SQ22: Longest Takeoff run of a commercial passenger flight?

[@danedmiston7734]

That's one heavy bird to see lift off. It's always amazed me how these marvelous machines take off with such grace being so heavy.

[@davidb6535]

Simple suction

[@robertlworley]

Actually, suction has nothing to do with it. It's a difference of pressures above and below the wings. It is Bernoulli's principle (who, I might add, would turn over in his grave at any mention of 'suction' related to this process). But I do agree with Dan. It's amazing to see these things get off the ground, despite the laws of physics that allow them to do it. Absolutely incredible!!

[@mmichaeldonavon]

Bernoulli may be a tad overrated here. Yes, high and low pressures do play out here - curved wing surfaces, etc., farther to travel air as it goes over and under a wing. But, planes fly upside down, right? That means the "curved" portion of the wing is on the bottom, right? But, it still stays up in the air. Why isn't it pushed towards the ground? So, what we have is, actually, the wing (right side up, or upside down) "pushing" the air towards the ground, and - Viola! The plane stays in the air. Old Newton's action and reaction principle. Agree?

[@davidb6535]

Guys, its 2/3 suction 1/3 pushing. And yes, it is amazing of course!

[@charliedrinkwater5656]

Michael Donavon dont you mean derate...ok that wasn't funny

[@enumrob771]

Looks like they were going to drive to their destination for awhile there.

[@justplanecrazy5575]

We pay for full runway, we use full runway

[@My_AviationChannel]

Infinite Flight JPC *says in Russian accent*

[@user-xw4zt9gc7l]

My Aviation Channel The full runway uses you

[@JehanKateli]

Singapore's runway is 4000m long, while most runways are around 3000m long. For economic reasons, planes always use as little thrust as possible when they take off (but not less than 75%, as far as I'm aware). The less thrust that is used for take-off, the longer the take-off roll will be. This means that the aircraft will use most of the available runway space. Since Singapore's runway is longer than average, take-offs from Singapore will generally be longer too.

[@coolkid2316]

i just came back to brisbane from singapore and we took off where the budget arilines were stationed. My brother said that the 777 used full thrust because the runway was shorter in where the budget airlines were stationed so im not sure, and also my dad told me that changi airport only had one runway...

[@AirborneRenegade]

Jehan Kateli unless they're cargo planes... they have used upto 110%

[@ilipan2668]

Mexico has a very long runway, high altitude. Takeoffs of 1:15 are not uncommon there, especially for flights to Europe.

[@vonercis]

Jehan Kateli correct!

[@vonercis]

Often, the A320 will try to use a maximum of 92.2% N1, but for 747, I’m not sure. If they had a long take off run, they might be trying to gain a higher rate of climb.

[@njorogewangari7938]

The sector was 18+ hours long which means the aircraft was operating close to to its MTOW due to the amount of tankered fuel, Payload and other factors hence the long roll was ideal both for performance and engine maintenance. You have to applaud LIDO flight management system for effectively and efficiently dictating the speed, payload and other parameters here...

[@ashfaqul11]

@Captain868 "Ladies and Gentlemen, this is your captain speaking, due to technical issues, we will be taxing to our destination, thank you"

[@garydunken7934]

The aircraft used Changi runway 20R for take off. I counted the side taxiways and utility roads after the plane started to roll and it rotated near the 7th side lane. When you check this runway on Google Map's satellite image, this side lane is approximately 3/4 the distance from start of 20R runway. So, if this runway is 4000m long as mentioned in the comment below, then the plane used nearly 3000m of runway and there was still a 1000m (1/4) left until the end of runway. :D

[@redwoodcactusnorthwest5219]

That’s honestly quite impressive. That’s about what most 737-900ERs use here in Seattle on domestic flights.

[@nvhaidatui2218]

You are right. I used Google earth to check how long it rolled for taking off.😊

[@DAIRX]

@BigSam3788 i don`t know exactly. it was end of july 2010 and the departure time was about 1pm - as I arrived at the airport it was a very nice and warm day in singapore :-) but the altitude of this airport is low..... so i think the long takeoffrun was due to the heavy aircraft

[@husseinali5856]

That's quick,exclnt takeoff.....for this a lot of runway is required ,I love the a340 ,good video Ty uploader

[@mikedd769]

Quick? bro what kind of planes u have in your country? probably nun, cuz it seems like u know nothing about em

[@osta007]

man I love the sound when it leaves the ground....

