Record-Breaking 23-Hour Nonstop Flight Takes Off
Travel Blog • Michael Yessis • 11.10.05 | 4:35 AM ET
Captain Suzanna Darcy-Hennemann took off from Hong Kong Wednesday morning in a Boeing 777-200LR and set out for London—heading eastbound, the long way around. Four Boeing test pilots are scheduled to share flying duties during the 12,500-nautical-mile flight, which Seattle Times reporter Dominic Gates writes will be a distance record for a commercial jet.
The plane is scheduled to go into service next year—it’s only carrying Boeing execs, journalists and reps from the engine maker on the current trip—and Qantas is considering buying a version with auxiliary fuel tanks that will expand its range so it could travel from, say, Sydney to London.
Besides the claustrophobia, the increased risk of deep vein thrombosis and the epic bouts of jet lag, it sounds like a great step forward. But at least one environmental group has come out against extra-long nonstop flights. Times transport correspondent Ben Webster writes:
Environmental groups said that flying non-stop produced more greenhouse gases than catching a series of shorter flights because the aircraft burnt so much extra fuel to carry the fuel needed for the final few hours of the journey.
Jeff Gazzard, co-ordinator of the Greenskies Alliance, said: “As well as the longest flight, Boeing should enter the record books for the most gratuitous use of fuel by an airline for the sake of a publicity stunt.
“They are clinging to the mantra of bigger, faster and longer in a world which is struggling to cope with the impact of climate change.”
Email to friend
Twitter
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo! Buzz
Michael Yessis is the cofounder and coeditor-in-chief of World Hum.
Paul Briede Jr 11.10.05 | 9:37 AM ET
It is clear the 777-200 LR is going to burn less fuel than any “series of shorter flights”. The aircraft is more efficient than almost every airliner out today. This is a positive step, no matter how you look at it. Environmental groups need to focus their energy on real issues rather than make false claims against aircraft manufacturing companies.