Boeing 777x First Flight.

After two failed attempts, called off due to high winds, the latest addition to the 26-year-old Boeing 777 family has finally taken to the air. At 09:08 am, Saturday 25 January 2020, aircraft registration WH-001 started its takeoff run on runway 34 Left at Paine Field, Everett. With an 8-knot tailwind, broken clouds at 3,000 feet with 6 miles of visibility, the largest twin-engine jet took a mere 30 seconds to become airborne. Applause and cheering from the crowd were drowned out by the world's biggest jet engines, the GE Aviation GE9x.

Maiden flights of new airliners don't happen very often, maybe once or twice a decade. Whilst the first flight of the Boeing 777x is a cause for excitement, Boeing must be feeling the pressure of getting this completely right in light of the 737 MAX situation. But enough of that.

The test flight lasted four hours out over the Pacific Northwest, a major milestone and the beginning of a very rigorous aircraft certification program. Before the aircraft can be delivered to airlines and begin carrying passengers, it has to go through a certification process. This is done with the F.A.A. (Federal Aviation Administration) and then no doubt with other agencies such as E.A.S.A. (European Union Aviation Safety Agency) before it can fly to, or overfly those regions. By current estimates, Boeing expects to be in a position to start delivering the first aircraft to customers in 2021. The first of those is expected to be Emirates. The order book for the 777x stands at 309 airframes with a list price of US $442M per aircraft. Of course, this is not necessarily what airlines will pay as they will have negotiated with Boeing for discounts around things like, the number of aircraft ordered, or being the launch airline. Nevertheless, the sooner Boeing starts delivering, the sooner the income for this project will start.

The wingtip deployment can be clearly seen in this video as the Boenig 777x takes to the sky for the first time on a wet Seattle day.

So after 26 years of 777s (Tripple Sevens), what is so special about the 777x? Well, the original 777 was a step forward in its day, being computer-designed it brought a lot of new ideas to the airliner design table. The 777x is carrying on that tradition by using technologies that have been tried and tested in the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. This includes using more composite materials in its construction, to make use of lighter stronger materials as well as materials that are far less susceptible to corrosion. Larger windows and an updated passenger cabin will be great news for passengers on this aircraft that Boeing maintains is the most efficient twin-engined airliner in the world.

The stand-out feature, however, is the folding wingtip. This feature, until now, was typical of fighter aircraft that were assigned to aircraft carriers. To save space when the aircraft was stored below decks, its wings would be folded upwards and thereby reducing the side-to-side space required for its storage. This is a concept that Boeing went with. Creating the largest twin jet in the world, which is required to fly further than the previous version, was going to require a wing that gave more lift than the previous version. Winglets could have solved the problem to some extent, but it has been found that a longer tapered wing gives more optimal lift. The Boeing 787 and the Boeing 747 8 are testament to Boeing's findings in this area.

So why folding wingtips? Well, let's look at the Airbus A380. When it was introduced in the early 2000s, airports were required to make adjustments to gate areas to enable a much wider aircraft to be accommodated. They had to be "A380 Ready" before that airliner could land there. A huge upheaval and expense but it was seen as the new future and therefore was seen as an investment in that future. We now know of course that the days of the A380 are numbered, now that the giant twin airliners are coming of age. Boeing wanted to avoid the restrictiveness of requiring airports to upgrade to be able to handle an oversized wingspan. They wanted the 777x to be able to fly everywhere that the current generation of 777s can fly. So was born the folding wingtip idea. The wingtips allow the 777x to change from a wingspan of 235 feet in the air down to 213 feet on the ground.

As the wingtips are a totally new technology in the passenger airliner space, the F.A.A. has come up with a set of 10 conditions that have to be satisfied before certification can take place. Boeing has stated that the non-deployment of the wingtips on takeoff can lead to catastrophic results. This is logical, as a fully laden aircraft, depends on the lift that those wingtips provide. If you suddenly have smaller wings than required, you are going by road with tragic results. The 10 conditions are designed to put fail-safes in place to prevent the non-deployment of wingtips on takeoff as well as the failure of the wingtips to stay in place during flight. These conditions revolve around a comprehensive warning system to alert the crew to the fact they are attempting takeoff without the wingtips deployed. In addition, if that is ignored, there is the ability for the aircraft to prevent takeoff until wingtips are deployed. With every new technology comes a whole raft of things to consider and conditions to be tested for.

Like the Boeing 787 Dreamliner which started its early days as the 7E7, the 777x will no doubt be dropped in favour of the actual variant names of 777-8 and 777-9. Some basic statics on the two models are as follows:

777x

Boeing 777-8

• Range 16,170km (8,730nm)

• 384 Passengers

Boeing 777-9

• Range 13,490km (7,285nm)

• 426 Passengers

Be sure to visit our Boeing 777x page for more details.