[@richygambs321]

It must have been heavy with fuel however I could tell from the noise of the engines that not a lot of thrust was used, because of a long long runway. If more thrust were used there would less of a 'groan' from the engine.

[@dave4shmups]

I would think that the hot and humid weather in Singapore would also have something to do with this long takeoff run.

[@CaptShami]

It took about 55 seconds to get off the ground

[@danielcostello7170]

To respond to the question by the op: a long runway will result in a long take off roll. Its like in a car but in reverse. In a car you don't apply full braking force if you have lots of space before the light turns red. If you are speeding and the light turns yellow at a critical moment, and there are red light cameras, then you apply full braking. Otherwise you apply the minimal required to stop at the stop line.

[@TheFlyingExperience]

this one took 53 seconds. the airbus 380 i was in (the day after the biggest blizzard in new york - fully loaded with pax) from a flight to dubai on emirates was 1:00 Takeoff Roll Time: Airbus A380, A330-200, Boeing 777-300 & 737-800 (bottom right) or you can see the entire takeoff here if you do a search for - Inflight Airbus A380-800 Experience on Emirates - Part 1

[@ShortyTXL]

I´m not that very sure, but last year we took off from Narita in a fully loaded A346. And we went all the way down from one set of piano keys to the other one. And Rwy 16R in Narita is 4000 meters long. So I would suppose it a was longer takoff run.

[@hotelgulf]

The ac is very heavy. You can see the heavy and slow flex of the wingtip on takeoff roll. Nice footage!

[@Winglets68]

@DAIRX But the thing is A340-500/600s take forever to takeoff because they are really long planes and they need a lot of lift so rotation isnt steep

[@SBS8873X]

Not forgetting a box/coffin to store someone when a person dies mid-flight.

[@abel1997at]

Maybe it took lots of runway because fully loded to is maximum capacity

[@johnr9528]

Reminds me of a Denver takeoff at Stapleton 1990; thought we were already in Kansas at rotate.

[@jetfreak4]

@fsxpilot21 The longest I've ever seen would have to be either a Lufthansa A340-300 (not an x version, but with the less powerful engines), and the second would have to be an Iran Air 747 classic taking off in the desert/mountainous region of Tehran. Both takeoffs were over a minute long, several seconds longer than this. A low thrust-to-weight ratio plus a takeoff speed of 180 mph (required for both A340 and 747) lead to longer takeoffs and slower climbs, but allow for higher cruise speeds.

[@Winglets68]

@DAIRX But the thing is A340-500/600s take forever to takeoff because they are really long planes and they need a lot of lift so rotation isnt steep. And i confirm that i got 54 seconds

[@robytar]

A-340-500 RIP. Flying tanker with a few passengers.

[@SFOSam]

1:35 is a VERY long takeoff! Do you know what the temperature was there when you left?

[@TheGamer241]

@BigSam3788 SIngapore usually has an average temperature of 28-33°C.

[@carlmaster9690]

First of all, great video and take off. What you've got to consider in this amazing video of one of the best take offs I've ever seen is that A) A340s, like all over large aircraft require long take off due to their shear size alone. B) They have heavy loads their hauling for thousands of miles while flying between 30,000ft and 45,000ft above sea level. C) They are travelling for (as I quoted in point B is that their flying for thousands of miles at extreams hights (aka 30,000ft and 45,000ft) and need as much thrust as possible to make the long journeys

[@island5317]

Flying from USA to Australia takeoff run was about a minute in a Dreamliner. Singapore like australian is far away from USA and europe so many takeoffs will be very long. Also a good distance from other major Asian places.

[@jetfreak4]

@Captain868 I wouldn't. The long takeoff roll makes perfect sense. It is a very large plane loaded to near its maximum range and flying nonstop from Singapore to Newark. On a heavy plane like this, they probably would use all the runway available to them not only to get off the ground, but also to maximize efficiency and to make it easier on the plane. As long as this takeoff was, they likely did not use maximum thrust. Probably 90%. As far as the climb, again, heavy.

[@jonahair747]

Climbing like a sick angel.

