Talk:Longest flights/Archive 1

Archive 1

a321 neo

What is the longest flight flown by the a321neo? i think that virgin america has started to operate them this month. Alexmicu00 (talk) 12:41, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

VX2, DCA-SFO, 3931 km, scheduled duration 6:00 Slasher-fun (talk) 18:57, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Longest 777-200LR flight

I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think that a flight from Delhi to San Francisco lasts 18 hours 10 minutes, I think it is closer to 15 hours. I don't know exactly, but I believe that Auckland to Doha-Hamad is the longest flight currently. Can someone check this for me?Yoshi022 (talk) 06:20, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Who keeps changing things?

Someone with only an IP address keeps changing the article wholesale. While a few things on this page might be out of date, most of the changes made are incorrect (e.g. Porter Airlines operates Ottawa to Melbourne, FL, meaning Toronto to Melbourne isn't the longest Dash 8 Q400 flight.

Can someone lock the article to prevent edits from random people? It's not even possible to message someone without an account to ask about the changes they are making, so unregistered users shouldn't be allowed to edit.Mirza Ahmed (talk) 05:48, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Anyone can edit Wikipedia. If you disagree with some edits, you can revert the incorrect ones. This article is too close to WP:OR anyway and should rely on a single external source, not wisdom of crowds. Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

This is not an article about the longest flights by US carriers

Recently a new list has developed among the already too many lists on this page about longest flights by US carriers. This may possibly be OK as a seperate article but does NOT belong in this page. If this stays I could also create a page longest flights of French Airlines, British Swiss, Australian. Really an encyclopaedia is not the proper place for this sillyness. The rationale for reinstating the table after it all had been deleted was "I disagree (27 out of 30 of longest flights in the world involve a terminus in North America) US Carriers are unique." What makes US carriers any more unique than any other country? oh the utter self assured smugness that comes from those in the US with such a narrow view of the world. The logic of this is just bizarre. The fact that some of the existing flights have connection to the US is of qustionable logic - either they are already dealt with elsewhere in the article or they are unimportant. Andrewgprout (talk) 08:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Andrewgprout said the utter self assured smugness that comes from those in the US with such a narrow view of the world.. That's quite a value judgement. Europe is at the center of the land hemisphere, and as a result tends not to have very long flights. The geography of the world makes the U.S. relatively unique. `Pacomartin (talk)

This article has enough fluff, it should be displaced in its own article (of which the relevance would be uncertain). --Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Section removed. People can just sort longer table by airline. Pacomartin (talk)

Who keeps table of maximum range by airline updated

The entry for Allegiant Air is no longer valid as they have retired all the B757s about three months ago and discontinued flights to Honolulu. Allegiant Air G4 1051/570/572 Las Vegas to Honolulu 4,437 2,757 06 hr 10 min Boeing 757-200 I suspect that their longest flight is Las Vegas to McGhee Tyson Airport (1739 miles), but I don't know how to verify. Pacomartin (talk) 15:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Political correctness

The content about worlds longest flights with all-female crews is nothing but PC. It is not notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.83.76.211 (talk) 14:55, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Could someone double-check the longest distance?

Could someone double-check the longest distance underneath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_flights#By_great_circle_distance , it seems difficult to believe that it's in the millions of kms? I think someone may have made a malicious edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=877918816&oldid=877636026&title=Longest_flights — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.98.242.79 (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Longest Flight on Airbus A320

Gulf Air no longer uses the A320 on the London to Bahrain route. It is now operated with a Boeing 787-9. What would be the longest now? 2601:640:C002:9300:B8F2:A27:E1D2:E444 (talk) 07:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Icelandair ends their Iceland to San Francisco flight today (5 January 2020)

The Longest flight on a B757-200 ends today.

Presumably, Icelandair's longest nonstop flight is KEF-SEA 3622 miles / 5830 kilometers / 3148 nautical miles, but I don't know how to verify that (1) they do not fly to Portland at times, and (2) there is not a B752 route longer than that. Pacomartin (talk) 09:34, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Delta 95 aircraft type

Delta uses an Airbus A330-200 not a Airbus A330-300 on the DTW-NGO route. source: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/dl95 So DL95 cannot be the longest A330-300 flight. Could this be fixed? 2601:640:C002:9300:75A2:209B:1F48:12B9 (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Air Tahiti Nui will operate the longest Non-Stop Flight

Due to the recent 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic, Air Tahiti Nui will begin operating direct flights from French Polynesia to Mainland France (NTAA-LFPG) (Pape’ete to Paris) non-stop with their B787-9. This was due to US regulations prohibiting flights from Schengen countries. This will make it the longest non-stop flight scheduled at 15715km (8485nm). Can this be included on the list of the longest non-stop flights? Daniboiii (talk) 12:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Name

For clarity, shouldn't this article be named "Longest airline flights"? Trivialist (talk) 22:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Questions/Observations to be addressed

Contradictions between "current" and "records" tables

In the By aircraft type section, for the same aircraft (e.g., A220-100), there are several examples of a longer current route than the longest historical route, even though the "records" section clearly says that it includes both current and historical routes. How can this be? Am I misunderstanding the logic of the tables? Also, the tables have different headers, units, and formatting for the same data. Is there a reason for this? It seems that both should use the same formatting in all regards. I don't want to change anything if I'm misunderstanding something. Thanks. Holy (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Holy is correct - the tables should be aligned if the current route is also the longest ever (historic) for a type, it should appear in both tables). Put this on the todo list? --DigitalExpat (talk) 10:14, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Confirm and Assure Data Accuracy

As Wikipedia's value comes from its confirmed validity, suggest in addition to the vigilant great monitoring of new longest flights by Wikipedia contributors, that we also group verify the entered data (such as distances for example) regularly. Today (Jan 5 2021) all distances for Airlines and aircraft types for non-stop flights (Current) had all entered Great Circle Distances (GCD) against global standard (eg: GCMap.com) - and found 21 of the 65 entries being incorrect by more than +/- 5km. Proof & Citation:data used here --DigitalExpat (talk) 06:09, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Continuing Data Assurance - Checked Non-stop flights (top 30, by great circle distance) - Found 1 off, updated it, (also 2 out of 3 GCD calculators say ORD-HYD = 13,301, 1 of the 3 (gcmap.com) say 13,299) - leaving at 13,301 DigitalExpat (talk) 13:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

• Airlines and aircraft types for non-stop flights (Current) - Checked 5 Jan 2021 - Proof & Citation:data used here --DigitalExpat (talk) 06:09, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
• Non-stop flights (top 30, by great circle distance) - Checked 20 Jan 2021 - Proof & Citation: Data used here DigitalExpat (talk) 12:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
• Direct Flights with Stops - checked 20 Jan 2021 Proof & Citation for Origin-Destination and by Sector DigitalExpat (talk) 13:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Question: Why limited to 30?

(Expand to View This Thread)

