we’ve even seen several new ultra long haul routes revealed.
In this post I wanted to summarize the world’s longest flights, what other ultra long haul flights might be on the horizon, and share why these are more practical than in the past.
In this post:
Why ultra long haul flights are more practical than ever
Why have we seen airlines launch so many ultra long haul flights in the past several years? It primarily comes down to new aircraft technology. In the past decade the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 have become the backbone of many carriers’ long haul fleets, and these planes are great for airlines and passengers:
- The planes are ultra long range, and can operate some nonstop flights that previous generation aircraft couldn’t
- The planes have lower capacity than previous generation aircraft (like the Boeing 747), which opens up more viable markets; it’s much easier to profitably fill 250 seats than it is to profitably fill 400 seats
- The planes have great economics, and per-passenger fuel burn is significantly lower than previous generation aircraft
So yeah, long range, fuel efficient, low capacity aircraft have done wonders for airlines when it comes to the viability of ultra long haul city pairs. Many routes that could have previously never been profitable now make sense.
The world’s 20 longest nonstop flights as of December 2023
Global aviation came to a standstill during the pandemic, but it has recovered nicely, with most airlines having resumed ultra long haul flights. As a result, I figured it was a good time to check in on the world’s longest flights, given how much the list has changed over the years. Let’s take a look at the 20 longest flights.
I’m basing this list on direct air distance between city pairs, since obviously Russian airspace issues are causing airlines to largely operate circuitous routings. Furthermore, I think distance is a better metric than length of flight, since winds can also have an impact on the duration of flights, and on top of that, some airlines do a lot of schedule padding.
Note that I’ll only be counting flights that are currently operating, or are expected to be operated in the coming months. What’s pretty amazing to me is that all of these flights are well over 8,000 miles, which is a long way to go nonstop.
What are the world’s longest flights? Here they are, starting with the longest (I’m including the airline that operates the route, the distance, and the aircraft type used):
- Singapore (SIN) to New York (JFK) / Singapore Airlines / 9,537 miles / Airbus A350-900ULR
- Singapore (SIN) to Newark (EWR) / Singapore Airlines / 9,523 miles / Airbus A350-900ULR
- Doha (DOH) to Auckland (AKL) / Qatar Airways / 9,032 miles / Airbus A350-1000
- Perth (PER) to London (LHR) / Qantas / 9,010 miles / Boeing 787-9
- Melbourne (MEL) to Dallas (DFW) / Qantas / 8,992 miles / Boeing 787-9
- Auckland (AKL) to New York (JFK) / Air New Zealand & Qantas / 8,828 miles / Boeing 787-9
- Dubai (DXB) to Auckland (AKL) / Emirates / 8,824 miles / Airbus A380
- Singapore (SIN) to Los Angeles (LAX) / Singapore Airlines / 8,770 miles / Airbus A350-900
- Bangalore (BLR) to San Francisco (SFO) / Air India / 8,701 miles / Boeing 777-200LR
- Houston (IAH) to Sydney (SYD) / United Airlines / 8,596 miles / Boeing 787-9 (resumes October 29, 2023)
- Sydney (SYD) to Dallas (DFW) / Qantas / 8,578 miles / Boeing 787-9
- Manila (MNL) to New York (JFK) / Philippine Airlines / 8,520 miles / Airbus A350-900
- Singapore (SIN) to San Francisco (SFO) / Singapore Airlines & United Airlines / 8,446 miles / Airbus A350-900 & Boeing 787-9
- Atlanta (ATL) to Johannesburg (JNB) / Delta / 8,439 miles / Airbus A350-900
- Mumbai (BOM) to San Francisco (SFO) / Air India / 8,406 miles / Boeing 777-200LR
- Dubai (DXB) to Los Angeles (LAX) / Emirates / 8,339 miles / Airbus A380
- Jeddah (JED) to Los Angeles (LAX) / Saudia / 8,332 miles / Boeing 777-300ER
- Doha (DOH) to Los Angeles (LAX) / Qatar Airways / 8,306 miles / Airbus A350-1000
- Perth (PER) to Rome (FCO) / Qantas / 8,298 miles / Boeing 787-9 (ends October 2, 2023)
- Manila (MNL) to Toronto (YYZ) / Philippine Airlines / 8,221 miles / Airbus A350-900
I intentionally left out the flight times, since they fluctuate throughout the year due to winds. Furthermore, some airlines pad their schedules more than others (in order to create artificial on-time arrivals). All 20 of these flights are blocked anywhere between 15hr5min and 18hr50min.