[@superskullmaster]

And for the record as well its. V1(GO/NO GO) then VR (which is Rotate), then V2(single engine climb out speed)

[@JKevinBrady801]

Its all a matter of thrust, lift and weight - if this plane had twice the thrust it would take half the time on the to roll - I took SQ 22 and we actually went out at reduced thrust (they will do this to reduce wear and tear on the engines)

[@sunbulah9779]

The weather must have been hot or humid

[@danielcostello7170]

You know the length of the take off roll is known before it starts, right? The weight, temperature, altitude and length of runway is input in the flight computer and a power setting is calculated. Airlines never use full thrust except in emergencies because it burns more fuel and exponentially increases wear on engines. That is why every take off in a heavy uses most of the runway. That is what the pilots programmed the plane to do.

[@ollo1982]

Its a very long takeoff run,but it need it becuase its weighing 360-370 tons.The hotter it is and the more humidity it is the more runway it uses,also when it comes to the elevation of the airport.changi is only 7 metres above sea level,but if it is hot,the takeoff roll gets longer.on a cold day,an aircraft use less runway due to more compressed air.and on a hot day the air ofcourse is less compressed making the aircraft use more runway.Low air density also hampers an aircraft's ability to climb

[@jlalbee]

Wow, that's a long one. And the climb is really slow too. Hot. Heavy. Cool airplane though.

[@OmsoiTekken]

Yeah, flying to the US from Frankfurt on the A340 took us much longer to get to cruising altitude.

[@lolvks]

@bermudaguy1 No, the airport is near sea level (22' MSL)

[@DAIRX]

@deedx when do you begin to count the takeoff run?

[@Taydrum]

The wings are so heavy, that the engines are misaligned relative to each other until they reach a certain speed where the wing lifts

[@AlexPraglowskiAviation]

That's a lot of runway...

[@carlmaster9690]

Alex Praglowski Aviation it's over 4,000 miles long! That's equivalent to four miles almost

[@alexanderhan2819]

Carlmaster96 bruh u dumb u actually this 4 miles is 4000 miles

[@OmsoiTekken]

I got really nervous when I was flying from Vegas to San Francisco earlier this summer because of our extended take off roll. It felt like we were going at it for so long before it lifted. Was the scariest flight I've ever been on too, there was a horrible rattling sound somewhere on the right side of the fuselage behind where I was sitting but it stopped after a while, then started again. Just after take off as well, the turns were really quick and sharp and I was terrified - usually turns are nice and smooth and gradual, but not this one. Even the guy sat next to me told me after we landed that he does that route a couple of times a month and this was his worst experience on it. It was United Airlines, B737-NG

[@ITripReport]

from someone who flies out of vegas a lot, I also have experienced quite long takeoff rolls, especially for a short flight to vegas. The steep turns are normal operations out of vegas, in which aircraft flying towards the west will perform a left turn around 500 feet above ground, right above the strip.

[@TheRevII]

A long takeoff roll for that trip? Hell, a Cessna 172 flies nonstop further than that...I can't imagine why an airline would load up a commercial flight with a lot of fuel for a 500-mile flight.

[@ITripReport]

CL cuz there’s a demand for a medium sized aircraft.

[@Flyermac]

I remember I watched a very long takeoff video of an El Al 747-400 pax. It almost took off after the end of the runway. It was in Tel-Aviv.

[@danzodamanzo8192]

Singapore is hot and humid. Takeoff thrust is calculated based on temperature and elevation. On a hot humid day with little wind, the airplane will require more thrust and runway than on a cold dry day

[@starpawsy]

Uhhh, no. That was only about 55 seconds from max thrust to rotation. I have sat through 72 second take-off runs in a 744 from Sydney to LAX in December, where the temperature was over 40C. Runway 34R in Sydney is 3900m and there is not a lot left at rotation.

[@jobama9877]

U remember all that?

[@paice95]

try looking up md-11 takeoff in st maarten(from a wingview). and also for a normal "flex" temperature of about 60 degrees Celsius the climb rate on average is about 4000-4500 feet/min with low weight and also pitch angles of over 20 degrees.