What is the rational on trimming/limiting the longest active flight table to 30? While every table needs its limits, wouldn't this article be equally, if not better, served by having a larger table? (If looking for a round number, you could say "40" but we have the historical edits here on this wiki to support this information, reveal some more interesting longest flights (we're maintaining the data by carrier anyways so no additional maintenance overhead...is there a rationale for not doing this? --DigitalExpat (talk) 22:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC) No - all the tables should be trimmed and limited to a much smaller number, I would suggest 10 or at the most 15. The more you have the bigger the problem to maintain an ever decreasing relevance and complexity of information. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia it is not really the correct venue for such exhaustive lists. Andrewgprout (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2021 (UTC) Thanks for the Thoughts Andrew, I appreciate it!! Entirely agree if the case is the article isn't being maintained....but this wiki page seems to be one of the better maintained repositories (and with reputable citations) on the net for this topic in particular. It is evident looking at the edit history that we have the ability to ensure it keeps its accuracy (for example the article is already committed to maintaining a table of 259 International Carriers), it would seem that there is no difference in the maintenance effort required for a list of 10/30/40 for longest active flight. Only limiting information (eg for example now when we have a new top 30 flight, the old one simply drops off into oblivion... having a longer list I see as only benefitting (more secondary information possible (continent pair frequency, trends over time based on age of the route). Looking at other Wiki articles like "Longest Road Tunnel" (Table is ~100 rows?)"Busiest Cruise Ports" (96 rows) "busiest airports in the United States" (61 rows) it does seems 30 to be an arbitrary number. Agreed though that maintained (and thus accurate) information is paramount, but the maintenance cost between 30 and 35 or 40 is marginal I would suggest... --DigitalExpat (talk) 09:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC) Oblivion is fine. This is an encyclopaedia not a directory, where do you propose to stop - your argument could go on for ever. If anybody cares what the 40th or the 50th longest flight is Wikipedia is not the correct place to store that type of information. Also just because other pages have something does not make it right or sensible my advice would be to be very careful of relying too much on such arguments. And I would disagree that this page is particularly accurate or well referenced. Andrewgprout (talk) 00:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC) Love your thoughts Andrew, thanks for the reply!... I think we're thinking along the same lines - the table needs to stop where it stops being maintained/maintainable (and therefore inaccurate/unreliable - the opposite of what an encyclopedia should be). I think that an encyclopedia with 1000 (verified) pages of facts is more valuable than one with 100, or 10, or 1....). As Per the Wikipedia's purpose statement: "Wikipedia is intended to be the largest, most comprehensive, and most widely-available encyclopedia ever written". As long as the list is maintained and retained to be accurate, I think a list of knowledge about the flights has lots to offer to the world and to wikipedia. On your second point, Just to clarify, I didn't say the page is accurate or well referenced, I said the article is "one of the better maintained repositories (and with reputable citations) on the net". Yes definitely more maintenance and citations are certainly needed here, but let's do that and make it the quality wikipedia article (and if it can be more comprehensive (and cited), all the better I'd suggest. I don't think reducing the amount of information in the article (unless it is unreliable, in which case we should tag it as citation needed, and set out about fixing it!) is in alignment with the spirit of Wikipedia to be the largest, most comprehensive encyclopedia ever written..." I can see from your past contributions (and those of many others), you've made the article an excellent one to date, I'd love to see it continue to grow to the next level is what my question is truly about.... All the best - DigitalExpat (talk) 08:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC) I found solid citations and sufficient references to expand Wikipedia's knowledge from 30 to 35 with informational authority (see updated article). Will need to ensure we continue to maintain this list (especially as COVID19 fallout continues and potentially scheduled flights become de-scheduled/ended... For what it is worth, I have a start on additional flights, but I don't have conclusive evidence there aren't more fitting. My research as it stands now could be: 36 - YYZ to HKG (AC & CX) 37 - TPE to JFK (CI & BR) 38 - EWR to MUM (UA & AI) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DigitalExpat (talk • contribs) 13:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Continuing the conversation here regarding the question of length of the Longest Flights Table: On Jan 15 2021 Change# 1000524063 was made to expand the Wikipedia with the information of "Top 30 Longest Active Flights" → "Top 35 Longest Active Flights" with the honest intent of improving the article/expanding Wikipedia in alignment with the 5 pillars. On Jan 16,The change was reverted with the comment "Although this was discussed increasing the length of this table was not agreed by consensus - in fact quite the opposite. The enclyclopadiaicness of the 35th in any list is most highly questionable". So in a desire to address this, I am reopening this thread here in the Talk Page to see about reaching a consensus. (Note that it wasn't the intent to forgo/override a consensus, no ill will was intended, merely was following the Wikipedia Guideline of "Be Bold". So am now reinstating this thread to see what Consensus can be reached here (which Andrewgprout correctly referred to in his comment, and I respect and value this Wikipedia tenet of course). At the moment, I'm working to understand why we wouldn't want the article to be more definitive on the topic (but still within reason) by expanding the maintained/cited active record list by 5). There has been a lot of great contribution to make the article how good it is today, I'd like to see it improved even more and I'm working to understand why adding more collated/referenced/cited information into the article is not-desired/should not be added to Wikipedia. But I respect the opinion and experience of all contributors to the article and will see what this consensus can be reached on the topic? Let's have some more discussion on this change so as to avoid a case of reverting only due to no consensus since only 2 people are currently posting on this matter. I respect Andrewgprout and all the great contributors to the article! Thanks - DigitalExpat (talk) 07:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC) In an interest to gather a wide consensus as possible on the above question as rightfully suggested by Andrewgprout and to respect the significant contributions over the years I've enjoyed this article, I'm tagging that top 15 contributors to the article over the last 5 years to seek their (along with anyone else who is active on this article of course! ( like Holy)) opinion if they please? By all of us working together, I think we make Wikipedia (and this article) better! Marc Lacoste 92 editsC933103 56 editsIrehdna 50 editsAndrewgprout 46 editsAzboi 37 editsAirportlover147812 36 editsGbrkk 33 editsWallacevio 30 editsJmg38 25 editsCaradhrasAiguo 24 editsEh Oh Canada 23 editsAaryan Bali 23 editsBenjamin "Jeffrey" Powell 19 editsPacomartin 18 editsThenoflyzone 17 edits --- DigitalExpat (talk) 08:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC) I am much less active on Wikipedia in recent days, but from when I'm involved in the article, I think it make sense to have a shorter list although remaining unchange is also okay, but I would favor a system that cut-off using distance or flight hour instead of numbers of flights on the list, and for the number to be constantly reviewed such that the list won't get too long after more ultra long haul flights are launched. Also, please be noted that the list was separated from another article only a few years ago, if you want to ping users who're involved with editing and updating the article I woild recommend you to ping also those who have made contribution to the original article. C933103 (talk) 13:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC) I stopped following this page some time ago as it was already bloated, and it become worse since (By airline! it will never end. Next step: by tail number!). It would be so much better to rely on a single source to link to, to keep a short list here as a reminder (between 10 and 20). For now, it's mostly WP:SYNTHESIS and borderline WP:NOTDIR/WP:INDISCRIMINATE.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 20:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC) I would just leave it at 30 since that seems to be the norm at this point; any longer definitely seems unnecessary. Alternatively, maybe reduce it to 20 or 25 since those are more "normal" numbers. Clearly there's no problem with maintaining the main list at its current length, so why delete all the accurate info that's been collected? The lists for direct flights with stops and discontinued flights, on the other hand, seem extraneous, and maintaining the list by airline seems nigh impossible to maintain accurately and potentially violates the aforementioned policies. Gbrkk (talk) 01:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC) Hey, DigitalExpat, don't leave out your 78 edits on this article. My first choice would be to stick with 30, already stated by a few of the other repeat editors. Related to this, there was some discussion at the top of this thread regarding other articles with lists that run forever, almost ensuring that every country or every city in a given country will be represented in the list of world tunnels or list of a country's airports. Those lists are fine, not complaining, but I mention that as a lead in to the fact that there is an entire section in this article, Airlines and aircraft types for non-stop flights, which should cover the most ardent fan's desire to see their home represented in some way. I should also mention that I can not be the only one here who has stumbled upon a (once) well crafted 100+ long list that has slipped into disarray, as the original diligent editors eventually grew bored, or disappeared. Best intentions on super-long lists do not match the beauty of a manageable pre-defined length with meaningful information. Second choice is agreement with the concept of using a cut-off flight distance as put forth by C933103, the editor who created the original list of 30 in December 2016. At that time, this was simply a nice round number, with the 30th entry just coincidentally (?) cutting off at 12,500 km. In just 48 months, there have been rapid technological changes (new planes/engines/cabin spaces & amenities) and social changes (sheer willingness to lock yourself in for more than half a day), meaning that 12,500 km is not all that special anymore. Today, a cut-off of 13,000 km would gives a clean break in km, and nearly a ",000" break on the other two units of measurement, with 8,078 mi and 7,019 nmi. It also creates a self-policing number that will not require debate for at least another 48(?) months. Or, with 23 flights currently at this 13,000 cut-off, and 26 by October 2021, perhaps push this to 13,500 km, giving 13 flights now, 14 flights by this May, then let it self-police for the next few years? This floats around the 10 or 20 that Marc Lacoste suggested, but still puts a cut-off point. On a different issue (sort of), now that the super-long non-stop flights are so numerous, do Direct flights with stops still need to be here? If so, should there at least be a self-policing cut-off (15,000 km, or maybe 20 hours), to make these "flights with a mid-point escape" worthy of mentioning when compared to the "you're locked in for 18 hours" flights? (please note that my use of two bolds is for ease of seeing the core of the thought, as this thread moves past 2,000 words, rather than to imply that these are extra important thoughts) Jmg38 (talk) 12:03, 18 January 2021 (UTC) Thanks all for your thoughts, and thank you to Andrewgprout for suggesting reaching out for consensus.... I think excellent points have been made and let's follow the majority vote and leave it at 30, I don't mean to rock the boat here, just trying to increase the font of knowledge that is wikipedia. I'd propose collapsing/closing this thread down? Lots of other excellent points raised above, one that was also on my mind was regarding the "By Airline" - Without a direct OAG/Innovata or similar direct access, I don't know how this can realistically be maintained... It takes brute forcing of checking all the routes of a carrier to figure this one out. I believe it's worth raising this is as a new question on this page if this should be removed (It's extremely light on citations, the individual wikis for "Destinations of XXX Airline" do a superior job, but I haven't looked back far enough in the history to see who/how this was added and see if there was an envisioned way to maintain this? As whoever put this together did a lot of work! Thanks All DigitalExpat (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC) Thanks for the shout-out and sorry for my slow reply. As a fan of this topic, I like the idea of going beyond 30. BUT, even at the length of 30 these tables have serious problems as I've noted in the section about contradictions between the current and historical lists. Those contradictions, unfortunately, cast doubt on the integrity of our data as it stands now. First, let's get the tables to match in format and not contradict each other, then we can discuss going beyond 30 again. Holy (talk) 01:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Question: Should "By Airline" Table be removed from the article?