Here’s a map with all the routes, which is quite cluttered, as you can see:
What record-breaking flights are on the horizon?
A majority of the world’s longest flights have been launched in the past several years, which raises the question of what other record-breaking flights might be on the horizon. In the past couple of years we’ve seen the launch or Air New Zealand’s Auckland to New York flight and Qantas’ Melbourne to Dallas flight, both of which make the list.
What else is on the horizon?
- Pre-pandemic Qantas planned to launch a Brisbane to Chicago flight, which would cover a distance of 8,916 miles; it’s anyone’s guess if this route ends up launching, or if Qantas instead focuses on Melbourne and Sydney
- Qantas is continuing to work on “Project Sunrise,” whereby the airline hopes to fly nonstop from Melbourne and Sydney to London and New York using Airbus A350-1000s; flights are only expected to launch in 2025, and that’s a best case scenario timeline
Next, while these flights aren’t 8,100+ miles (or are routes that aren’t currently operated), there are some other ultra long haul flights that have either recently launched or are on the horizon:
- Delta Air Lines launched an Atlanta to Cape Town flight, which will cover a distance of 8,130 miles
- Singapore Airlines launched a nonstop Singapore to Seattle flight, which covers a distance of 8,073 miles
- United Airlines launched a nonstop Newark to Johannesburg flight, which covers a distance of 7,989 miles
- Vietnam Airlines launched a Ho Chi Minh City to San Francisco flight, which covers a distance of 7,838 miles
Bottom line
As airlines have rebuilt their global route networks, we’ve not only seen the resumption of some ultra long haul flights, but we’ve even seen the introduction of some new ones. We’ve seen so many new long haul flights launched in the past five years or so, thanks to how amazing the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 are. Compared to previous generation aircraft, these planes are low capacity, long range, and fuel efficient.
While these marathon flights are great for those traveling in a premium cabin, I can’t imagine doing a nonstop flight like this in economy. In those situations I feel like I’d rather break up the journey than fly nonstop. Heck, even in business class I feel like some of these flights are too long.
Which ultra long haul flight do you find most interesting, and what do you think we’ll see added next?
That EK DXB-AKL route was great for me when I needed to return to NZ regularly for family reasons.
Eliminating the Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane stopovers reduced flight time to around 16.5 hours (and reduced EK’s daily rotations to Auckland from three to one, ending an era of easy trans-Tasman premium cabin award availability from three major Australian cities).
With Air NZ having withdrawn its one stop London to Auckland via LAX, the...
That EK DXB-AKL route was great for me when I needed to return to NZ regularly for family reasons.
Eliminating the Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane stopovers reduced flight time to around 16.5 hours (and reduced EK’s daily rotations to Auckland from three to one, ending an era of easy trans-Tasman premium cabin award availability from three major Australian cities).
With Air NZ having withdrawn its one stop London to Auckland via LAX, the EK flight allows connections from multiple English and European cities to Dubai, and then the one shot out to Auckland. I can get an evening A380 from Birmingham, 2.5 hour stopover in DXB after a five hour flight, and be at the gate in Auckland after around 27 hours. And I save the time taken to get to Heathrow by using my local airport.
British friends whose idea of a long flight is three hours to Greece are horrified but Antipodeans are used to long haul and have welcomed the gradual introduction of longer range aircraft with fewer stops.