At 251 feet, the Boeing 777-9 will be the longest commercial aircraft in the world.

The road to this first test flight has not been a smooth one. From the time that the 777x was first rolled out of the hangar in March 2019, it was found that the new GE9x engine experienced excessive wear when run. In September when the wing stress testing was done, there was an explosive decompression event when a tear appeared in the fuselage. The manufacturing of the 777x was to be done in a fully automated assembly line by robots. Challenges in this area have forced Boeing to revert back to the traditional human-driven process.

The 777x is in the air at last. We certainly look forward to watching its progress toward certification.

One giant leap.

The story of aviation is certainly all about balance. How can you go further but still carry a profitable amount of payload? It is all about trade-offs. You can certainly fill an aircraft to the brim with payload, but you will have to leave fuel behind in order to be light enough to get off the ground. You can alternatively load up with fuel to go a long way, but you will then have to leave passengers and cargo behind, so once again you can become airborne.

Even with the newest technology those simple laws of physics still apply.

The Air New Zealand Boeing 787-9 will be the tool of choice when Air New Zealand opens its new long-range route, from Auckland to New York in 2020. The 787 is one of the new breeds of giant twin jets using composite materials in their construction which offers greater strength at lower weights. This is the great enabler for ultra-long-range routes.

It seems, however, that every few decades improvements in technology allow us to take that next step. Whether it be the materials used in aircraft manufacture, the power, and reliability of engines, or the corrections to design theory. All evolved through lessons, often learned at a high cost. For instance, the move from canvas and wood to aluminium, the lessons learned about metal fatigue. The advent of the Jumbo jet brought travel to the common man.

All, like our foray into supersonic travel, have been game-changers. Some of these technologies have stayed and grown, others proved to be less popular. Not necessarily because they were bad in any way, but because they weren’t economical in most cases.

When all is said and done, airlines and airliner manufacturers are businesses with shareholders who expect to make a profit on their investments. Airlines find routes on which they can make a profit carrying passengers and/or cargo in a profitable way. Attracting customers depends on offering the service at a cost that is competitive and palatable to the market.

The airline industry carries horrendously high operating costs. High fuel costs, aircraft that cost millions each as well as maintenance and other costs. So minimising cost, without impacting the level of service or safety is paramount.

The QANTAS Boeing 787-9 is currently being used on the ultra-long-range Perth to London route. QANTAS is embarking on what they call Project Sunrise which will see new non-stop routes opening from Australian cities to points all over the globe. On the 19th of October 2019, a proving flight left New York to fly non-stop to Sydney, an exhausting 19 hours and 16 minutes.

Like any industry, it is important to use the right tools for the job. Airliners are those tools, and each of those models and variants has a very specific purpose and niche in the market. For example, smaller twin jets can fly short to medium ranges to carry a small number of passengers more frequently. Larger transcontinental jets carry many more passengers over greater distances.

So back to balance. The travelling public is becoming ever more mobile. Holidaymakers travel all over the globe to find those, as yet, unspoiled destinations. Business travellers, similarly, need to get to all sorts of far-flung destinations to close that deal. To the business traveller, time is money, so get me there quickly. To the leisure traveller, too many hours in that economy class seat are soul-destroying, among other things.

This is where technology is currently being focused. Being able to fly further from more origins to more destinations. What does that mean?

Let's look at the iconic Boeing 747. It was designed to operate out of big city airports. It is big and needs a big runway to take off and land on. So, the system, known as hub and spoke was used. For example, you take the Boeing 747 from London Heathrow to New York JFK, then change to a smaller commuter airliner to go on to a secondary city. That makes for a long journey, not very convenient. There were several factors that led to things being done this way. One is engine reliability. Aircraft and their engines need to be certified (ETOPS) to fly long over-water routes. This is particularly true of twin jets.

For many years, aircraft like the 4-engine Boeing 747, Boeing 707, Douglas DC8, Airbus A340, as well as the 3-engine Douglas DC10 and Lockheed L1011 were the mainstays of trans-oceanic travel. Airbus perhaps came a little late to this game with the Airbus A380. Certainly, a marvel of aviation technology, the A380 has not met its sales potential for Airbus. Existing customer airlines have shortened their orders as they have seen that the game has changed.

The age of the giant twin jet is upon us.

Engine technology has enabled the production of engines with a far lower failure rate than in the past. Through testing and the resultant certification, large twin-engine jets like the Boeing 787, Boeing 777, and Airbus A350 are able to fly further from the nearest available airfield than past twins. This is what makes trans-oceanic travel possible.