(Expand to View This Thread)

Branching off from the previous question about table size, a new question about the "By Airline" table. Here is my thoughts (repeated via c&p): ithout a direct OAG/Innovata or similar direct access, I don't know how this can realistically be maintained... It takes brute forcing of checking all the routes of a carrier to figure this one out. I believe it's worth raising this is as a new question on this page if this should be removed (It's extremely light on citations, the individual wikis for "Destinations of XXX Airline" do a superior job, but I haven't looked back far enough in the history to see who/how this was added and see if there was an envisioned way to maintain this?DigitalExpat (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC) I agree; it should be removed. Gbrkk (talk) 23:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC) I agree with the removal proposal, due to there exists too many airlines in the world to fit into the table. C933103 (talk) 09:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC) Noted An Anonymous Edit executed this removal on the main article on 8 Feb 2021, I think it was the right call, collapsing this question - cheers all! --DigitalExpat (talk) 13:16, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

United claims that as of January 18, 2018 it will have the three longest flights by a USA carrier

SFO and LAX to SIN as well as IAH to SYD I am going to change ranges SFO- SIN 13,593 km ATL- JNB 13,582 km Pacomartin (talk)

3 years later, United has the "top 2 longest routes scheduled & operated by a US Carrier (IAH-SYD, SFO-SIN)" (UA moved its LAX-SIN service to become a 2nd SFO-SIN service in Jun 2018). Suggest Pacomartin's valuable 2018 comment can be archived now? Thanks Paco for accurate info! DigitalExpat (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

QF110?

Qantas ran QF110 as a commercial flight to repatriate Australian citizens stranded due to COVID-19. It flew direct from London Heathrow to Darwin in 16h 25m covering 13886.76km or 8577.37 miles. There have been several of these (I flew on the 15th of Jan). Could this be added to the top 30 or even as a separate section? It looks like it should slot in at #7 unless I’m missing something? Bordersquirrel (talk) 06:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Only regularly scheduled flights are included in that table. Gbrkk (talk) 01:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Gbrkk is right :) Otherwise we'd be citing LH's recent two HAM-MPN flights or even Comlux's epic ICN-EZE flight on Mar 28 2021...Flights for this list have to be commercial & scheduled (eg - you or I could buy a ticket on them :) ) DigitalExpat (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Longest non-stop flights operated by U.S. carriers[edit]

The stopping point for this table is the route flown by all three legacy U.S. carriers, LAX-SYD. Pacomartin (talk) 12:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

North America is the primary terminus for longest flights in the world with 27 out of 30. U.S. Carriers are a distinct case. It is true that the first 7 carriers in the U.S. table are also in the top 30, and I chose to terminate the table at LAS-SYD which was the original ultra long distance route back in the late 1970s. The table is not very big and is of general interest. Pacomartin (talk) 12:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Longest non-stop flights operated by U.S. carriers

On 1 June 2016, United launched nonstop flights between San Francisco and Singapore. On 1 June 2017, United announced its Los Angeles/Singapore nonstop service. On 7 September 2017, United announced that it will begin daily, nonstop service between Houston and Sydney on 18 January 2018.

Rank (Dist.)	Airline	From	To	Flight number	Distance	Aircraft
1	United Airlines	Los Angeles	Singapore	UA 37	14,114 km (7,621 nmi; 8,770 mi)	Boeing 787-9
2		Houston	Sydney	UA 101	13,834 km (7,470 nmi; 8,596 mi)
3		San Francisco	Singapore	UA 1	13,593 km (7,340 nmi; 8,446 mi)
4	Delta Air Lines	Johannesburg	Atlanta	DL 201	13,582 km (7,334 nmi; 8,439 mi)	Boeing 777-200LR
5	American Airlines	Dallas/Fort Worth	Hong Kong	AA 125	13,073 km (7,059 nmi; 8,123 mi)	Boeing 777-300ER
6	United Airlines	Newark		UA 179	12,980 km (7,009 nmi; 8,065 mi)	Boeing 777-200ER
7		Los Angeles	Melbourne	UA 98	12,748 km (6,883 nmi; 7,921 mi)	Boeing 787-9
8		Mumbai	Newark	UA 49	12,565 km (6,785 nmi; 7,808 mi)	Boeing 777-200
9		Chicago—O'Hare	Hong Kong	UA 895	12,543 km (6,773 nmi; 7,794 mi)
10	Delta Air Lines	Atlanta	Shanghai	DL 185 (begins 20 Jul 2018)	12,327 km (6,656 nmi; 7,660 mi)	Boeing 777-200LR
11	American Airlines	Los Angeles	Sydney	AA 73	12,051 km (6,507 nmi; 7,488 mi)	Boeing 787-9
	United Airlines			UA 839		Boeing 787-9
	Delta Air Lines			DL 41		Boeing 777-200LR

Copy of table Pacomartin 12:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC) (talk) 12:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

References

A340-200 longest flight?

Longest flight for A340-200? Kaseng55 (talk) 23:38, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Believe it is the Conviasa flight 729 (CCS-THR) DigitalExpat (talk) 08:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Inaccurate/Out of Date - 5 Longest Flights by Aircraft Type

The table of "Longest Flights By Aircraft Type" (Current) is particularly hard to maintain & source without risking Original Research. That being said, there are several flights on there that are now no longer operating (and should be removed) (also not just COVID suspended) In particular I noticed:

1. DHC8 Q200
2. DHC8 Q400
3. Embraer E190-E2
4. Swearingen Metroliner (this aircraft type is no longer flown by AirNorth)
5. A321LR (Air Transat no longer uses this type on this route)

If someone can find the accurate flights to go here it would be great, otherwise I'd suggest deleting these rows as they hold inaccurate information currently...
DigitalExpat (talk) 13:32, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and removed these 5 outdated/inaccurate records hopefully they can be researched and added back in later. But more important to have an accurate article with reliable information DigitalExpat (talk) 10:02, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Longest Flight Previous Talk Items (link to historical discussions)

While, I think we made the right call in not manually porting over valuable conversations from the original Talk:Non-stop Flight page that this article (and talk page were split off of 5 years ago), I wanted to place a talk topic here as a signposting to anyone who reads through these talk pages as many good conversations and points were had there. So posting this thread to sink into the Archives of this Talk Page and encourage anyone who finds this thread subsequently to check:

1 - The Talk Page of Non-stop flight: Talk:Non-stop Flight

2 - The Archives of that Talk Page: Talk:Non-stop flight/Archive 1 (Ranging all the way back to 2007)

Cheers to contributors past, present, and future for a great article

DigitalExpat (talk) 06:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Air China Beijing - Sao Paulo via Madrid

There seems to be no indication that this flight still exists. If anyone doesn't know otherwise, I'll remove it from the table

FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 22:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

@FlyingScotsman72 good shout on this, I've been trying to look at this a while ago but with little luck, best I can come up with is showing that since its suspension due to COVID19, it is now no longer even scheduled/timetabled. CA has been applying to ANAC to operate it still ( https://aeroin.net/air-china-pede-novamente-voos-ao-brasil-mas-sera-que-dessa-vez-vao-ocorrer) , but hasn't applied for S22 season and is now removed from the CA timetable completely, I'd suggest we remove this as it doesn't meet the criteria of an active scheduled flight 👍 DigitalExpat (talk) 05:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Great! Thank you! but tbh, there are so many other flights in these tables that dont exist anymore... FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @FlyingScotsman72 for this 👍. I agree that there is a lot of maintenance needed, I'm fairly confident in the tables (and their citations) for longest nonstop, longest direct,and discontinued nonstop tables....the ones by type are worlds more difficult to find citations/reputable sources...are these the ones you're referring to as not existing anymore? I'm hoping at least the top 3 tables are fairly clean (as well as the historical section) DigitalExpat (talk) 05:09, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I've been going through and maintaining the by-type list. This is done by taking a parsed list of every active current airframe of the type from the planespotters.net production list and then querying flightradar24 for all recent long flights. It has helped replace many out-of-date listings and find new records, but it would be nice if someone with Cirium access could pull information from there. Pythonhax (talk) 03:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Amazing work! (and perhaps even more impressive - the methodology, I have much appreciation for well built systematic approaches! - properly living up to your username? :) ). I was trying to keep up with all of your updates and was super impressed... Cirium (OAG/Innovata etc...) access would be superb, the closest I can think of for now is spotchecking against sites that utilise Cirium data (like flightmapper.net). (which helps with confirmation, but not with identification right?). On the other hand, even with limited result set size, if you ever find yourself really bored, is it a bit tempting to unleash your mad skills against the free Cirium trial API? :D ( https://developer.cirium.com/apis/flightstats-apis/get-evaluation-account ). (PS - I think you are also single handedly resolving my moans in the other chat topic on this talk page. Cheers @Pythonhax , incredible success! 👍 DigitalExpat (talk) 04:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

In the table of direct flights, the one at the bottom, Havana to Beijing via Montreal hasnt operated for ages.

