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.

Boeing 787 vs Airbus A350

Boeing 787 vs Airbus A350, Boeing 777 vs Airbus A330, I hear a lot of questions in this vein.  Which is better?  Which flies further, higher, carries more passengers, and which is the more advanced?

Airliners are like tools in a toolbox that an airline can choose to use on routes appropriate to the traffic demand. Some routes are relatively short and don't require airliners that have a long-range, or the ability to fly a long distance.  If the pair of cities being linked are large cities then there might be a demand for more frequent flights by smaller airliners rather than fewer flights by larger airliners.  This allows the airline to offer business travellers a wider choice of departure times which reduces time wastage waiting for inconvenient less frequent departure times.  At peak times a much larger airliner might be used to ensure maximum uplift of passengers at those times.

It is critical to an airline that they have the right tools for the tasks that they intend to undertake.  Like any business, airlines have to control expenses, so once again the right tool is essential.  This is why many airlines have a mixture of airliner types. These different airliners are used on routes that they are specifically designed for and can perform the task with the minimum overhead expense.

The Airbus A350 XWB takes off on its maiden flight on 14 June 2013 from Aéroport de Toulouse-Blagnac.

Let's look at the two newest offerings from the top two airplane makers, Boeing and Airbus.  Both aircraft manufacturers have come out in the last few years with new models that are technological leaps forward.  The Airbus A350 XWB (eXtra Wide Body) and the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.  These two airliners represent the competition between Airbus and Boeing to have the best offering in the market.  But mostly they represent the demands of their airliner customers for a more advanced and economical tool for their airliner toolbox. Economy is the driving factor.

Particularly since the 2008 doubling of the oil price, airlines have been looking for ways to reduce their fuel bill and therefore protect their margins.  On the other side of the equation, the proliferation of Low-Cost Carriers has put downward pressure on airfares and airlines are having to ensure their aircraft are full in order to make sure they show a profit.

Jet Airways Airbus A330-200 registration VT-JWF.

These two newest airliners employ new techniques such as the use of composite materials to reduce weight, and single-piece fuselage sections to reduce the number of fasteners which once again reduces weight.  Weight reduction of course reduces the amount of fuel burn required to carry a payload from A to B.  Coupled with enhanced passenger comforts to make them more attractive to the travelling public, these airliners are setting the bar for the future of air travel.

Both the Boeing 787 and the Airbus A350 come in 3 variants.  This ensures that the models are a very versatile offering to the market and the same design can be used for many different scenarios.  This also highlights the fact that giant twin-engined jets are now the mainstay of passenger aviation.  We have seen the demise of the Airbus A340 which was a 4-engined version of the Airbus A330.  This was produced at a time when twin jets were still getting approvals for long over-water flights, but with the present level of engine technology, this is no longer an issue.  We may even see the end of the 747 and A380 if a recession hits as some would suggest.

So, when we talk about Boeing 787 vs Airbus A350 or Boeing 777 vs Airbus A330, we have to remember that there are different variants of each of those models.  Let's look at range to start with.  Obviously, if an airline has long overwater routes, then they will need airliners with long-range ability.  The economics have to add up as you may end up with a flying tanker with a few passengers on board.

In ascending order the maximum ranges of the largest of today's twin jet airliners.

Although we can see that Boeings' 777 offers the shortest and the longest range, the airliner models are fairly evenly spread through the various niche markets as relates to range.  The Boeing 777X, which I have not yet included here, as design specs are only now just being finalised, will have a range of 17,220Km which is up there with the Boeing 777 200LR.

United Airlines Boeing 777-200 registration N778UA.

So we know how far these airliners can fly relative to each other, but unless we know what they can carry over that distance, the information is a little pointless.  So below we have a table to show the relative passenger numbers as well as the Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW) for each.

A list of the large twin jet airliners with their maximum take-off weights (MTOW) expressed in kilograms and their maximum passenger numbers when configured in a typical 3-class configuration.

We can see here also that there are niches for each of the airliner models,  for each Boeing offering there is an Airbus offering that does relatively the same job and vice versa.  If you look at an aircraft that carries a heavier load you can go to the range chart above and it will probably have a lesser range unless, of course, it is a specially built extended range variant.  You can also notice that for example the Boeing 777 200 and Boeing 777 200ER (Extended Range) carry the same amount of passengers, however, the 777 200ER has a higher maximum takeoff weight.  This of course is to lift the additional amount of fuel that gives it the extended range ability.

This mix of attributes ensures that all niches in the Very Large Airliner (VLA) market are addressed.  Large capacity - short distance, large capacity - long distance, small capacity - long distance, small capacity - short distance.