Delta flies one of the world's longest non-stop routes from Johannesburg to Atlanta which takes around 16 and a half hours using the trusty Boeing 777-200LR. Shortly we should be seeing the newer Boeing 777X, which will come out in a 777-8 and 777-9 variant.

The economics are obvious. Twin jets require fewer spares to be kept in store and less maintenance. Not being as big as their Jumbo and Super Jumbo predecessors, they can fly into smaller airfields, doing away with the need to transfer through busy main hubs.

So, what about the further part?

The new twins, particularly the Boeing 787 and Airbus A350, use a high percentage of composite materials in their construction. Carbon fibre and plastics provide strength but at a lower weight than aluminium. This delivers benefits in having a lighter aircraft with the same if not higher strength. Keeping the base weight down enables a higher payload which is great news for the airlines operating them.

Back to the balance. Being able to carry a higher payload means we can carry more fuel without leaving as many passengers behind for those long-haul routes. This is important for more remote parts of the world, like Australia and New Zealand.

QANTAS the Australian national carrier, for its part, is focused on Project Sunrise. The aim is to fly non-stop from Australian capital cities to major destinations around the world, like London and New York. They have already been operating from Perth to London non-stop for a few months now, with a flying time of 17 hours 45 minutes. On 19 October 2019, QANTAS took delivery of a Boeing 787-9 with which they performed a publicity flight under the number QF7879 from New York to Sydney, non-stop. The flight took 19 hours and 16 minutes and carried 50-odd passengers and crew.

Data was taken on how each passenger dealt with the nearly 20-hour flight. It will be interesting to see their findings when they are publicised as this may help us to understand and mitigate the effects of super long-haul flights.

Air New Zealand announced that they would commence flying non-stop from Auckland to New York, a flying time of between 17 and 18 hours. The options for travellers in a hurry to get to their destinations are certainly about to explode. Whilst these services will no doubt be aimed at the upper end of the market for now, I'm sure they are looking at ways to make sitting in economy for those extended flying times possible.

Airline	Origin	Destination	Miles	Duration	Aircraft Type
Singapore Airlines	Newark	Singapore	9,534	18h 45m	A350-900 ULR
Qatar Airways	Auckland	Doha	9,032	17h 50m	Boeing 777-200LR
QANTAS	Perth	London	9,009	17h 20m	Boeing 787-9
Emirates	Auckland	Dubai	8,823	17h 5m	Airbus A380
Singapore Airlines	Los Angeles	Singapore	8,769	17h	A350-900ULR
United Airlines	Houston	Sydney	8,596	17h 15m	Boeing 787-9
QANTAS	Dallas Fort Worth	Sydney	8,557	17h	Airbus A380
Philippine Airlines	New York	Manila	8,520	16h 45m	A350-900ULR
Singapore Airlines and United Airlines	San Francisco	Singapore	8,446	16h 35m	SQ A350-900ULR UA Boeing 787-9
Delta Air Lines	Johannesburg	Atlanta	8,439	16h 25m	777-200LR

How do you feel about super long-haul flights? Would you be keen to take a nearly 20-hour flight, and what class of travel would you travel in? We would love to hear how you travellers feel about that.

How long are airliner types produced?

I'm sure the recent announcement by Airbus to curtail its production of the Airbus A380 Super Jumbo met with disappointment by many. It doesn't seem long ago that we were all excited by this brand-new groundbreaking aircraft. It promised to be the new Boeing 747 to take us into the 21st Century. I remember, only a few short years ago, being able to boast that I had actually flown on one and sharing that experience with those who hadn't.

It seems too soon to be thinking about this aircraft ceasing production in only a couple of years from now.

That got me thinking about how other airliners have fared in the past. Don't they usually get produced for longer periods than that of the A380?

Modern Airliner production number of various airliners animated over sixty years.

Like any marketable product, an airliner has to fit a niche in that market. There has to be a demand for that product. In the case of an airliner, it has to be able to generate an income for its owner so that it can make a profit. Much like a car manufacturer, they have to produce a product that is appealing to the potential customer and operates within parameters that the customer expects. These parameters include environmental concerns, but, more particularly economical concerns.

In these days of higher operating costs, it must be shown that the product has addressed these higher costs with technological solutions.

In the case of the A380, it seems technology was part of its undoing. Don't get me wrong, the A380 used state-of-the-art technology in its design and materials, and is a great example of where aviation technology has evolved to. It is more about other aviation technology that has also evolved into a very high standard of reliability. The jet engine.

