4 ms·
Speaking as somebody who has flown one regularly between Australia and the US I'll really miss them when they go. They were a much nicer, quieter, smoother expe
by alwaysanon 6y ago
Speaking as somebody who has flown one regularly between Australia and the US I'll really miss them when they go. They were a much nicer, quieter, smoother experience than the 747 or 777 - though the 787 is almost as good and I guess that'll be the way forward...
I had hopes for a 787 from Sydney to Seattle and Chicago direct but I imagine that sort of expansion is likely off the cards for the foreseeable futute...
- gok 6y agoSYD->ORD is around 8100 nm, a bit outside the range of any 787. You'd need a 777-200LR or A350 for that, or a 777-8 if they ever get made.
- alwaysanon 6y agoI thought it was ex SYD but it looks like what Qantas was planning on doing was ex BNE. https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/qantas-sets-sights-on-direct-flights-from-brisbane-to-chicago-and-san-francisco/ https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/qantas-sets...
- jesterson 6y agoSecond that - frequenting between OZ, Singapore and Japan I'd always prefer A380 against 777/787. It's unbeatable beast when it comes to long haul flights. Too sad we are left with A350 and B777 for now.
- WildGreenLeave 6y agoI feel like Airbus planes in general are much quieter than Boeing planes. I flew in a A320 from Bangkok - Singapore and Amsterdam - Moscow and both of these times the flight was much quieter then all of my other flights. Other flights included a diversity of (Boeing) planes including the 737, 747, 777 (300ER) and Embraer 190 (KLMs city hopper). I do usually sit in the front of the plane so it wasn't just the engine noise that was quieter.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]