Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 30 posts

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#21

Post by toomuchtodo »

grkvlt wrote: post #18
FabHK wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed - if you fly Economy. For example, Asia to Europe it's quite pleasant to stop over in the Gulf (sorry, non-Gulf carriers :-) However, if you fly Business (or even First), my, are these long flights pleasant. Also, if you wish to minimise the number of take-offs and landings (eg out of a fear of flying, rational or not), non-stop flights are the way to go, obviously. EDIT: s/direct/non-stop/g

If you have status with an airline, then stopovers become more relaxing with access to lounges (food, drinks, internet etc.) plus many have areas where you can get some sleep, so economy might become more feasible.

If you don't have airline status, get a Platinum Amex for ~$500/year, which gets you Priority Pass and Centurion lounge access (among a raft of other benefits that are out of scope for this comment). To your point, stopovers become enjoyable; I no longer mind multiple legs when traveling internationally, and I plan my flights based on the stopovers with the best lounges I can access.

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#22

Post by wben »

XorNot wrote: post #10
wild_preference wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve long yearned for a flight where we just lay down the whole time, stacked. I’ve envied everyone who could ever sleep in a sitting position.

I'd pay more for a flight where they just sedated me in advance and I woke up at my destination.

I used to hate long fights, but now with a bit of Alprazolam I can take the "short cut". The 14 hour flight Chicago to Seoul seems to take only 6 hours instead of the normal 14 Hours.

Now I don't care about Ecomomy seats, etc. I'm asleep most of the time.

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#23

Post by Taniwha »

grkvlt wrote: post #16
XorNot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd pay more for a flight where they just sedated me in advance and I woke up at my destination.

Diazepam is definitely useful, and 5-10mg ought to be enough to let you have a decent rest on flights between 6-12h long, I've found. But you'll probably be a bit groggy on arrival, so depending on your immigration status and the target nation, this may be something to consider ;)

Having had a horrific experience with my wife, halcyon and US customs I recommend being particularly careful here - try your dose out before you fly

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#24

Post by toomanybeersies »

ipsi wrote: post #6
FabHK wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed - if you fly Economy. For example, Asia to Europe it's quite pleasant to stop over in the Gulf (sorry, non-Gulf carriers :-) However, if you fly Business (or even First), my, are these long flights pleasant. Also, if you wish to minimise the number of take-offs and landings (eg out of a fear of flying, rational or not), non-stop flights are the way to go, obviously. EDIT: s/direct/non-stop/g

As someone who also flies from NZ to London every now and then, I would love a non-stop flight from, say, London to Sydney, and then a short hop from there to NZ (the city I'm actually flying to couldn't handle a plane big enough to fly from London, sadly, so it's a minimum of one stop). That would be quicker, I'd be able to optimise my sleep better, and at least in business class it would be reasonably relaxing. Als…

I thought Air NZ went to AKL-SFO-LHR these days?

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#25

Post by toomanybeersies »

sushisource wrote: post #13
XorNot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd pay more for a flight where they just sedated me in advance and I woke up at my destination.

Now we're talking. I'll take a vodka and a valium, see you when we land.

I assume you aware that it's not a great idea to mix benzos with alcohol?

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#26

Post by sitepodmatt »

xg15 wrote: post #15

> Singapore is also adding bone-broth teas because they’ll send people to the bathroom more frequently, forcing them to stretch. I'm sure it's meant well, but this idea fulfills all the bad cliches about Singapore to a point...

At the same time reducing bathrooms (a350-900 for example), i.e. increasing passengers per toilet. Logic ain't with this airline, the glory days for SG are well gone.

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#27

Post by sitepodmatt »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #11

A loosely related interesting fact. When you go on long international trips you're more likely to go on older planes than would be used for short domestic trips. Really counter intuitive since you'd think you'd want the tip top newest beasts for the long international flights, but the main wear and tear on planes is in pressurization cycles. International flights experience a single pressurization/depressurization fo…

That depends, Europe to/from Asia, whatever airline, it's uncommon not be on a 787/a350 which are very new or a380 (ranging from 2-10years old), occasionally have to suffer a max 15 year old 777/a330 (some airlines are still ordering these new though), but rarely gets worse than this. Most short/regional 737/a320 seem older than above. Going west from europe to say Canada or states I admit is a different story old 757s, a340, 737 on long hauls, 747s, ran by terrible airlines like Air Canada, Air Transat, United and so on, even when they run new metal its terrible legroom.

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#28

Post by jessriedel »

> Beverages are being selected to not only improve hydration

They don't need new types of beverages to improve hydration; water is already optimal. What they need is to give people sizeable plastic water bottles with a screwtop on request rather than a tiny plastic cup. I always end up waking at 4am parched from the dry air and weighing whether I should wake both my poor neighbors so I can get up and track down a flight attendant. And then bring three spillable cups back to my seat.

(Bringing your own bottle is great if you remember to do it, but it's often hard to refill on the plane depending on how they are serving water.)

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#29

Post by xg15 »

sitepodmatt wrote: post #26
xg15 wrote: post #15

> Singapore is also adding bone-broth teas because they’ll send people to the bathroom more frequently, forcing them to stretch. I'm sure it's meant well, but this idea fulfills all the bad cliches about Singapore to a point...

At the same time reducing bathrooms (a350-900 for example), i.e. increasing passengers per toilet. Logic ain't with this airline, the glory days for SG are well gone.

The whole thing doesn't seem logical. Their top priority is keeping people hydrated - so naturally, they'll make the drinks extra-dehydrating...

Re: The Science Behind the World’s Longest Flights

#30

Post by ipsi »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #24
ipsi wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who also flies from NZ to London every now and then, I would love a non-stop flight from, say, London to Sydney, and then a short hop from there to NZ (the city I'm actually flying to couldn't handle a plane big enough to fly from London, sadly, so it's a minimum of one stop). That would be quicker, I'd be able to optimise my sleep better, and at least in business class it would be reasonably relaxing. Als…

I thought Air NZ went to AKL-SFO-LHR these days?

Nope, NZ0001/NZ0002 still fly through LA, unfortunately.
Post reply on HN