Re: O'Hare -> Hong Kong Non-Stop

From:         lstone@interserve.com (Larry Stone)
Organization: InterServe Communications, Inc.
Date:         18 Jul 96 01:59:29 
References:   1 2
Followups:    1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.1305@ohare.Chicago.COM>, kls@ohare.Chicago.COM
(Karl Swartz) responded to somebody:

>>It's amazing they can do this.  If the winds aren't right,
>>they said they will have to touch down in San Francisco or
>>Toyko.
>
>Both would be *way* off course for this flight.  Edmonton (or either
>Anchorage or Fairbanks) would be closer on the North American side,
>while Bejing would probably be the most plausible refueling spot in
>Asia.

The first eastbound went well south of Tokyo and made North American
landfall over the Olympic Peninsula (near Seattle). Fuel will probably not
be an issue eastbound due to winds.

Westbound went much farther north and into Russian airspace but not, I
believe, into Chinese airspace. West of Tokyo - Seoul or Taipei are more
likely fuel stops or Anchorage if known early enough.

Apparently, one fuel saving technique being used is the plane is towed to
the runway and engines started in the runup area.

>>Anyone have more details on the flight?
>
>Only one more bit of trivia -- with stiff headwinds, the flight may
>take longer than 999 minutes (16:39), which required modifications to
>some of UA's operations software!

I think this is a for block-to-block time, not just flight time.

--
-- Larry Stone --- lstone@interserve.com
   http://www.interserve.com/~lstone/
   Belmont, CA, USA
   My opinions, not United's.