flying

[toetoe]

is it true that if you are flying from america to australia do you fly across europe and asia,if this is so can anyone tell me why don't they fly the other way e.g the west coast of america to the east coast of australia

[sddsddean]

Went on a cruise starting in Sydney last year and all the Americans had come via West Coast (LA mainly) and across the Pacific. I can't see an airline would even consider flying the other way (eastbound). I think someone is winding you up!

[Buenchico]

Watch out for an answer to this question from Clanad. He's a US airline pilot, so he'll know the definitive answer.

However, I assume that the reason lies with the need for a refuelling stop. This site uses 'great circle mapping' to show the shortest route between any two airports:
http://gc.kls2.com
(To understand how it works, imagine pulling a piece of string tight, on a globe of the world, between two airports and drawing a line where the string lies. Then imagine that the globe is mapped onto the familiar 'mercator projection, which most atlases use. This website shows where the path of the string ends up).

Here's the result if you ask for the shortest route between New York and Perth. The distance is 11627 miles, so refuelling is required, but can you see anywhere suitable?
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=JFK-per%0D% 0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=mi&PATH-MI NIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STY LE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=

Here's Los Angeles to Sydney. (Same problem):
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=lax-syd%0D% 0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=mi&PATH-MI NIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STY LE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=

Incidentally, most people are surprised to see the shortest route between the UK (London) and New Zealand (Auckland):
20:12 Thu 28th Feb 2008

[Buenchico]

Oops. The final link was cut off:
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=lhr-akl&RAN GE=&PATH-COLOR=&PATH-UNITS=mi&PATH-MINIMUM=&SP EED-GROUND=&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&R ANGE-COLOR=&MAP-STYLE=

Chris

[sddsddean]

I think most of the ones I was referring to either stopped in Tahiti or went via Auckland. Not sure if anyone did it direct.

[Clanad]

Chris, there's little I can add to your superb demonstration. The only additional factors are often driven by the 'bean counters' that prevail in any airline operation. They would see the opportunity to carry passengers between the refueling stop(s) and final destination that might not otherwise travel beyond those points. Somewhat akin to you Brits travelling from London to many of the Cairbbean or Mexican east coast destinations being required to land in Ft. Lauderdale or Miami. BA can, without violating ICAO cabotage rules, pick up additional passengers on the Miami to Barbados leg(as example).
Additionally, flight crews can only be on duty 14 hours and accumulate 10 hours of actaul flight time(as a general rule) within any 24 hour period. Long haul's require carriage of additional crews in sleeping quarters that take up a lot of valuable passenger revenue space...
Finally, as many airlines transition to more fuel friendly, large two engine aircraft as opposed to 4 engine (the venerable MD-11, DC-10 and Boeing 727 have been or are being phased out) the ETOPS rule becomes more noticeable. Stands for Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards which says that a two engine aircraft must never be more than a given, proven time on one engine from an adequate landing site. Most airlines start out at 90 minutes and progress up to the now average180 minute standard. A lot of money invested in training, navigation standards, engine monitoring and other factors is required to extend that time by any appreciable amount. The rule doesn't apply except to two engined aircraft...