Aircraft Model and Variant	Range	Passenger Capacity (typical 3 class)	Maximum take off weight (MTOW) (tonnes)	Fuselage Length (metres)	Wing Span (metres)
Airbus A330 200	13,430	293	233.00	58.82	60.30
Airbus A330 300	10,830	335	230.00	63.69	60.30
Airbus A350 800	15,700	270	248.00	60.54	64.75
Airbus A350 900	15,000	314	268.00	66.89	64.75
Airbus A350 1000	15,600	350	308.00	73.88	74.75
Boeing 777 200	9,700	301	247.20	63.70	60.90
Boeing 777 200 ER	14,310	301	297.55	63.70	60.90
Boeing 777 200 LR	17,370	301	347.50	63.70	64.80
Boeing 777 300	11,120	365	299.37	73.90	60.90
Boeing 777 300 ER	14,690	365	351.50	73.90	64.80
Boeing 787 8	15,200	242	228.00	56.70	60.10
Boeing 787 9	15,700	280	251.00	62.80	60.10
Boeing 787 10	13,000	323	251.00	68.30	60.10

The table above shows the different relationships between capacity, length and wing span.  In the case of the Boeing 777, the LR and ER extended range variants use additional wing size to enable higher lift as well as accommodate more fuel storage space.

Thank you for taking the time to read about these airliners.  We would love to hear any comments you might have and any ideas to make this site more useful to you. These can be left below.

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.

QANTAS Airbus A380 Orders Capped at 12.

Back in 2006, QANTAS was one of the first airlines to place an order for the Airbus A380 Super Jumbo. 20 of the type were ordered which certainly lifted the QANTAS image as an industry leader. On 21 September 2008, the first A380, registration VH-OQA named for the much loved and respected aviatrix Nancy-Bird Walton landed in Sydney. Over the next 3 and a half years Airbus delivered 11 more airframes with the last of the 12 arriving in December 2011. VH-OQL, named Phyllis Arnott after the first woman in Australia to take a commercial pilot's licence, is now officially the one that concluded the order.

QANTAS had the third largest order for the Airbus A380

For the last 8 years, QANTAS has had 8 A380s outstanding in their order book with Airbus. Sources at QANTAS indicate that those remaining 8 aircraft have not been featured in its future network plans for some time. This week it was announced that the remaining 8 would no longer be required and in discussions with Airbus formally cancelled that remaining order. This is no doubt bad news for Airbus as this cancellation is a significant contributor to the $US4 billion in lost contracts. Airbus is putting a brave face on it, one source was quoted as saying, "one month does not make a year". Let's hope they're right.

When we look at the order book for the A380 as of the end of January 2019, we see there are 313 orders with 234 airframes delivered of which 232 are currently in active service. The QANTAS order for 20 aircraft was the third largest behind Singapore Airlines and Emirates. The Emirates order itself is what is keeping the A380 factories open. Of the 162 ordered by the giant airline, 109 have been delivered. We also note that Virgin Atlantic who had 6 on order has now dropped off the order list.

The Emirates Airbus A380 was in a class of its own.

Whilst Airbus might see the Emirates order as being a lifeline for the A380. There is talk that Emirates may also be rethinking its strategy and perhaps looking at the A350 as a viable alternative. As we wrote back in 2015 about the 747-8, is the day of the 4 engined Jumbo sized aircraft at an end? We can only speculate, and of course, Airbus is remaining tight-lipped, about whether we will soon see a closure of the Airbus A380 production line.

QANTAS say they are committed to the A380s in their fleet and around mid-year this year, they will embark on a revamping and upgrade of the interiors of their A380 fleet. So there certainly is a commitment to the type in the future.

Project Sunrise

Described as the last frontier of aviation by the CEO of QANTAS, Alan Joyce, is the non-stop flight to anywhere in the world. The advent of the giant twin-engined airliners is bringing this dream into reality. QANTAS recently took delivery of its Boeing 787-9 Dreamliners which have been deployed on the Perth to London non-stop flight route. This will become available for East Coast Australian cities soon as well. Mr Joyce indicated that the aircraft are stripped back and are targeted at the higher-end business market. Cargo may even be sacrificed in favour of sleeping berths for extremely long flights.

The QANTAS Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner is pivotal in Project Sunrise, bringing more of the world into the non-stop flight umbrella.

Perhaps we are at that tipping point where those longer flights are becoming economically feasible. If we go back a few years, the Airbus A340 was given as a solution to those ultra-long flights that other airliners could not compete with. Singapore Airlines pioneered some of those long routes, but eventually, the economics didn't stack up. The long-range A340 became known as a flying tanker with a few passengers allowed along for the ride.

QANTAS also introduced an extremely long route from Sydney to Dallas, Texas using their Boeing 747 400ER. It was quite a stretch, and on several occasions on the Dallas to Sydney leg, which is against the jet stream, the aircraft had to stop over in Noumea due to low fuel. This route is now operated by the Airbus A380.

Originally Mr Joyce of QANTAS was adamant that the Project Sunrise aircraft would carry in excess of 300 passengers. This has been revised back now, and may well follow the lead of Singapore Airlines on their Singapore to New York route using an Airbus A350-900ULR (Ultra Long Range). This non-stop flight of 18 hours is available to 67 Business Class travellers along with 94 Premium Economy Class travellers. Certainly a high-end portion of the market. For high-flying business travellers, this is the quickest way to get there, so maybe it is money well spent.

Perhaps we're not all as keen as those business travellers to shave a few hours off our trip and pay those premium prices. But there are new aircraft being developed and improved all the time. The likely candidates are the Boeing 777X and the Airbus A350 1000. We mustn't quite forget about supersonic travel either. Concorde may not have flown for a decade and a half, but that doesn't mean the concept is dead.

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.