There are vast differences between the production numbers of the the airliners we have chosen. It is easy to see that the sweet spot in the market is the small twin-engine jet space occupied by the Boeing 737 and the Airbus A320. Of course these airliners form the back bone of airline domestic operations as well as short haul international. Whilst many of these airliners are still being produced and will grow in number, others like the A340 or Boeing 717 were superseded.

Jet engine technology is now of such a high standard that restrictions that were previously applied to aircraft with two engines flying long distances over water have been lifted. Each new engine that is brought to market has to go through a certification process along with the aircraft they happen to be attached to. This is a standard called ETOPS which stands for "Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards", or if you prefer, "Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim".

So what has this to do with our poor, not-so-old, A380? It benefits from the same engines, right? Absolutely it does, it can be sure that all four engines will keep spinning happily throughout every flight. However, waiting in the wings(and with wings) are the big twin-engine jets, like the Boeing 777, Boeing 787, Airbus A350, and Airbus A330, to name a few. They can now fly the same routes as the A380, and some of them even further. The larger of these can carry about two-thirds of the capacity of the A380, so they're not that much smaller either.

This Boeing 777 of China Southern Airlines illustrates the power and size of the giant jet engines that power it. These airliners are becoming the long-range flagships of most major airlines today and are certainly the way of the immediate future.

So why do airliners want larger twins instead of the glamourous Super Jumbo? Economics and logistics. The economics part is fairly straight foreward. The A380 is expensive to run. Four hungry engines to feed and of course all the additional spares you have to keep on hand to ensure the aircraft doesn't miss a beat if something needs replacing. If the engines aren't turning you're not earning. To make the aircraft turn a profit, it has to fly almost full all the time, which is a hard thing to achieve with over five hundred seats to fill for every flight.

The logistics side relates to where it can fly. When the A380 was about to be introduced, main airports around the world had to make major improvements to runway strength and terminal gates so as to be able to accommodate the new aircraft. Whilst this development has been done, it means that there are many airports around the world where the A380 cannot land. Airbus worked on the hub and spoke theory. They envisaged the A380 carrying large volumes of passengers between main centres from where those passengers would then connect to regional centres using local commuter airliners. The reality now, however, is that the aforementioned twin jets are capable of flying the long-haul routes once dominated by the four-engined jets, and are capable of landing at many more airports. The trend, therefore, is to be able to fly non-stop from almost anywhere to almost anywhere else.

It may surprise you learn how long or how short a time some of our iconic airliners were produced for. Those with an end date of 2018 are still in production at time of writing.

The story is similar for the Airbus A340. Its four-engined configuration was designed for those long-haul overwater flights. It enjoyed a measure of success, particularly with Asian airlines, but was also overtaken by the twin-engined jet eventually.

If we go back and look at the early jet airliners like the Boeing 707 and the Douglas DC8, we can see they dominated the skies for quite some time. During a time when fuel was cheap and restrictions around noise and pollution hadn't really found their teeth yet, they were the intercontinental airliners of the day. As soon as the oil crisis of the early 1970s happened, they were no longer viable.

The Douglas DC 8 enjoyed 14 years of production, in which time 556 of the type were produced. Before the introduction of the Boeing 747, this and the Boeing 707 were the intercontinental airliners of the day.

Airliner manufacturing companies spend billions on research and development for each airliner type we see. They evaluate the selling ability as they need to know they can recoup the money they have spent, as well as of course make a profit. In the case of the A380, it is obvious that this hasn't happened. Airbus anticipated selling 1,200 of the type and has not even made a quarter of that number. This hurts the bottom line and will ultimately cost jobs.

The life of the airliner type is very dependent on the manufacturing companies keeping up with the latest technology and market trends and to a large extent, predicting the future.

Airbus announces the end of A380 production.

European aviation powerhouse, Airbus, announced, not unexpectedly, that they would cease production of the A380 Super Jumbo.

The huge double-decker A380 was set to revolutionise air travel in the new millennium and give stiff competition to the Boeing 747 Jumbo. Able to carry over 500 passengers across long distances, the A380 looked like a sure bet in that niche market. Launched in 2008 by Singapore Airlines, the future looked hopeful with orders from many of the world's prestigious airlines. Notably, Middle Eastern airline giant, Emirates, ordered a whopping 162 airframes. Airbus expected to sell around 1,200 A380s in order to recoup development costs, and of course, turn a profit. The actuality is that they have not even achieved a quarter of this target. As of the 31st of January 2019, 234 A380s have been delivered with 232 in active service. Of these 106 are with Emirates.