EK economy has slightly more legroom than Air NZ had on its cramped 3-4-3 777s and the A380 is so spacious by comparison. Their catering is also very generous. I have also heard very good reports of Qatar provided you don’t mind a long layover.
How about some reviews, Ben?
Ben, the map is off: Singapore flies SIN-EWR eastwords, see for example https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/SIA22 (and i don't think they generally use Russian airspace these days).
He is using a general mapping tool. He has already said a dozen times that it doesn't show or account for route changes. DUH.
Regarding ultra-long flights; is there really any difference (in terms of perception) between 13.5 hours (SYD-DEL, done in 2014) and one a few hours longer?
Interesting that no other Middle East or Asia flights made the list such as China or Hong Kong.
Ben, I beg to disagree with you on "fuel economy" on ultra long haul flights.... The fuel economy "savings" degrade for the carbon fiber planes (A350 and 787) for flights longer than 13-14 hrs as the amount of fuel burn in the first few hours is very high and the plane cannot get to final cruising altitude (38K-40K ft depending on direction of travel). This is also the reason for lower capacity passenger configurations. Also,...
Ben, I beg to disagree with you on "fuel economy" on ultra long haul flights.... The fuel economy "savings" degrade for the carbon fiber planes (A350 and 787) for flights longer than 13-14 hrs as the amount of fuel burn in the first few hours is very high and the plane cannot get to final cruising altitude (38K-40K ft depending on direction of travel). This is also the reason for lower capacity passenger configurations. Also, when there are head winds, it is likely that some checked baggage will take an indirect route to keep weight down as these flights are operating at 100% fuel capacity.
As a result, these flights are not eco-friendly to say the least, plus the additional issues with hygiene (body odor and cleanliness/odor of toilets).
So, I personally like going with a short stop enroute to shower and walk around rather than trying to ultra long haul in one flight only to get to destination and need more recovery time after flight.
Qantas has been the only "sensible" airline that has done some hands-on research on effects of ultra long haul on air crew and passengers. I don't think the NYC-SYD will last too long....
Every airplane burns alot of fuel to carry fuel. The carbon fiber aircraft just start lighter and have more efficient engines to enable longer flights. Practically every longhaul aircraft starts at a lower altitude and climbs as it burns off fuel; that is also true for longer domestic flights on narrowbody aircraft.
In reality, there aren't a whole lot of flights over 16 hours on either the new or older generation aircraft such as...
Every airplane burns alot of fuel to carry fuel. The carbon fiber aircraft just start lighter and have more efficient engines to enable longer flights. Practically every longhaul aircraft starts at a lower altitude and climbs as it burns off fuel; that is also true for longer domestic flights on narrowbody aircraft.
In reality, there aren't a whole lot of flights over 16 hours on either the new or older generation aircraft such as the 777 because there just aren't that many routes where 16 hours is really necessary.
There is a diminishing value from ultra long haul flights but the ability to operate depends on where an airline's hubs are located and what parts of the world they can reach from that hub. Australia just happens to be so far from Europe that they have to make major investments in new aircraft and the appropriate configurations in order to justify opening a whole bunch of new routes.
@Anthony,
Almost none of what you wrote is accurate.
A 319t A350-1000 at full MTOW will outclimb a 777-300ER or A340-600 (both of which it's primed to replace) to altitude any day, often without step; so not sure where you're getting the "carbon fiber planes for flights longer than 13-14hrs" nonsense from.
Also, "lower capacity passenger configurations" compared to what? Show me an airline flying a dense configuration greater than 16hrs on any aircraft,...
@Anthony,
Almost none of what you wrote is accurate.
A 319t A350-1000 at full MTOW will outclimb a 777-300ER or A340-600 (both of which it's primed to replace) to altitude any day, often without step; so not sure where you're getting the "carbon fiber planes for flights longer than 13-14hrs" nonsense from.
Also, "lower capacity passenger configurations" compared to what? Show me an airline flying a dense configuration greater than 16hrs on any aircraft, and filling it routinely both ways. Only one that comes close to being to do so, is generally the 777-200LR, but its fuel burn isn't particularly competitive in today's environment.