Also, I'm sorry but in my view I do not agree that you have been maintaining it the by-type list at all, there are countless incorrect entries. As just a few examples, Tehran to London hasnt been operated by an A300 for years and years. Caracas to Tehran hasnt operated at all for ages, El Al doesn't even own any 737-900's (not 900ER), among many many other mistakes. FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 23:51, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Isn't the point of Wikipedia is that the power is given to all to contribute and improve the articles? :) (so "maintaining" it is up to about 7 Billion of us....) I know I don't know enough to be able to do it myself....but contribute where I can! (To your specific point, the "by Aircraft" tables have been a subject previously in the Talk pages here as well for being notoriously hard to maintain (It was for similar logic that the "by Airline" tables were struck as they were even more impossible to maintain with certainty (and in my opinion, better served by the individual airlines' articles and their SMEs anyways). Appreciate that we don't have the ability for perfection at hand, but if we all do our part to maintain, that sounds pretty good to me.

Your three cited points are spot on, if we see things needed addressing, perhaps we can add those flights onto a Todo List here on the Talk Page to be looked at (that A300-600 record TEH-LHR has been bugging me too, but trying to find the right citable source to figure out if it is Iran Air or Mahan Air (or another!) now operating the longest has eluded me, so my empathy with you @FlyingScotsman72 is high and sounds like we're all aiming for the same thing here...pleasure to be a fellow contributor with you two and all on this article. Cheers! DigitalExpat (talk) 05:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the understanding :) we are definitely in agreement here! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 08:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Longest route on the 737-600

Another editor told me to ask here if I find a mistake, so: The Air Algerie flight from Algiers to Nouakchott is no longer operated by a 737-600. Can anyone find out the new longest 737-600 service? Thanks

FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 00:23, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Appears to be AH5010 ALG-DSS, now updated in table. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:37, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Upcoming AA BLR-SEA flight

Decision was correctly made to remove AA 181 BLR-SEA from the upcoming table, but it appears that AA has added it back to schedules starting March 26, 2023 according to expertflyer data: https://twitter.com/xJonNYC/status/1532844628491354113/photo/1

Don't have a firm source, so if anyone could find one it seems that we should add it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoubleClawHammer (talk • contribs) 22:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Great spot! I don't see anyone covering it formally, but my goto is to check with the carrier themselves, sure enough it's bookable right now for March 28, 2023 on AA.com (but can't link directly to it to show you, but AA does expose their schedule API to OneWorld.com that I can link to! :) ( https://www.oneworld.com/flight-search?from=SEA&to=BLR&departureDate=03%2F28%2F2023 ) So while surely likely to be kicked back again, it meets the criteria to be in the table, I agree with you @DoubleClawHammer, it should be re-added...I'll let you have the honour/pleasure of this one as you spotted it! :) DigitalExpat (talk) 08:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

New longest route on the ATR42??

Could someone find this please, as the Totegegie-Tahiti route seems to only be operating with ATR 72's now, according to their website anyway. (With the ATR 72 operating this route, it is very slightly shorter than the UTair flight I just added to that row of the table)

FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:34, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Can no one help me with this? DoubleClawHammer ? FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 23:26, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

QR DOH-AKL flight

Of all the COVID impacted flights ("Scheduled, but unticketable") - only Qatar's service from DOH-AKL remains fully unscheduled (their service via ADL seems to be replacement for this demand). All other currently unticketable flights in the top 30 have scheduled flights upcoming (i.e. EK DXB-AKL has been selling Dec 1,2022 flights for quite sometime (albeit this may be shifted but it is both scheduled and ticketable)...

Was interested in the Wiki's hive mind on if we should remove the QR DOH-AKL flight from the Top 30 as it is truly not planned/announced/scheduled to resume at this time (and of course re-add it if/when it does resume)

(fwiw, this change would return current #31 BR 51 TPE-IAH to the list as the new #30)

Cheers to all! DigitalExpat (talk) 07:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I personally think so, yeah :) I guess that table is about showing the current flights so it would make sense to remove it! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 21:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Agree, I think we can remove DOH-AKL from the list and move it to the discontinued list. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Fully Agree all around, that makes 3 contributors in alignment, going ahead and making that change now, thanks! 👍 DigitalExpat (talk) 04:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Longest flight on the 787-10

This summer, United has occasionally been running 787-10s on the JNB-EWR route (e.g. 16 Aug 2022: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL187/history/20220816/1810Z/FAOR/KEWR). However, I'm not sure if these are "scheduled" or just aircraft swaps. Should we at least add this on the records section for the longest 787-10 flight at 8003sm? DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I suggest yes - this is a scheduled flight record DigitalExpat (talk) 10:18, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Change made. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 15:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Beijing to Havana via Montreal

uhhhh I dont think this flight has operated in years?! Does anyone have any info to say otherwise? FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 03:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Yep, entirely agree (and I indirectly agreed with you back in May too ( Talk:Longest flights/Archive 1#Air China Beijing - Sao Paulo via Madrid ) but I wandered off piste in my reply. Entirely agree there are no signs of this flight in Cirium or otherwise, also has been removed for CA Website Timetable (also fwiw, José_Martí_International_Airport contributors reached the same overdue conclusion 3 weeks ago it looks like). Entirely agree to remove this flight. great spot...(twice!) (also happy 160th birthday) DigitalExpat (talk) 05:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Whoops! I completely forgot I already brought this up hahaha! Also, 160th birthday?? (I think there is a joke I am missing here!) FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 03:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@FlyingScotsman72 RE:160th, this was an Off-topic, and an apparently incorrect, guess on my part that your namesake was perhaps rail based, I'm guessing now it's instead fittingly aeronautical derived :) DigitalExpat (talk) 08:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

no, you were correct, it is rail based, but I still don't understand the 160th part!! Wikipedia states that the locomotive Flying Scotsman is currently 99 years old, not 160! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 18:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@FlyingScotsman72 🤦 oh dear, youre absolutely right, I was errorenously going off the route (1862), not the namesake locomotive... I shall stick to air related facts in the future.... Thanks for the educational schooling! DigitalExpat (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

no worries haha :D FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 21:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

NZ1 JFK-AKL scheduled flight time changes (17h35m -> 17h50m)

Regarding my recent edit to page, looking at NZ1 schedule it does indeed get blocked at 17:35 in September, but over the Southern Hemisphere peak Summer (November-ish onwards), it does indeed extend to 17:50 scheduled flying time, presumably due to seasonal variations (routings, prevailing weather, etc...) Not unusual in flight schedules, but explains why conflicting information in the published timetable. DigitalExpat (talk) 05:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

A310 longest flight

The aircraft type on flight mapper for IR738 Rome-Tehran (https://info.flightmapper.net/flight/Iran_Air_IR_739) disagrees with the aircraft type for the next few months on Iran Air's booking system (https://ebooking.iranair.com/ibe/IR/home/?language=en#searchForm). What do you guys think? FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Use what's in the booking/what you see on flightaware or FR24, flightmapper can sometimes be inaccurate. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 03:45, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

DoubleClawHammer's advice is a good one, aligns with my experience regarding flightmapper (and lag on it). (you can also get a peek directly at Cirium via ITA usually for most major operators, Iran Air not so much. DigitalExpat (talk) 04:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both for your useful responses :D FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:32, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing for longest flights by aircraft type

The section on "Longest flights by aircraft type" doesn't seem to be citing any source for the claim that each route is in fact the longest. Am I missing something or is this section just completely unsourced? CapitalSasha ~ talk 21:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I have removed these tables until someone can provide some plausible way of sourcing them that is not original research. CapitalSasha ~ talk 15:57, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Seriously...?!?! Several of us, especially me, @DoubleClawHammer, and @DigitalExpat, have been updating these tables pretty religiously whenever we see something has changed or something isnt right. Just look down in the history of this article's edits. I am actually not going to stand for hundreds and hundreds of hours of work going down the drain. In my opinion this was one of the greatest tables of interesting information anywhere on wikipedia, as this isn't information that can be found anywhere else. It is a simply a labour of love and tireless work conglomerated into one place.

In addition, your 'original research' argument is severely flawed, because if you were following that premise, then you would have to get rid of every single table in this entire article, as do you think there is any 'proof' that Singapore Airlines' Vancouver to Singapore flight SQ47 (for example) is currently the 29th longest non-stop flight by great circle distance? Of course there isn't.

If you're going to delete that, then go and delete this whole article and see what happens...

This makes no sense whatsoever. FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

So how do I verify the claim that the longest A220 flight is from Seattle to Reagan National? (How do we know there isn't a longer flight somewhere that you missed?) CapitalSasha ~ talk 23:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @CapitalSasha thanks you've brought up a topic that is a good one and one that runs deep across the entirety of Wikipedia that I think we can glean guidance from. In my opinion, it shows a need for a balance between no WIKI:OR and WIKI:5P5. In the case of superlative lists, there seems to be a large trend of citing individual entries, but not citing superlatives/rankings skirting on the edge of a logical fallacy, but erring on the side of common sense.

