[Anonymous]

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

Who dares? As I usually travel in Economy this would be a big NO:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/10096266/Non-stop-flights-to-Australia-confirmed.html

[AMcWhirter]

Bearing in mind the flight length, it’s a pity TK has now confirmed it will remove its comfortable premium economy seating from its fleet of B777-300ERs:

http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/turkish-to-remove-premium-economy-seating

But it still remains only a plan and then, if the non-stop route were to proceed, it would only happen in a few years’ time.

TK’s initial Istanbul-Sydney service will operate one-stop via a city in Asia.

Right now TK has no planes in its fleet capable of operating non-stop with a full payload. It would have to acquire a new aircraft type.

[pdtraveller]

TK are clearly becoming a force to be reckoned with. I have not had the pleasure but the J product looks superb and may be we’ll suited to a non stop oz operation.
To be fair it is only just Europe and London is still almost 5~6 hours away when you factor in transit times. Would you really want to switch from flat bed to economy seating for such a final leg. That assumes they do not use long haul equipment on this route.
Non the less clever announcement from TK.

[TominScotland]

The Telegraph report, while correct to highlight the first Europe – Australia flight, slightly misleads when stating that “The Istanbul-based airline’s new non-stop journey – when it begins – will put many European cities within one short hop of the Australian city.” OK, its true but itignores the fact that Emirates already offers this from a wide range of European cities to rather more Australian destinations than just Sydney.

[Bucksnet]

The Telegraph article is not correct – Turkey is in Asia, not Europe.

[VintageKrug]

While that one runs and runs, shouldn’t people be more focussed on Turkish Airlines’ derisory safety record?

Four serious crashes in the past two decades, 147 dead and 110 injured; that’s not a great record for a relatively modest-sized carrier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines#Incidents_and_accidents

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

Bucksnet

Ataturk Airport is in Europe.

Alex

Which aircraft is required to operate such a long non-stop flight?

[sparkyflier]

TK has a fleet of over 200 aircraft and serves more countries than any other airline.

Hardly a modest sized carrier VK.You are trying to mislead by exaggerating the scale of the incidents versus number of aircraft in fleet, or maybe you just do not know how big TK are now.

[craigwatson]

Sadly I would have to agree with VK, as a commercial pilot at this moment in time there is no way I would put my family or myself on TK or KE, and that goes for I would say the majority of crew in Europe.

[JohnHarper]

I’d be more concerned about an airline that manages to have a plane take off with not one but two engine cowlings unfastened. That was 100% of the engines at fault in this instance.

Turkish are, IME excellent with high standards of service.

[AMcWhirter]

Hello alexpo1

The ideal aircraft would be either an A340-500 or a B777-200LR.

But as I have written in the magazine, these ultra long-haul flights have fallen out of fashion owing to today’s fuel prices.

Istanbul-Sydney is only a few hundred miles shorter than today’s longest flight which is SIA’s non-stop service linking Singapore with New York.

SIA and Thai introduced non-stop flights from Singapore and Bangkok to the US but both failed to make a go out of it.

Thai axed its non-stop flights last year while SIA is set to follow later this year.

See these news items:

http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/thai-to-axe-non-stop-los-angeles-service

http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/sia-to-cease-non-stop-flying-to-los-angeles-and

Ultra long-haul flights are fuel inefficient because in the early stages of the mission you are burning fuel just to carry fuel. That’s why a former AF CEO famously billed the A340-500 as a “flying fuel tanker with few people on board.”

Here’s a backgrounder as to why they have become unfashionable:

http://www.businesstraveller.com/archive/2012/april-2012/special-reports/in-focus

The non-stop market from Istanbul to Sydney must be small. It means therefore that TK would have to fill its flights (as it does in many cases now) by attracting transfer passengers.

But then if you’re flying from say, Rome or Paris or London or Manchester etc to Sydney then you already have a wide choice of one-stop flights with other top Asian and Gulf carriers such as SIA, CX, MAS, EK and EY. And, of course, GA will be joining the party from London next October.

What it means is that TK would have to undercut these rivals to attract customers which would then harm yield (ie revenue per seat) which in turn would make the flight uneconomic to operate.

Of course, nothing in the airline business is set in stone so it might happen but probably with a twin-engined rather than a four-engined plane even though those A340-500s can be acquired at knock-down prices.

Much depends on the price of oil. Who can predict what that will be in a few years’ time ?

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

Thanks for your reply Alex

Indeed, a few years is a very long time in the airline industry.

Dubai to Sydney would be much too long for me and, at a rough estimate, a flight from Istanbul would add at least an extra 3 hours to the journey.

[Bucksnet]

alexpo1 – 12/06/2013 08:40 GMT

Oh yes, TK’s main hub is on the European side, not at the other airport they operate from on the Asian side. The European part of Turkey is of course land they took through war.

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

Hello Bucksnet

I had no doubt you knew IST is in Europe 🙂

[Author]

Posts