Lastly, what does "only sensible airline that has done some hands-on research . . ." even mean? That's not a remotely accurate statement, unless you wish to call airlines like Singapore, Emirates, EVA, Delta, United, and (even airlines that don't operate ULH flights, like) British Airways and Lufthansa, "not sensible."
Where would a potential Tokyo to Miami flight fit into this list?
I read on a travel blog (I thought this one) it may be a possibility.
less than 7500mi (7469)... it's nowhere near this league.
Miami to Tokyo flight maybe but Tokyo to Miami is just plain delusional.
How did you miss United’s flights from EWR-CPT, IAD-CPT and EWR-JNB?
The (obvious) answer being: none of them make it into the top 20.
Jay: Because they are ALL less than the mileage required to make the Top 20.
Ben,
I hope you are busy researching and composing some articles about the aviation impacts of the current conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Several airlines have cancelled flights that have flown over that area including several KLM and LH flights from Europe to northeast Asia.
United's DEL-EWR flight is in the air headed toward the UAE, likely taking the same route as it overflows from there to the US on its DXB-EWR...
Ben,
I hope you are busy researching and composing some articles about the aviation impacts of the current conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Several airlines have cancelled flights that have flown over that area including several KLM and LH flights from Europe to northeast Asia.
United's DEL-EWR flight is in the air headed toward the UAE, likely taking the same route as it overflows from there to the US on its DXB-EWR flight which itself has to navigate a number of airspace closures. AA's DEL-JFK is heading over its usual route over Northern Pakistan, the tip of Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Central Asia. It would appear it will hug the Russian border as it crosses the Caspian Sea and into Georgia and across the southern part of the Black Sea and northern Turkey where there is finally "clear air." Several airlines have taken that route but it is riskier for many reasons and ATC there can only accommodate so much traffic.
UA's route is adding about 40 minutes compared to yesterday.
Time to pull out the world map and watch all of this but global aviation is facing another major blow even as fuel prices are soaring. Never a dull moment
Error Correction.
When Australia opened up after C19 and Perth still refused to accept any flights I flew non-stop London to Darwin.
It might not be current but for a while it was scheduled.
When Australia opened up after C19 and Perth still refused to accept any flights I flew non-stop London to Brisbane.
It might not be current but for a while it was scheduled.
Aviation nerds cry about the lack of "diversity" among aircraft in today's commercial aviation, but it's pretty dang amazing what these A350s, 787s and even 777s can do nowadays.
I'm betting that within the next 20 years, you'll be able to step onto an airplane and go non-stop to any corner of the earth, if you desire the non-stop and are willing to pay the fare for it.
Aviation nerds cry about the lack of "diversity" among aircraft in today's commercial aviation, but it's pretty dang amazing what these A350s, 787s and even 777s can do nowadays.
TWO WORDS: convergent evolution.
That concept basically guarantees that this very thing (lack of design diversity) would happen.
Nature/physics finds a design what works best, for a specific action within a specific period of time, and whatever entity (that desires to do that action within...
Aviation nerds cry about the lack of "diversity" among aircraft in today's commercial aviation, but it's pretty dang amazing what these A350s, 787s and even 777s can do nowadays.
TWO WORDS: convergent evolution.
That concept basically guarantees that this very thing (lack of design diversity) would happen.
Nature/physics finds a design what works best, for a specific action within a specific period of time, and whatever entity (that desires to do that action within that time frame) doesn't evolve toward that design, gets out-competed and eventually dies off.
It's why Flying Squirrels and Sugar Gliders look almost exactly alike, despite no relation other than both being mammals: they do the same thing (glide from tree to tree) within the same time (now), so they've evolved down the same design.
__________
Transportation engineering follows the same principle. You can see it in car design, ship design, etc.
And of course, airliners: where CFRP tube + wings + 2 underslung engines is what works most efficiently, thus nearly every airliner whose design doesn't fit that description, has died off.