Here are 10 quick Wikipedia examples of great articles that have faced the same challenge and the choices WP has made:

Example 1 - WP article fails to prove there was never a tiny one-man Broadway show that ran 12,000 performances (how can they prove that "Chicago" *really* is the #2 longest running show?)

Example 2 - WP article fails to prove that a cinematic release of a director's cut of "Zyzzx Road" that ran 900 minutes isn't the real longest running cinematic movie (thereby invalidating their claim of Resan in the article?)

Example 3- The current highly viewed and edited article of list of Monarchs should be removed as it doesn't cite the ordinal listing (and also doesn't even mention the reign of the 60+ year reign of the King of Redonda)

Example 4 - WP list is completely wrong as it doesn't list my family as the 10th richest family (yes they all have sources, but where is the source for the ordinal list? (and they completely skipped my Uncle's family, but only because they only publish our wealth in Vogon-based language publications in the Principality of Sealand (because Wikipedia didn't find the publication (yet) does it make my uncle's family less rich?)

Example 5 - The WP article of world's verified shortest people is missing #5-#12 and is therefore incorrect

Example 6 - The list of the largest stadiums is wrong in its ordinal as it is missing the newest stadium in Irkutsk that sits 145,000

Example 7- The Tallest Hotels in the World and the Largest Hotels in the world have no proof that they have forgotten the newest one in North Korea (only because they haven't noticed it)

Example 8 - There is no proof at all that the Bugatti Chiron is the #8 most powerful production car in the world. It is perfectly cited what the power is, but the article doesn't prove it is definitively #8, only what its power is

Example 9 - The list of Largest Giant Sequoias is absolutely incorrect as per preservation standards: some of the tallest and largest of the species are purposefully not revealed their locations to ensure preservation,

Example 10 - The list of longest spaceflights should be removed as it is incorrect - it doesn't prove, nor cite that SkyLab 4 mission was the 10th longest spaceflight (in fact Tiangong Expedition 1 and 2 were both longer than this!)

I believe these articles and lists, just like the lists on this "Longest Flights" article are valid and not original research.

Some proposed ideas to improve the article as I join you (and all of Wikipedia's contributors) in wanting to make all articles as best and accurate as they can be:

My Suggestions:

Suggestion 1 - Add Citations for the measurements/list entries (an archive.org snapshot of an agreed reliable source of information (such as: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/nz1 for example?), I think this would be an improvement? (and many such recent edits have psuedo-citations already by @FlyingScotsman72 and @DoubleClawHammer

Not Suggested - We could be pedantic and add qualifying text to the title of the list ("Longest observed operated scheduled commercial flights per scheduled type"), but I think it is unnecessary and already covered in detail at the top of the article as any superlative definition of "longest" "fastest", ..."-est" needs ringfencing/defining which this article puts right at the top (and dedicates a whole section to)

Also Not Suggested - Removing the list entirely, it goes against the goals and ethos of WP

Suggestion 2 - We work to continue to improve the list (including healthy conversation and contribution to it here on Talk Page)

These are my thoughts on the matter, appreciate the dialog on the matter - my view is the list should be restored and improved, cheers!

DigitalExpat (talk) 06:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

I think many of the lists make sense in that they are presented as, e.g. "here is a list of buildings with height over 1000 feet, and you can sort the list if you want." So the encyclopedia makes less of an explicit claim that the ranking is exactly correct, although I suppose that is certainly implied. When you present just one flight and say it is the longest flight, then it is quite difficult for someone to verify that that is actually the longest -- I guess someone would have to go trawl flightaware just looking for long flights operated by a certain aircraft? If flightaware had a "sort" feature that we could link to that would be very helpful, e.g. CapitalSasha ~ talk 16:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

By the way I am happy for the list to be restored while the discussion is in progress, in accordance with WP:BRD. CapitalSasha ~ talk 16:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

If you look at some of the archived talk pages, I've explained my methodology for maintaining that table - I have a script that trawls through Flightradar24 to find the longest flight operated by whatever aircraft type in the past week. Unfortunately these flight trackers do not have such a sort functionality as those analytics are typically behind an (extremely expensive) paywall. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 02:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps we could craft a note or a citation to that effect? The essay Wikipedia:Counting and sorting are not original research, seems germane here, but I think we need to provide an indication of how the reader could at least in principle verify the data presented in this table. CapitalSasha ~ talk 14:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

A very relevant essay @CapitalSasha (even its link back to WP:NOR#Routine Calculations seems ancillary/pertinent). I am heartened by 2 things in this entire thread:

1 - Continued mass desire to produce a high quality article with the most accurate information

2 - Ideas on how to (continually) improve the article have come to the surface (and I think they are good ones)

As we have an entire section of the article (Definition) dedicated to explaining what and how the flights are measured, (scheduled, commercial...great circle distance etc...) - I'd suggest going forward adding an archive.org snapshot of the relevant flightradar (or similar fitting page) of that flight when the new records going forward Also suggest embedding whatever such idea/guidance like the idea above as an editor's note above the table (like the ones above the Top 30 table) to signpost for future contributors as well..., I'll take a look through the history of some of the recent submissions and test the ability to grab archive.org screenshots here.... DigitalExpat (talk) 07:55, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

For the "Longest passenger flights (by aircraft type)" Current table - With the exception of the A310 record, all entries have a cited (linked) source that shows the flight/schedule, if these were transformed into a valid archive.org snapshot, I think this accomplishes the job here (archive.org is down for me at the moment, otherwise I'd get started on it! :) DigitalExpat (talk) 08:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

I disagree -- the citation should not only indicate that that flight exists, but also that it is indeed the longest with that aircraft type. I would be OK with some kind of note indicating how the scraping/sorting was done. Perhaps it would be even better we could put the output of the script on Wikipedia somewhere, so that there could be easier verification. CapitalSasha ~ talk 14:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

I think this is back to the question of "How does wikipedia prove that X musical really is the longest running broadway show?" - the answer is (like all of WP): As best as humanly possible in a citable/verifiable (WP:V) way.

Case in point for record flights we've already normalized the measurement (Great Circle Distance), and then best sourcing/citing of information, also stacks up as confirming verification:

Bad/Unacceptable - Airline Announcement/Press Release (not proof of operation)

Subpar - Published Airline Timetable

Good - Published Schedules (eg: Cirium derived)

Better - Flight Logs of the route being operated (Largest publicly accessible repository of ADS-B/MLAT/radar data - fr24.com) (note that since the article already states that this is for scheduled commercial flight, unless you are flying either very low or within Africa, some Asian countries, you have to have ADS-B, so by definition, we are looking at the right flights here...)

Best - Checking every single flight log in an ADS-B based database programmatically.

@DoubleClawHammer's approach is obviously the best/superior method, but I don't believe it creates an onus that mandates the scripted approach for it to be cited/supplied to the list. It is like citing who has eaten the most hotdogs - yes there are governing bodies that issue records for it, but it doesn't mean their competitions *are* the ones where it was actually the most eaten. If there is a reliable/citable source of measurement, it can be cited (eg, not me practicing at home, but a measured official hotdog eating event). And in the case of flights, every flight has an ADS-B record and is a very citeable event, (or more historically before ADS-B data availability - a published schedule, or a timetable.)

(note that many highly cultivated/approved WP articles are only capable of achieving a "Good" or "Better" on this ranking, everything from "List of the most expensive football transfers". To your important point, it's not just establishing the verifiability of the recorded flight ("X flight did happen") but about disentanglement on ("X flight is the longest currently observed scheduled flight on this type")....I think we can add qualifying text/sentence below the title to make it clear that these are the longest, by type, demonstrable confirmed/operated scheduled flights to help ensure clarity. If that is agreeable, would it be worth group brainstorming what that wording should look like? (The Encyclopedia Britannica approach (if that is the appropriate measure of a good reference/WP aspiration?) repeatedly uses the phrase "known" to achieve this ( https://www.britannica.com/place/Olympus-Mons )

A final thought from my side, I think we have to temper expectations here/there is a limit: I think it is unreasonable to presume a list is either omnipotent/bulletproof or it has to be scrapped/discredited altogether. Should we delete all WP lists that cannot prove definitive rankings/ordinals All 10 examples in my earlier comment would fail that test...(Even Guinness Book of World Records cannot reasonably be presumed to be definitive, it's only their observation/recording/standards of how many hotdogs someone has eaten, or the largest rat ever weighed. I think that we have to be careful balancing between verifiable numbers vs. verging on the Simpsons' correct assertion "...so far"

Thanks @CapitalSasha and all, I think I've said enough of my thoughts on the topic now...