Where did Airbus go wrong? Like anything in the commercial world, the economics no longer stack up. The high price of the aircraft, coupled with the extensive upgrades required at airfields, before they can accommodate the Super Jumbo, led to very high overheads. Aviation, like most industries with an accent on technology, is ever-changing. It can be very difficult to predict future trends, and Airbus is not alone in this. Boeing also got burned by this trend with their 747-8i. Designed as the descendant of the much-loved 747, it met with a very lukewarm reception and has since ceased production. Boeing at least could fall back on the original failsafe of the 747, by creating a freighter version of the 747-8. This has done slightly better. The bubble on the original 747 was to enable a freighter version to be loaded through an opening nose door. They didn't have faith that the passenger version would sell, so took an "each way bet".

The focus seems to be now moving toward the long-range twin jets. Both Boeing and Airbus have a wide range of offerings in this space, which offer airlines a wide choice across their whole network. The economics of filling one very large aircraft to the point of profitability can very challenging. With slightly smaller aircraft, routes can be flown more frequently and economically. Today's giant twins like the Airbus A350 and the Boeing 777-9, are coming online and are enabling airlines to offer non-stop services between cities where it has not been possible in the past. Airlines, like QANTAS, are rethinking their strategy and proposing services that to date have not been possible.

An Airbus A380 destined for Emirates takes shape in the Toulouse factory. When production ends for the Super Jumbo in 2021, there are an estimated 3,500 jobs that will be at risk.

Only a few days ago QANTAS announced that they would no longer require the remaining 8 A380s in the order book. Virgin Atlantic also withdrew their order of 6, as they no longer wish to take up the A380. The final crunch came when Emirates announced it would reduce its order of 162 by about 20 aircraft. Once the balance of the Emirates and A.N.A. orders are fulfilled, there is no further backlog. Airbus anticipates closing production in 2021, which could impact up to 3,500 jobs. Not only will this affect Airbus, but also the many suppliers who create components for the giant aircraft.

It seems the A380 came along just a little late in the day. The focus of aviation has changed once again and it seems the day of the giant 4 engined Jumbo is over.

Where is MH370 two years on?

Here we are, 2 years down the taxiway from one of aviation’s biggest mysteries. Two years ago 239 passengers and crew settled in for a routine flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. The Boeing 777 belonging to Malaysia’s national flag carrier, Malaysia Airlines, lifted off into the balmy Malaysian night and flew into history. Now on the second anniversary of the aircraft’s disappearance, we seem no closer to finding an answer.

A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 like MH370 lifts off.

Now on the second anniversary of the aircraft’s disappearance, we seem no closer to finding an answer.

It seems inconceivable in today’s high-tech world that we can lose a big airliner so utterly and completely. It goes to show that we haven’t quite got the ability to track the movement of everything that goes on in our world.
Since that fateful night two years ago, there have been so many theories of cover-ups, lies, and deception. Was it done by a rogue pilot? Was the aircraft deliberately flown below the radar to enable it to be hijacked elsewhere? Was the aircraft flown in the shadow of a Singapore Airlines flight to enable it to be flown to Central Asia undetected?

The initial search area for MH370 centered on the logical areas around the Malaysian Peninsula.

We’ve heard of an oil rig worker seeing a ball of fire crash into the sea in the distance in the South China Sea.

We’ve heard of inhabitants of an island in the Maldives, where large airliners are rarely seen, reporting a low-flying large jet flying overhead hours after the disappearance of the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777. This prompted a theory about the jet being flown to a small atoll called Diego Garcia which lies just south of the equator in the middle of the Indian Ocean and belongs to Great Britain.

It just goes to show that we do not take readily, as humans, to unexplained situations and work to fill the void with theories of what we think the likely train of events may have been. It also serves to show we are quite willing to believe some fairly far-fetched theories to fill the void of actual knowledge.

But as usual, it seems fact is stranger than fiction. Of all the far-fetched scenarios, who came up with one where the airliner found its way into the southern reaches of the Indian Ocean? No one as far as I can recall.

I must admit that when I first heard of it, I was amazed at why someone would believe such a far-fetched story. Of all the stories I had heard, this seemed to be the most fanciful.  A flight that was headed north ends up being further south than it was ever intended to go north.

The current search areas were determined by satellite pings as well as the fuel range limits of MH370.

Those engine ping handshakes that gave the arc of the area where the aircraft is supposed to have been, were obviously conclusive enough for several governments to throw in millions of dollars worth of search time and resources. While it is admirable that governments are seen to be caring about those poor souls who perished, and those who are left behind wondering what became of their loved ones. I am often left wondering why the Southern Indian Ocean scenario was so readily accepted so quickly and why governments were so quick to be prepared to throw millions at the project.

