Why is this? Weight of fuel that needs to be carried?
Also surely it is more economical to have an aircraft fly one direct route rather than have to perform two sets of taxiing, take off, climbout, descent, and landing even if its per km fuel consumption is slightly higher?
Totally true if you look at one passenger who wants from London to Sydney. But flights via hubs normally work better towards their capacity. So the price per person transported is higher on ULR.
Right, but I thought that on BA's LHR-SYD route, all passengers continued onto SYD regardless of stopover point, so surely for operating the direct LHR-SYD route it would make more sense not to have a stopover. This is not to say that it would also replace flights that BA operate to SIN, BKK and HKG, and passengers could still connect to these flights having flown from other origin points including SYD on other airlines.
So basically what I'm trying to say is wouldn't it still make economic sense to be able to operate a non-stop LHR-SYD flight?
so far it's been almost a month since the MSN001 1st got its engines and I can't wait to see it painted and move on to the flight line. Maybe they'll take a page out of Boeing's book and reveal it on the 3rd of May. [EDIT]Actually that will be unlikely unless the aircraft is already in the process of being painted
There were multiple hints in the past that Airbus is internally aiming to fly before the air show. And while the A350 will not participate to a static nor flying display, nothing should prevent Airbus to do a fly over if the airplane is ready.
Here is a quote from the RR program manager:
"The engines are ready and capable to go to their limits from day one, should Airbus choose to do so," says Young. "The program - which we're fully supporting with our initial flight-compliant engines - has a very clear aim to make sure that first flight is prior to the Paris air show."