DigitalExpat (talk) 08:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Excellent words! Very eloquent and well-put! :) We seem to have stumbled across some sort of paradox here haha FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 23:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Putting the output of the script would be somewhat difficult because I try to rerun the script roughly weekly - it's a lot of data that is output and I'm not sure how that could be formatted for publishing in a sane way. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to guess republishing of FR24 data is probably frowned upon as well :) DigitalExpat (talk) 08:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Happy to open-source the scripts I'm using though. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

A third-party source has to be evaluated on whether we believe they are reliable, i.e. on whether we presume that they have actually done a reasonably exhaustive search to find their ranking. If we are producing the ranking ourselves, then somehow we need a way for the reader to validate our claim -- otherwise it simply appears on Wikipedia as an unsourced claim. Do you mind if I post on a noticeboard to get more ideas from other parts of Wikipedia on how to source these kinds of claims? CapitalSasha ~ talk 19:45, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I always think more minds the better to make Wikipedia the best it can possibly be. Of course I'm not sure who your (rhetorical?) questions is directed towards (I'm certainly not the Lorax, I don't speak for the trees section of the article ).

I think your question has transcended above just the subject of the article and even FL quality articles like (List of highest-paid Major League Baseball players and List of highest-grossing films ) suffer from the same dilemma. I think two potential areas of clarification/improvement would be put qualifying text at the top of the list, additional citations (ADS-B track archive link, etc...). I am encouraged that I can personally go see all ADS-B related flight information and see for myself if I search (weekly required currently to access the free data), that I can see the verification of a flight's GCD/served city pair with confirmed type. I think there is a striving to make this list "as good and accurate as possible", and perhaps some verbiage to point out that it is not purporting to be perfect (without use of non-public databases (OAG, Cirium, or similar data), the data provided *is* sourced, verifiable and citeable. And I can freely access ADS-B (search) from all flights taken by any given equipment type to verify for myself the proposed information (similar to other articles)...so ideas on how to improve the section would be (always) an excellent idea in my opinion DigitalExpat (talk) 06:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I asked on Wikipedia talk:No original research to see if editors who think about this kind of thing a lot have any suggestions. CapitalSasha ~ talk

New A320 current flight record

Hi all! Could someone potentially try and find the new A320 flight record seeming as the Ural Airlines route from Moscow to Chita has stopped. If not, I can do it somewhat soon, I am just posting here as I cannot do it now!

Thanks! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 23:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Help with finding the current record ERJ-145 and E175 flights

Hi guys! After manually finding (what I think to be) the current longest E170 and E195 flights, I would like some help from that person who has the algorithm, as finding the current record ERJ-145 and E175 flights are nowhere near as possible to do manually due to the huge number operating in the USA. I hope someone can help, Thanks. FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 15 December 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus against. Nom is blocked as a sock. (closed by non-admin page mover) echidnaLives - talk - edits 06:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Longest flights → List of the longest flights – reflects the article more clearly PennsylvaniaHorse (talk) 04:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Oppose (Respectfully) - Hi @PennsylvaniaHorse, always glad to see wikipedia articles improved! In this case, I don't see a value add in renaming the article.

Looking at MOS:LIST for guidance on why should be a List and not a normal article, to me it doesn't fit definition of a list. This article, while extremely list heavy in its content by nature of the topic, is a complete article (not a supporting/isolated list) that discusses the history of aviation's longest flights, specific background on historic flights, and also related non-qualifying (chartered or promotional flights) to provide a holistic view at all kinds of commercial aviation's longest flights. It feels like more "meat on its bones" to be read as an article rather than a standalone list. Looking for peer comparison, the top 5 Wiki Aviation Stand-Alone List articles look to be quite different, less of an article to me: List 1, List 2, List 3, List 4, List 5 , therefore I respectfully oppose, but applaud you for bringing this up/constantly improving wiki 👍 DigitalExpat (talk) 08:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose as this has way more content then simply just a list. cookie monster 755 02:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

AI BLR-SFO & HYD-ORD flights

Both of the Top 30 flights operated by AI are currently greyed out by a well-intended edit to reflect that they are not scheduled/operating between March & October. Currently seeing BLR-SFO selling seats for next flight on 31 Oct (scroll down below the fold) (also bookable on [1]https://bookme.airindia.in) and HYD-ORD for Nov 4

I can't find a source if this is an intended seasonality update or just an unusual situation due to external events (COVID19, Indian use of Russian Airspace, etc...) But regardless the gray color scheme is mentioned above the table to refer to routes that remain scheduled, yet you can't currently buy a ticket on them (and for all the gray rows, we have the upcoming resumption dates for all of them except DOH-AKL)

So my question to the fellow editors, is I believe AI flights should not be grayed out...yes there's a long time until their next flight, but frequency (or infrequency in this case) doesn't seem to be a criteria for the list (they're scheduled flights, and I can buy a ticket right now for them, and they are already an operating route, therefore seeming to qualify to remain on the board as is... interested in people's thoughts on this instead of making a unilateral edit? Cheers! DigitalExpat (talk) 08:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I personally think that if you can book tickets, they shouldn't be greyed out :) FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 22:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

After no more responses after 1 week, I'm going to go ahead and assess this is a 2-1 majority vote to make them ungreyed... (but again no slight or disrespect at all to the original wiki editor who greyed them, their point/intention was a good one!) Thanks to him and to all the great contributors :)

DigitalExpat (talk) 07:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I made the original edit, ungreying is fine with me. 128.12.122.145 (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Huzzah! Great stuff 👍 Cheers! DigitalExpat (talk) 19:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

To this point, should the longest currently operating flights by aircraft type also go by the "tickets on sale" rule rather than the "operating sometime in the last week" rule? i.e. I currently have DXB-IAH listed as the longest 777-200LR route, but SFO-BLR is longer even though it's not operating at the moment (but tickets are still on sale). DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Similarly, for A220-100, DL's CVG-SEA flight is longer than AUS-SEA but hasn't started yet (but will start in a few days, so it's not as big of a deal). DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:26, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

My understanding/opinion is the Longest Passenger Flights (top 30, direct, by type tables) as per the definition section at the top of the article (full disclosure/transparency - I contributed a fair bit to that definition) all require the flight to be:

Passenger (not Cargo,Military etc...)

Commercial ("Anyone" can buy a ticket (a "Ticketable flight" in GDS system classification or Travel Agent lingo)....- it's not a test flight, delivery flight, etc...)

Scheduled (not Chartered)

For when the flip from the "Future Routes-Scheduled Services" table to the top 30 (or similarly other tables) I believe is it needs to be operating (and arguably needs to remain operating to remain on the table). The COVID pausing has been unique I think as for many of the Grayed out routes, they have remained scheduled/timetabled (and sometimes even operated as either "Pargo" type flights or otherwise), thus the "graying out"

To your point/question, I would vote that SFO-BLR would be the winner here as it is operating, scheduled, ticketable (just a very very long pause between flights currently, but everything else is there)...hopefully this kind of conflict is limited (or previously there have been annotations of "(seasonal)" next to some record flights if it truly becomes a seasonal flight... right now my guess is they are not operating the next few months at the moment for a variety of potential reasons.

Your second question with the A221 record, I don't believe in this case a few days is going to make or break anything, I think the rule of thumb is to make sure the route actually becomes operational before adding the top30 table (as operator may do last minute type change etc...) but in this case, your visibility with the script is better than the alternative methods anyways and I don't think anyone would catch this by a few days (just suggest we make sure it actually goes :D ), all the best! DigitalExpat (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Update after a few months, it doesn't seem to be possible to actually find any availability for these flights using the links you sent, but I can't see any discontinuation statement from AI about these routes. What should we do about them? DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Discussions on airliners.net read like the routes have been suspended or discontinued, and it appears that AI is trying to sell the 77Ls that operate the route: https://www.airindia.in/images/pdf/Tender-for-Sale-of-B777-FINAL-27Jul22.pdf DoubleClawHammer (talk) 22:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I can see HYD-ORD bookable via GDS and AI direct (https://www.airindia.in/) but only in S23 schedule (example date: June 23, 2023). I can't see SFO-BLR anywhere.... I concur with you to gray out HYD-ORD and at minimum gray out SFO-BLR to remain consistent,or remove completely (for the time being) as it unscheduled and unbookable at the time being...great spot 👍 DigitalExpat (talk) 10:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Will gray out HYD-ORD and remove SFO-BLR; this will bring up #32 which I believe would be DOH-DFW on QR 729/QR 731? DoubleClawHammer (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@DoubleClawHammer yep I concur, DFW-DOH is #30 (upcoming UA CPT-EWR will be new #31 when it launches in 3 months time  :) ) cheers! DigitalExpat (talk) 16:07, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

The upcoming NZ JFK-AKL launch will kick the QR DOH-DFW route back to #31 and UA CPT-IAD will be #32 at that point, as long as everything launches on schedule. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 16:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah, you are most correct! Was not looking at the upcoming list... Proof why the power of wiki is in the combining of the Masses, ty! DigitalExpat (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

While I think it will have to be a case of waiting to see if it actually launches, AI has now scheduled resumption of SFO-BLR on Oct 31. I've added it to the upcoming flights table so it can be monitored/re-added, let's see DigitalExpat (talk) 07:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

HYD-ORD has finally stopped being sold earlier this month, and is now not scheduled all the way through 2023, accordingly I removed it from the Top 30 active flights and put in the Discontinued table now :) DigitalExpat (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Records for 777-200ER and 747-400

I thought back in the early 2000s SAA had 747-400 service on ATL-JNB and that is about 367mi longer than JFK-HKG on UA. Can't find a source as of now but I'm sure a timetable exists that details it.