I am not trying to promote any of the conspiracy theories. I do find it strange that not one floating object such as seat squabs, neck pillows, and other floating objects has ever been found. These objects are more susceptible to wind-driven effects, as opposed to the flaperon found on Reunion and the alleged horizontal stabiliser piece found in Mozambique that would have floated below the surface and been more influenced by ocean currents.

There are of course many kilometres of uninhabited coastlines around the Indian Ocean, but something should turn up somewhere and be found. If the flaperon and other pieces were ripped off the aircraft, I feel it safe to assume the fuselage did not stay intact to contain all the loose objects that should have floated away.

I just hope that something is found soon. Friends and relatives need closure and aviation needs to know what happened and how it happened so steps can be taken to remove the likelihood for the future.

Aviation becomes safer as we learn from accidents and incidents and build processes to prevent them from happening again.

I don’t pretend to be an expert in any way shape or form and would love to hear the opinion of others. Feel free to join the discussion below.

Long Haul Flights

Getting to far-flung parts of the world has been a challenge to mankind for as long as history stretches back. Knowledge of riches and resources beyond what can be found locally has driven us to find new ways and routes to far-distant corners of the planet. What virtually anyone can achieve on today’s long-haul flights in a matter of hours would have taken months, if not years in the not-so-very-distant past.

Whether it was the Vikings setting off for lands unknown, the Chinese doing the same, or the Portuguese circumnavigating the Earth. We have always been driven to new horizons by the prospect of the exotic worlds that lie beyond and how they could enrich our lives.

We still live by those same principles. Instead, however, of intrepid explorers setting off for journeys that may take them from their homes for years at a time, or forever, in many cases. We have business travellers completing those same journeys in a matter of hours and making trade deals. We have holidaymakers making those same journeys to find the sun, or a great shopping deal not available at home.

Those journeys are now so common as to seem mundane to many. While travelling over routes that were once only for the brave and those willing to risk life and limb, we now quibble over the quality of food, the entertainment system, or how much legroom we have. How quickly we adapt.

Today we are seeing records tumble every few weeks as airlines propose and begin ever longer “non-stop” routes. These are made possible by the latest long-range airliners, such as the Airbus A350, the Boeing 787,  Airbus A380, and the Boeing 777. Emirates launched their super long-range route from Dubai to Auckland, initially with the Airbus A380 but now with the Boeing 777-200LR (LR=Long Range), a distance of 14,200 kilometres. That is around 16 hours, depending on the wind.

The Emirates flight is impressive but that record is set to tumble as Qatar Airways is about to launch a Doha to Auckland non-stop flight which is 300-odd kilometres longer than the Emirates flight. Also announced are United Airlines' non-stop flights from San Francisco to Singapore, and Singapore Airlines flights from Singapore to Los Angeles.

So how did we get around the world before the advent of today’s modern airliners?

The simple fact was, that travel was for the rich in most cases. Yes, there was the opportunity to travel relatively cheaply by ship if you travelled in the lowest class. This kind of travel was usually once in a lifetime as you emigrated from one country to another. Long-distance aviation was another story.

The difficulty for early international travel was to create an aircraft that could carry a usable payload for a long enough range. There has always been a trade-off between carrying enough fuel to reach the destination versus carrying enough payload (passengers) to make the trip profitable for the airline.

Flying Boats

uring the 1930s on both sides of the Atlantic, aircraft makers like Boeing and Short Brothers decided that the future of long-range passenger air travel lay with the flying boat. These large chunky machines were generally powered by four propellers affixed to a huge wing atop the fuselage. Inside the accommodations were laid out as if the travellers were on a first-class sea journey.  Cabins could be set up for seating during the daytime, and as sleepers for night-time. There were even dining rooms so meals could be taken in a civilised fashion.

Boeing 314 Clipper.

Little wonder that a trip from the UK to Australia would cost as much as an average annual salary. The cabin may have been first class, but it was quite an adventure never the less. One of the reasons for choosing to land and take off from water was the ability to fly to places, or via places, where no adequate runway was prepared.

These lumbering behemoths may have been able to lift a luxurious cabin and its occupants into the sky, however, their range was severely limited by today’s standards. At little better than 1,000 kilometres, they had to hop their way across the globe which made for very long journey times. For example, a trip from Sydney to Singapore which today takes between 7 and 8 hours, involved a journey time of four full days with three overnight stop-overs. This was not too dissimilar to travelling by ship where you got to see some of the world along the way.

Land-Based Propeller Airliners

War always brings advances in technology and for aviation, this was certainly the case. A new generation of land-based propeller airliners emerged making use of advances in engine reliability as well as many more airfields that were now available.

These airliners started to resemble what we see today as far as cabin layout is concerned. Gone was the cavernous and opulent interior of the flying boat to be replaced by a more practical cabin seating both economy and first-class passengers in most cases. Airliners of this age were more streamlined and were capable of higher speeds than the lumbering flying boats.