As long as we're using fossil fuels as propellant, that's not likely to change.
Wow, I’ve flown JFK - SIN #1. But none of the others. I’m all about First Class but did great on JFK-SIN. Stayed awake until sunset then slept. Enjoyed the Ambience. :-)
Flight time is the most significant measure of the length of flight; it does require review every quarter as winds change but it is much more meaningful, esp. since some airlines respect Russia airspace embargoes and others do not.
And the world faces yet another blow to global aviation as conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan escalates. Several European airlines are pausing operations as they reassess security for the airspace over a country that suddenly became...
Flight time is the most significant measure of the length of flight; it does require review every quarter as winds change but it is much more meaningful, esp. since some airlines respect Russia airspace embargoes and others do not.
And the world faces yet another blow to global aviation as conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan escalates. Several European airlines are pausing operations as they reassess security for the airspace over a country that suddenly became very important with the Russian war in Ukraine.
Flight time is the LEAST accurate measure for comparative sake.
The same route can have vastly different flight times within the same period, due to everything from temp, to winds, to weather, to load, to overflight authority, to availability of diversion.
that is precisely the point but it is THE measure of aircraft endurance. A plane can cover 8000 miles but take very different amounts of time to do so and some aircraft may not be able to do it.
If the point is simply to measure the longest routes by mileage which no one actually flies and then rank that result, then it is simply an academic exercise.
It is far more meaningful...
that is precisely the point but it is THE measure of aircraft endurance. A plane can cover 8000 miles but take very different amounts of time to do so and some aircraft may not be able to do it.
If the point is simply to measure the longest routes by mileage which no one actually flies and then rank that result, then it is simply an academic exercise.
It is far more meaningful to the know the average time of a route on a flown round trip basis over a period of time; it can even be done over a year -but it requires a whole lot more work than the simple schedule extract that Ben pulls
Why do you always refer to Bengaluru by its colonial name Bangalore and not by its actual official name? This is not the first time you have done this.
At least this way, we know what city he's talking about without having to Google it. India seems to shuffle names for cities every decade or two. Now there's a movement to rename the entire country. Let's not play that game.
And before you say that's somehow "racist", try watching Univision who (while based in the USA) refer to states as Nueva York as Carolina del Norte - which is not what we call them.
NY or Carolina del Norte (typo there). Or Carolina del Sur. Or Filadelfia.
Honest question Sean,
While I realize that you don't speak for all Indians, I'm equally sure that you have your finger on the general pulse, so:
Do everyday Indians consider it insulting/pejorative when names like Bombay/Madras/Calcutta/Bangalore etc are still used, or is it mostly just a government thing?
____________
Also, is the same sentiment for Indians in India, versus diaspora in Europe, the Americas, and elsewhere?
I ask this part, because I so...
Honest question Sean,
While I realize that you don't speak for all Indians, I'm equally sure that you have your finger on the general pulse, so:
Do everyday Indians consider it insulting/pejorative when names like Bombay/Madras/Calcutta/Bangalore etc are still used, or is it mostly just a government thing?
____________
Also, is the same sentiment for Indians in India, versus diaspora in Europe, the Americas, and elsewhere?
I ask this part, because I so often get corrected when I refer to the former Saigon as "Ho Chi Minh City" in front of Vietnamese-Americans, but never when I've said it in front of Vietnamese folks abroad. Obviously, the former have a reason for their hostility to that label, so there's the inherent bias. I wonder if it's a similar concept with (some groups of) Indians?
I actually prefer Calcutta or Bombay, and I say it all the time being an Indian; heck, the airport codes are still CCU and BOM, for crying out loud!
Most educated Indians prefer the old names. I still call my hometown Madras. The idiotic renaming of cities is a political stunt to create anti colonial sentiments by corrupt politicians. Bengaluru just sounds dumb to me.. having grown up in India
Seems @Sean M. makes a good point.
If you have to call people with the official pronoun and not pronoun by genetics, then you should definitely call a city in the same manner.