As for the 777-200ER, there was one instance where there was bad weather on DL17 JFK-BOM flight in around 2007, so they had to schedule a direct ATL-BOM flight that one time, about a year before they launch ATL-BOM on the 77L. ATL-BOM is about 400mi greater than EWR-HKG. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=446347#18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.153.34.244 (talk) 23:43, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

You're right, SAA definitely did have 744 service ATL-JNB in 2000, it was the world's longest flight and is mentioned in top half of the article. Are you looking for this to be added in the "Discontinued non-stop flights" table? It is missing, just needs citation on the ending of this route/date and it can be added.

For the 777-200ER flight ATL-BOM - Interesting but need reputable/citable sources before it can be added, if it can be located, it can/should be added as this wasn't a diversion nor IROPS but a ticketed, scheduled, commercial flight... definitely worth looking more into to see if can be encyclopedic/added 👍 DigitalExpat (talk) 09:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Looking further into the 777-200ER longest flight - from what I can see the longest flight was in 2005 and 2006 when it was used on one of the longest routes in the world at the time (SIN-LAX) (eastbound only) on SQ20 when the A345s were unavailable. There's many anecdotal articles covering this, but none citable/reliable, the closest I can come is the Singapore Newspaper's daily Changi departure reports that chronicle the flights, but I can't link to a clear enough image/no-transcript available ( https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/biztimes20050812-1.2.26.9?ST=1&AT=filter&K=los%20angeles%20sq20&KA=los%20angeles%20sq20&DF=&DT=&Display=0&AO=false&NPT=&L=&CTA=&NID=&CT=&WC=&YR=2005 ). Maybe someone else can have better luck, but it looks like this is the correct record holder DigitalExpat (talk) 08:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I was lookng for the ATL-JNB to be added to the "records" section by aircraft type, to replace the existing JFK-HKG entry.

As for the ATL-BOM, there should be some timetable or something that can denote the one occurence, but I cannot find it right now. 99.153.34.244 (talk) 16:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Aha, you're absolutely right - great spot, the SAA 744 ATL-JNB (listed here with citations: Longest flights#2000s ) does belong in the record table! I've gone ahead and done that edit on your behalf if that's okay? Thank you!

To your second topic, the longest 772 flight - I believe SIN-LAX was longer than ATL-BOM one-off flight as per my findings above, will continue to look for citable sources on this - what are yours/anyone else's thoughts? (note - I edited this comment from my original as I forgot my own findings on ATL-BOM) DigitalExpat (talk) 04:39, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to have to wave the white flag on being able to research this one. From what I can see the 77E operations on SQ20/SQ38 are rumored at best (see no formal sources or even anecdotes that would point towards official sources of this ever operating to "cover SQ A345 fleet while undergoing C-Checks". As far as DL16 ATL-BOM on March 16, 2007. I can see enthusiast postings documenting it happening, but can find nothing citable, best I can come up with is this screenshot of the flight tracker on the day which is of course not usable at all, but that's all I could get to, will hang up the reins on this one to someone else, I've exhausted my searching for a citeable source ( https://web.archive.org/web/20070320082559/http://i61.photobucket.com:80/albums/h77/mikelaw1122/ATLBOM.jpg ), cheers! DigitalExpat (talk) 09:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

GC Distance Source

So this is interesting, @FlyingScotsman72 's excellent edit (as always) for the longest current E170 flight (Novosibirsk - Volgograd) (OVB - VOG) with the distance raises a good question. So as per the header at the top of each table states, the tables are listed by Great Circle distances. Interestingly the source of one's GC Distance seems to have more variance in it than I expected. I was researching this as I was going to suggest we shouldn't just take an airlines' statement of a GC Distance (usually done by their marketing department to round to a nice number or at least not necessarily the people up in the pointy end of the plane). I went to check my usual goto (http://www.gcmap.com/ (v2.0 of the old school http://gc.kls2.com ) and then thought best to sample around as perhaps S7 doesn't use their marketing department and found the below results:

- GCMap = 2686 km

- GreatCirclemapper.net = 2689 km

- GreatCirclemap.com - 2689 km

- AirportDistanceCalculator.com - 2681 km (not a credible site in my opinion: no sources/methodology referenced)

- US Department of Transportation - Bureau of Transportation Statistics - 2688 km

- EdWilliams.com - 2686 km (using any of the WGS models)

A bit more digging and checking to find that it is down to using the correct Airport Reference Point as published by in Russia's most recent Aeronautical Information Publication. And for Novosibirsk (OVB / UNNT ) - that reference point is in the middle of the newer/second runway (16/34) that opened in 2010, presumably the ARP may have changed around this time as well.

Of all the above sites, only GCMap.com uses the correct navigational coordinates as published as the ARP in Russia's AIP as the official coordinates for the airport. (And Klaus amazingly links and cites all of his sources ). So I would recommend as a takeaway that perhaps we do 3 things:

1 - the distance for the current longest E170 flight betwen OVB-VOG be updated to 2686 km

2 - Going forward it improves the encyclopedic value of the article in using the same/consistent measure of GC Distances

3 - I would propose for that reliable source of GC Distances to be gcmap.com due to its: transparency in calculations, citation of sources, and ability to source check it (as well as being the most accurate)

Interested in other people's thoughts?

And thanks again to @FlyingScotsman72 and all contributors for their impressive work as always in finding the best for this article, my hat's off to you all!DigitalExpat (talk) 05:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you so much for the shout-out, it really does mean a lot :D

And yes, thank you for spotting that many websites state slightly different distances, it would definitely be better to stick with one site for consistency. If you say that gcmap.com is the best then I will take your word for it of course, as I don’t even properly understand the details. I’ll hopefully remember to use it from now on! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:17, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Well I would suggest you don't take my word blindly, I'm quite fallibll falibel imperfect :) (many examples on this very page!). But if you concur or are of the same opinion then that's great ;) Cheers!

(nb -- website #5 above "Edwilliams.com" may look not very credible on the paper, but he's a pretty decent numbers guy, his GC measurement is who the American NOAA uses for their GC Distance calculations)

DigitalExpat (talk) 04:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Uncited mass edits/(vandalism) by @ 24.184.113.32

I've reverted the 3rd round of mass edits by @24.184.113.32 in as many days (over 100 flights had their times changed in today's edits).

In the best case scenario: these are uncited changes (and are not as per the column header "Scheduled duration"), worst case scenario: these are outright whitewashing/vandalism as almost all flights have had times changed, going down the list, and many of the changes whitewashed/round to ":00" times.

Also factual incorrect changes provided (the old BA1 route from LCY to JFK was never direct (a318 had a restricted MTOW out of LCY that required refueling in SNN, also Kai Tak was not open in 2019.) So in the spirit of assuming that there is some good intent here, felt this post has needed as the anonymous user is unlikely to/not reading their page so wanted to make this comment here for him/her plus all other contributors to understand why I did a manual revert. I'm very interested in seeing a great article cultivated and encouraging new contributors, in this case I'm not seeing it though. If you are reading this Mr anonymous, please let us know what you are trying to do/provide citations. Thanks! DigitalExpat (talk) 05:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Undid another round of vandalism from yesterday (same look and feel, different IP) - looks habitual/repeat offender See: User talk:160.72.105.243#January 2023 DigitalExpat (talk) 07:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Longest 737-900ER flight

Hi @DigitalExpat, just a heads up that it looks like the longest 737-900ER flight from Anchorage to Hawaii big island is now using a 737 Max. I have no idea if this is a short or long term thing of course, just wanted to let you know as I saw it! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

@FlyingScotsman72 apologies for the delayed message I'm travelling this week (a bit of flying even) - great spot, I'd suggest we locate the next longest 737-900ER then and swap it out (@DoubleClawHammer is the best at this sourcing), if not dome before, I'll take a look and see if i can soirce it once I am back home next week, cheers! DigitalExpat (talk) 03:32, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

@DigitalExpat@FlyingScotsman72 AS 872 ANC-KOA is not operating during the summer season, but will be back on a 737-900ER in November. The longest 737-900ER flight is now AS 139 ORD-ANC, to which I've updated the row in the table. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Amazing work both of you, thank you!! FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 23:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation of Chicago -> Chicago–O'Hare

Is this necessary? Since Midway is so size constrained and nothing larger than a 757 can land there? Combined with serving only North American destinations/routes - I'm thinking disambiguation is unlikely to be needed here, what does everyone think? DigitalExpat (talk) 09:01, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

June 10 Reversions

Hi All, Hi @SurferSquall, and Hi @DoubleClawHammer :

Thought it would be best/most prudent to open a talk subject regarding the reversions over the weekend to get the Wiki Hive mind thoughts here and make the article the best it can possibly be.