A preserved Super Constellation “Connie” comes in to land. The long nose-wheel and curved fuselage were designed to keep the longer propeller blades clear of the ground, whilst the triple lower tail enabled it to still be stored in the standard hangars of the day.

Perhaps the pinnacle airliner of this age was the Lockheed Super Constellation, a very sleek aircraft almost resembling a dolphin in shape. With a cruising speed of 295 knots (547 KPH), she had a maximum range of 4,700 Nautical Miles (8,700 Kilometres). For the princely sum of around 2.5 times the average annual salary, one could travel from Sydney to London in no less than 64 hours. The journey would involve 8 stops, such as; Darwin, Singapore, Calcutta, Karachi, Cairo, and Tripoli. The journey, lasting 3 days, would involve overnight stops in Singapore and Cairo.

Engine reliability was still an issue and it was not uncommon for a delayed propeller airliner to arrive with only 3 of its 4 engines running.

In addition, these aircraft were all susceptible to weather conditions. The Super Constellation had a service ceiling of 24,000 feet which means it was not able to climb above weather as we expect today’s jets to do. This could lead to delays as pilots awaited weather systems to pass over, manoeuvring around them if they were already airborne

A New Sound in the Sky

The late 1950s saw the introduction of the Jet Airliner age. Aircraft like the Boeing 707 and the Douglas DC8, each with four jet engines mounted beneath their swept-back wings, started to be the mainstay of intercontinental travel. With a much higher speed than the propeller airliners, these jets dramatically cut down travel times. The Sydney to London trip could be done in half the time at around 30 hours.

The jet airliner age brought faster speeds as well as the ability to fly above most weather. This QANTAS Boeing 707 sported the V Jet insignia where the V stands for Vanna, the Latin for fan. It was powered by the newer generation fan jets.

The problem of range was still there though. These jet flights, while being faster, still required multiple stopovers along the way to refuel. The Sydney to London route would require 5 to 6 stops along the way.

Enter the Jumbo

In 1969 passenger aviation changed dramatically. Boeing launched their most audacious design yet, the Boeing 747. This aircraft, dubbed, the Jumbo Jet enable several hundred passengers to be carried all in one aircraft. One result was a drop in the cost of flying which brought it within reach of the common person.

Pan Am Boeing 747 May 1985. Pan Am was the driving force behind the development of the Boeing 747.

Whilst the size and carrying ability of the 747 were impressive, one of the great features that attracted airlines was its range ability and speed. It could fly further and faster than the DC8 and 707 at a cheaper seat/mile cost. This opened up the ability for intercontinental airlines to offer faster and cheaper journey times to faraway destinations. If we go back to our Sydney to London route, the early 747s reduced the stopovers to 2 which were typically Singapore and somewhere in the Persian Gulf like Bahrain. The journey time was now in the low 20 hours.

There was even a shorter version of the 747, 747SP (Special Performance)  which had an increased range due to the reduced weight. This was requested by Pan Am and Iran Air so that they could service some of their longer non-stop routes such as New York to the Middle East and Tehran.

Later versions of the 747, such as the 747-400 were built with newer technology engines as well as winglets for extra lift which enabled them to fly the world's longest routes as they have been doing to this very day.

It’s Twins!

Jet engine technology has now reached a point of reliability where a shutdown during flight is almost unheard of. An aviation standard called ETOPS (Extended Operations or Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim) governs the certification of twin jet airliners to fly long distances over water or remote territory. These certifications have been gradually granted to the large twin jets we see in our skies today.

It took a while to gain acceptance that twin jets could be used on long over-water intercontinental routes. Airbus had an each-way bet with their A330 and A340 models. They are essentially the same airframe, but one has four engines and one has two. Their adage was, “four engines for long haul”. The A340 proved popular at first and boasted a long-range model that flew some of the longest routes in the world. It was quipped that it was a flying tanker with a few passengers along for the ride.

Once ETOPS approval was given to the large twin-jets such as the; Airbus A330, Boeing 777, and more recently the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and Airbus A350, the economics of the four-engined airliner just didn’t stack up anymore.

Today

Today it seems to be the age of the twin-engined airliner which is capable of meeting and surpassing the performance, reliability and economics of all previous airliners. What used to take 6 weeks by ship, 4 days by flying boat or 3 days by Super Constellation is now possible in around 17 hours.

Airbus A350 XWB is the new high-tech twin jet airliner from Airbus.

When we expect to be able to go and explore any part of the world in the few weeks of holidays we are allocated, or go and close a business deal on the other side of the world, this is a huge step forward.