You don't see people calling cities by Saint Francis, Saint Didacus, or The Angels. Heck even Texans don't call Saint Anthony.
Now let's start with Rossiya, Zhonggua, Hanguk, and Nihon.
I can't imagine Columbus' reaction if the indigenous said they are not...
Seems @Sean M. makes a good point.
If you have to call people with the official pronoun and not pronoun by genetics, then you should definitely call a city in the same manner.
You don't see people calling cities by Saint Francis, Saint Didacus, or The Angels. Heck even Texans don't call Saint Anthony.
Now let's start with Rossiya, Zhonggua, Hanguk, and Nihon.
I can't imagine Columbus' reaction if the indigenous said they are not Indians and don't call them that.
21st century, the era of identity crisis.
Sean is a very strange sounding Indian name, is that Bengalurese?
Seriously though, stfu with your woke taking offense on behalf of others while claiming moral authority nonsense.
Sean sounds like a fake name.
Seriously though, stfu
Seeing as you (clearly) have no idea who and what you're talking about, perhaps the best course of action, would be for you to take your own advice.
Sean is a very well known quantity in both Indian and African aviation.
Delta is proud of its ability to fly to CPT. I’ve done the ATL-JNB many times on the 777 before they prematurely retired it. But the fun fact they don’t advertise is the A350 cannot fly JNB-ATL profitably due to fuel/cargo/weight with the 5558’ altitude problem.
So the solution is to fly down to CPT (sea level) much to take the full load of fuel to make the 17 hour trip up the Atlantic....
Delta is proud of its ability to fly to CPT. I’ve done the ATL-JNB many times on the 777 before they prematurely retired it. But the fun fact they don’t advertise is the A350 cannot fly JNB-ATL profitably due to fuel/cargo/weight with the 5558’ altitude problem.
So the solution is to fly down to CPT (sea level) much to take the full load of fuel to make the 17 hour trip up the Atlantic. Aeromexico faces the same problem with some flights and the 787 has to go to Monterrey, fuel up, and continue its westbound journeys.
The 787 and A350 are great planes. But they’ll never have the performance fully loaded of the 777-200LR and carry about 300 passengers.
Delta does fly JNB to ATL nonstop and will continue to do so in the winter when payload restrictions - which can be generally verified by airport passenger boarding data - are minimized.
Delta also only has 2 of the most capable, highest takeoff weight A350s in its fleet right now; they are supposed to receive 16 more in the next 3 years but being able to put the "right" aircraft on the right...
Delta does fly JNB to ATL nonstop and will continue to do so in the winter when payload restrictions - which can be generally verified by airport passenger boarding data - are minimized.
Delta also only has 2 of the most capable, highest takeoff weight A350s in its fleet right now; they are supposed to receive 16 more in the next 3 years but being able to put the "right" aircraft on the right route will help Delta tremendously. Currently Delta rotates its 2 283 tonne A350s primarily between South Africa, ATL, LAX and SYD. Delta has 6 280 tonne A350s which are mixed in with the two 283 tonne aircraft to help provide backup. Four of the 9 ex-Latam A350s are 280 tonne aircraft but they do not have the premium cabin configuration which Delta uses on all transpacific flights.
Russia airspace closures are making a number of Pacific flights more challenging esp. to/from ICN.
Also, Delta is reportedly reconfiguring its 350s to put more Delta One and fewer economy and total seats which should make the aircraft more capable.
Delta also only has 2 of the most capable, highest takeoff weight A350s in its fleet right now; they are supposed to receive 16 more in the next 3 years but being able to put the "right" aircraft on the right route will help Delta tremendously.
Considering that the tire rotation-speed limit for an A350 at that altitude is going to limit you to somewhere between 273T and 275T, it really doesn't matter what MTOW...
Delta also only has 2 of the most capable, highest takeoff weight A350s in its fleet right now; they are supposed to receive 16 more in the next 3 years but being able to put the "right" aircraft on the right route will help Delta tremendously.