So I saw the reversion with the reason given of: "Unsourced/poorly sourced information"

   1)   Regarding the Anonymous edit of WF 222 to WF 1522 - This is a confirmed change reflected in the Cirium data (changed in March 2023), I have manually redone this change and added a better citation of the actual Cirium data to support this

   2)   Regarding the update of the longest A320Neo route - My two thoughts:  
               2a) DoubleClawHammer's script to compare all active flights (see the earlier dedicated talk subject) is decent/proven way to confirm what currently active flights per type are the longest.
               2b) The provided change provided sourced citations replacing the previous one lacing citations, so it seems to me the change *was* sourced an improvement than the existing one?

Am I missing something in the reversion/what are other people's thoughts?

12:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC) DigitalExpat (talk) 12:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

All good, just make sure you have good sources for this stuff. SurferSquall (talk) 23:56, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Sage advice! Thanks @SurferSquall, If interested, @DoubleClawHammer has a dedicated talk topic (now in archives) that shows his methodology and is independently/manually verifiable...a best possible way to tackle a topic with a moving (no pun intended) target, cheers to good sources and good editors! DigitalExpat (talk) 05:57, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Suggested additions

I suggest adding a list by airport, that is, longest flight with an endpoint at said airport, for each of a number of airports; and a list by country, that is, longest flight with an endpoint in said country, for a number of countries. (For a country or airport that has an endpoint of a flight in the top 30, you can obviously see the longest flight for said country or airport, but it would be good to hav a dedicated list.)

I also suggest expanding the current list, from the 30 to the 40 or 50 longest flights; that way, one could see what other very long flights there ar. For example, would the Los Angeles -- Sydney flight (mentioned in the article), make the top 50? Solomonfromfinland (talk) 00:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

I think these ideas are very interesting and original, but I'm just not sure they would be practical. This is because even currently, the article is ALWAYS at least somewhat out of date, especially in the 'longest flights by aircraft type' section, as they change so frequently. I feel that the longest flights by airport or country (depending how many countries/airports you include) will usually be partially out of date too, because there just arent enough regular editors on a page that needs updating so often. FlyingScotsman72 (talk) 01:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Entirely agree with @FlyingScotsman72, great thinking, but unpractical and not the best way to store/access this info in an encyclopedic manner in my opinion. (For airport specific routes, this topic tends to be covered by those airports' main wiki articles, but sans distances. For Cirium based data, this is already done publicly pretty well by http://flightsfrom.com. Other than that would be a huge list that is hard to maintain to a point of relevance/encyclopedic value unfortunately.

Solomonfromfinland: I also suggest expanding the current list, from the 30 to the 40 or 50 longest flights; that way, one could see what other very long flights there are. For example, would the Los Angeles -- Sydney flight (mentioned in the article), make the top 50?

The topic of expanding the list was previously discussed on this talk page (see archives), the concensus then was to expand from 25 to 30, but no further. To answer your specific question: I don't think so... by my count the top 30-40 are pretty well known, from 40 onwards it starts to get murky/harder to track as they are less notable for being "longest flights"

Solomonfromfinland: For example, would the Los Angeles -- Sydney flight (mentioned in the article), make the top 50?

No, I don't believe so (a Great Circle Distance of 12,051 km isn't far enough in these modern times, but it is indeed a long flight none the less!) DigitalExpat (talk) 05:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

To help answer your question, here are the current flights 31-45:

31 HKG BOS CX 12,826 km

32 YVR SIN AC 12,821 km

33 IAH TPE BR 12,776 km

34 DOH DFW QR 12,765 km

35 CPT IAD UA 12,754 km

36 LAX MEL QF/UA 12,748 km

37 SFO MEL UA 12,641 km

38 SGN SFO VN 12,614 km

39 CPT EWR UA 12,580 km

40 YYZ HKG AC/CX 12,569 km

41 TPE JFK CI/BR 12,566 km

42 EWR BOM AI 12,565 km

43 JFK BOM AI 12,551 km

44 ORD HKG CX 12,543 km

45 BOM YYZ AC 12,513 km

DigitalExpat (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

UA152 SFO-BLR

This route does not seem to be bookable starting 28 Oct 2023 anymore -- @DigitalExpat would you mind checking any of your sources if you can find it anywhere? And if not, should we remove it from the upcoming scheduled list? DoubleClawHammer (talk) 17:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry @DoubleClawHammer for being far too late in this reply to be useful, but in the interest of encyclopedic completeness, yes you were right, UA quietly removed seat availability in April before formally removing the flights from 2023 and 2024 schedules ( https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/230710-uanw23in ), PS for others reading later - AI 175/176 remains operating this route via Russian airspace which is currently forbidden for US carriers. Great Spot as always @DoubleClawHammer

04:31, 29 August 2023 (UTC) DigitalExpat (talk) 04:31, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

UA179 EWR-HKG

The flight is currently scheduled and bookable (ticketable in GDS) from March 23 onwards.(Non Destructive Edit by Author: no longer bookable since late Jan 2023, see my below reply comment) However since Russian airspace remains closed to US carriers, it is unlikely to be viable for UA to operate this route.

Previously the graying out of the routes in the table were to reflect pause in operations due to COVID-19 (flights were scheduled but not operated), now in this case with COVID-19 restrictions largely ended, this pause in operation is more likely due to viability (United has made statements about other impacted routes being paused due to Russian Overflight rights).

So my question is what to do what the flight in the table? My thoughts at the moment are:

Option 1 - Remove the flight (it hasn't operated for coming up to 3 years now...)

Option 2 - Do nothing, leave it as is until March 23 comes and goes (or announcement made otherwise), it's a scheduled flight, I can buy a ticket on it right now, so it is as legitimate as the others (for the time being?)

Option 3 - Change the text denoting what the "graying out" of a flight is to show?

Option 4 - Something else?

Interested in other people's thoughts on how best to address this/improve the article? :) DigitalExpat (talk) 08:26, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Aha, looks like the United Airlines earnings call a couple weeks back gave the official answer - EWR-HKG (and all UA China routes except for SFO-PVG) are no longer scheduled as United is restricted to 4x weekly service between US and China and they are dedicating all 4 slots to SFO-PVG. As EWR-HKG is no longer scheduled at all, removing it from the longest flight list. Also they further go to note that Russian Airspace ban/restrictions would constrain their operation even if China flight allotment was lifted. DigitalExpat (talk) 07:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

On United's site this route is now bookable starting 31 Oct 2023 -- UA 179 opby B772 blocked at 16:00. Should we add it as a future scheduled route? DoubleClawHammer (talk) 02:56, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

@DoubleClawHammer you're right! I agree, it's an officially scheduled flight by definition, time to add it to the upcoming/future scheduled routes (although I'm pessimistic about it starting on that date due to either/both China slot restrictions combined with Russian airspace restrictions, but opinions like mine are irrelevant, add it in is my vote!) DigitalExpat (talk) 03:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Added now. DoubleClawHammer (talk) 17:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

UA has now removed this route from schedules until NS24 (March 30, 2024 is now for sale). I've updated it on the upcoming flight list, but am thinking this is potentially better to just remove the flight. While CX is operating HKG-JFK with A359 and A35K, UA's traditional use of it's 77W was on the polar routing using Russian Airspace, now CX's distances avoiding Russian Airspace are coming right up against the limits of the 77W range (not even taking into account load factors and headwinds) (see yesterday's CX distance: https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/CPA844/history/20230827/1810Z/VHHH/KJFK). I'm proposing we remove this until something is properly announced about US carriers being allowed to use Russian Airspace again (which doesn't appear to be anytime soon). (Even UA have (sensibly/prudently) loaded more west coast to HKG/PRC flights now instead of EWR routings now that bilateral route constraints are being improved). What are other people's thoughts? DigitalExpat (talk) 05:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:TOOLONG Tag added to article

This banner was added to the article by a new wikieditor on his first day (Welcome to Wikipedia @Volgograd Oblast Looking forward to your contributions!), but there was no talk article started, so I'm starting one to discuss this here. I think the WP:TOOLONG tag isn't warranted here, looking at WP:AS and WP:MOS, I think the article is cleanly broken down with 8 Headings (plus subheadings), with strong use of article tools to expedite reading (Tables and Lists). Outside the Lists & Tables, the article only contains 1,308 words. It's highly structured and the employs navigable tables/lists for expediting of reading/searching for the information readers are looking for. I think at minimum a conversation on if this tag is warranted would be of value here. Interested in everyone's valuable thoughts if we should keep/remove? While it's always a good idea to be constantly looking to improve the article's layout etc, in this case I think the WP:TOOLONG tag is unwarranted and would vote Remove. DigitalExpat (talk) 05:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Seeing that there are no other comments on this, and the editor who created his account on the same day he applied this tag (and then went on to do mass deletion of pages, and was permanently banned from WP because of it, I am going to go ahead and WP:BEBOLD and remove the banner, if there are opinions that it should stay on, suggest we encourage a dialogue here. :) Thanks! DigitalExpat (talk) 04:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)