On the other side of the coin, one has to wonder what is lost when you no longer stop along the way. Have we lost the adventure that makes travel exciting? Will we no longer look forward to the journey itself as we complain about the food and watch the same shows we watch in our own living room?

It seems long-haul flights have become as exciting as a trip to the mall.

Sydney Welcomes American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER.

It might have been Friday the 13th, but Sydney turned on a stunning morning for the publicity visit of the American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER twin jet. This Boeing 777 had flown overnight from Hong Kong after completing a Dallas to Hong Kong service and added in a side trip to Sydney to promote the new direct American Airlines service between Los Angeles and Sydney. After an absence of 2 decades, American Airlines returns to these shores working in concert with Australian carrier, QANTAS.

The aircraft was flown empty from Hong Kong to Sydney with just two pilots on board. With an arrival at around 08:30 am into Sydney and a departure around 10:00 pm that evening, the pilots used their thirteen and a half hours in Sydney to sleep, before flying the return sector to Hong Kong.

Air traffic was at acceptable levels and Sydney tower approved a low-level pass over the airfield by the giant Boeing 777 300ER twin jet. Descending to 1,800 feet she came in from the south and did a slow fly over the field along the runway 34 left centre line. She then continued on and did a west-to-east pass over Sydney Harbour before returning back over the sea to land on runway 34 left.

Brand New Boeing 777

This American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER registration N734AR is under a month old with its first flight on 15 October 2015. It was delivered to American Airlines in Dallas / Fort Worth on 26 October 2015. Powered by 2 giant General Electric GE GE90-115B engines which are currently the largest turbofan jet engines in the world, the Boeing 777 has a very impressive presence. The engines themselves are rated to produce 115,300 lbs of thrust or 510-kilo Newtons. 

Front view of the General Electric GE GE90-115B engine which is currently the largest turbofan jet engine in the world.

Walking around underneath the 777, one gets some perspective of the actual size of this aircraft. I was fortunate enough to be able to have an up close and personal look, whilst she was housed in hanger 96 at Sydney airport for publicity visits by the press, as well as representatives from the travel industry. If the size didn't impress, the newness certainly did.

Shiny new painted tail of American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER, Registration N734AR.

Under the Boeing 777 tail looking forward. Less than a month old and this American Airlines 777 was as shiny as a new pin.

The huge engine intake on the largest turbojet engine in the world powers this American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER.

This newness was even more evident when entering the cabin from the rear door. That feeling of getting into a new car. 

On Board the American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER

There are basically 4 classes in the American Airlines 777 300ER. Main Cabin, Main Cabin Extra, Business Class, and First Class. In the Main Cabin, the configuration is 10 seats across the cabin width in a 3 x 4 x 3 setup. In Main Cabin Extra there is an additional 6 inches of legroom in the same seating style.

American Airlines Boeing 777 300ER Main Cabin. Seats are in 3x4x3 configuration.

Both Business and First Class are set up in a herringbone alcove configuration which gives each seat the feeling of privacy. All classes can enjoy 250 movies, 130 TV shows, 18 radio channels, and 380 music albums.

Each seat also has AC outlets as well as USB connections, so you will be able to have your devices fully powered during the flight and charged up for arrival. For an additional cost, WiFi is also available. The dome on top of the aircraft fuselage is the receiver for satellite internet which drives the WiFi connection.

Boeing Sky Interior

The cabin itself is presented in Boeings' new sky format, with contoured ceilings and LED lighting. This interior gives a feeling of space and coupled with the fully controllable LED lighting has a calming and relaxing effect.

Boeing Sky Interior LED lights change the look and feel of the cabin with dimming and colour changes.

Whilst walking through, each cabin had slightly different colours being emitted by the lighting which was quite effective. The feeling of space created by the contoured ceilings and luggage bins was not done at the expense of the storage space. I found the overhead luggage bins to be quite generous in size and well able to accommodate the wheelie bags that have become the favourite of today's traveller.

The average flying time between Sydney and Los Angeles is around fifteen and a half hours which can vary due to winds aloft.  The new 777 300ER certainly looked like it would make for a comfortable ride with plenty of entertainment to pass the long journey. 

One thing I did notice and if I was travelling as a couple I would try and get these seats.  There are two together next to the window instead of the usual 3 if you go to row 30, seats A and C. I believe the opposite side would be the same and would be row 30, seats H and J. They seemed to be able to recline even though the bulkhead is behind them. If anyone tries these, be sure to leave us a message below and give your thoughts and experiences.

Seats 30 A and C look good if you are travelling as a couple. Two across instead of three.

Thank you for stopping by.