Considering that the tire rotation-speed limit for an A350 at that altitude is going to limit you to somewhere between 273T and 275T, it really doesn't matter what MTOW the aircraft is rated at.
The reason DL wants its newest aircraft on that route, are for the aerodynamic improvements (wing twist and modified wingtips on the 280T models) and the associated incremental PIPs on the 283T birds.
They'll all leave JNB for the nonstop at about the same TOW, regardless of what the MTOW is rated.
and yet Delta rotates its 2 283 tonne A350-900s through JNB and they clearly would not do that if it didn't matter.
I strongly suspect that Delta knows exactly why they bother to do that and part of the reason is because the higher MTOW allows it to carry more southbound
Once again, you don't actually read what's written.
It's spelled out for you in plain English, second sentence.
the A350 cannot fly JNB-ATL profitably
I'll take "Statements that are not fact," for $500 please.
It's incredible that CXs JFK-HKG flight 20+ years ago was at one point the one of the longest if not longest flight in the world on their A343s and A346s. Now it's just a another long-haul flight. And coincidentally, that's the last time in my opinion where CX was great.
Its not only CX, Mike :-)
When Qantas introduced SYD-DFW B747-400 non-stop 11-12 yrs ago, it briefly became the world's longest flight. Now, demoted to the 11th longest flight, B747-438ER retired, A380 moved off DFW route .. and replaced by 2 x B787-9 (1 does SYD and the other does MEL-DFW non-stop) allowing better utilisation.
It is also interesting to note that the fleets operating these globe-straddling non-stop routes are almost equally divided...
Its not only CX, Mike :-)
When Qantas introduced SYD-DFW B747-400 non-stop 11-12 yrs ago, it briefly became the world's longest flight. Now, demoted to the 11th longest flight, B747-438ER retired, A380 moved off DFW route .. and replaced by 2 x B787-9 (1 does SYD and the other does MEL-DFW non-stop) allowing better utilisation.
It is also interesting to note that the fleets operating these globe-straddling non-stop routes are almost equally divided between Airbus and Boeing frames (A350 vs B787-9's). Whilst the inclusion of Air India's B777-200LR flight give Boeing the edge, AKL-NYC is operated both independently by Air New Zealand and Qantas. However, the combo of A350-900 and A350-1000 would seem to have the edge going forward.
Currently on Dxb to sfo route. According to emirates air show, it states 8268 miles from Dxb to sfo. If that’s true, it would bump the Manila to Toronto to number 21. Will be flying from Sin to jfk in December nonstop. Not sure how I feel about that right now since only J is on offer.
I did JFK SIN in J quite well. Flight left at night so I stayed awake until the next day’s sunset then still had a few hours to sleep. Sorry I don’t know your schedule so this might be of no help. Still great service on SQ I did SIN JFK in Suites ;-) Next month SYD SIN LHR n Suites.
BTW transferred points and got SQ / Star Alliance Gold
Sadly, JFK-FRA-SIN and SIN-FRA-JFK in Suites is now dead, as the A380 has been removed from service on these flights and replaced by FC on the 777-300. No comparison whatsoever; a drastic service downgrade. Therefore, the A350-900 non-stop makes more sense than ever. Paid FC on the 777 is around US$23,000. Four seats only, so you likely won’t have the “privilege” of traveling that way. Business on the non-stop costs far less, and one arrives...
Sadly, JFK-FRA-SIN and SIN-FRA-JFK in Suites is now dead, as the A380 has been removed from service on these flights and replaced by FC on the 777-300. No comparison whatsoever; a drastic service downgrade. Therefore, the A350-900 non-stop makes more sense than ever. Paid FC on the 777 is around US$23,000. Four seats only, so you likely won’t have the “privilege” of traveling that way. Business on the non-stop costs far less, and one arrives faster. An End of an Era when it comes to SQ super-premium service to the USA.
Transferred recently? Or a while ago?
Way Over a year ago. Initially trip was last November.
Got the Gold status extended for current year. Access to United Clubs when fly UA domestically