[@Tecnigod]

I think I have seen a longer takeoff run on youtube of an Aerolineas Argentinas B747 taking off from Buenos aires to Madrid but would have to search and check it up again to confirm. Anyway cool vid. :)

[@CaptainMum]

Wow, that was a very long take off run! You can see it was incredibly heavy by the rate of initial acceleration...very low! Still, it wouldn't have taxied all the way out to the runway if it wasn't going to make it off by the end! :-)

[@edwardsedgley1714]

Its true that the A340 does take awhile to catch the maximum takeoff speed because of its long body and 4 wing mounted turbo fans/jets. when i went on the MD 90 it took awhile to catch air but i never been on a plane that has 4 turbofans/jets

[@FalseShatner]

Looked pretty normal to me for a full jet. About like full a 737-800 from Seattle-Dallas. I've been on loud clattering seemingly 15 mile takeoff runs in crappy old dash 8 turboprops though. Yikes!

[@bambang303378]

Is this true that for this route they are all business class? I flew this route twice in 05 and 07 they still had economy class back then.

[@davidlandovsky5294]

Timed it at 55 seconds. Very heavy takeoff. You can tell by the climb rate.

[@asamitchell7948]

Hot and heavy a380 take off is one of the longest I've experienced felt like it took an age to take off

[@yamahabradley]

All A340's were known to be underpowered compared to the other long range aircraft of their time. Long take-off runs and extended times to get to cruising altitude meant air controllers were always pushing them to speed up if possible. I was fortunate enough to be able to fly in business class from Canada to Hong Kong and Japan and boy were they comfortable. I am still amazed that you can get into one of these magnificent aircraft and in 17 hours get off on the other side of the earth while being pampered all the way. Many happy memories from the High Tech days, too bad its all gone to the dogs. By the way a 747-400 fully fueled and loaded is not much better. They could make the Hong Kong west to east trip only in the winter and at the time I flew on this flight I believe it was the longest flight of the scheduled flights.

[@heidischell6700]

Why could they only make the Hong Kong west to east trip only in winter?

[@Edwiness]

Tailwinds.

[@goawaygoawaynow]

It's because they are 4-engined aircraft. An aircraft has to be able to lose an engine during take-off and still make it up safely. For twin-engined aircraft, this means that they essentially have to be able to take-off and fly on a single engine, making them overpowered during normal operations. Four-engine aircraft only have a third again as much power as they require, so during regular operations, they are less sprightly.

[@AaronShenghao]

4 engine aircraft could fly on one engine though, but not during take off.

[@Itapirkanmaa2]

A 4-engined a/c is very unlikely to fly level flight on one engine, unless it's unusually light.

[@ETOPSriskier]

Fascinating but not heart-stopping. 55secs. t/o run is fine for a fully-laden quad embarking on an 18 hour flight using a graduated power t/o with plenty of available runway. What matters is not t/o length or climb rate but whether it is smooth, quiet, safe, and uses the fuel optimally. To me the A340-500 is the Queen of the Skies and I wish more of them had been made.

[@jetfreak4]

Very long indeed, but not the longest I've ever seen. The A340-300 and A340-200 have done the longest take-off rolls I've ever seen. Look up some Royal Jordanian takeoffs of A340s from Amman to Chicago. Those takeoffs are over a minute long.

[@HesJustSteven]

@ThrogsNck no its not because if it was FSX you would see graphic, and if you look THERE ARE NO GRAPHICS!

[@seno862]

almost a whole minute takeoff run:P Must be that long for a flight from Singapore to Newark:P

[@istvanklein]

Thin tropical hot air plus a very heavy plane mean long takeoff roll. I have been watching your videos for a while, you seem to be ceaselessly criss-crossing the world on very long flights, what's your job?

[@mytree3979]

Legends say they are still taking off...

[@danial192]

Singapore Airlines A345 fleets uses RR engines. Its agreeable that the rate of climb is slow.. But have you consider about the tonnes of Cargo and also the fuel onboard? Its a 17.5 hours flight and the A345 fuel consumption is greater then a B747-400..

[@hendricstattmann3638]

+Danial Iskandar Just a word about the fuel consumption: typical values for the 747-400 is 10'000kg, vs. 8'500kg for the 340-500.

[@farhankunkkaraji2485]

Why does the A320 has an average fuel of 12 or 10k?? And an a345 has 8k like wtf xD

[@Spiralworm]

Wow you weren't kidding about the long takeoff run

[@zerrubabbel]

It did seem a little long, but nothing unusual... was it perhaps a hot day?... I dont know the reason, but Im under the impression planes take up more runway on hot days

[@TaterTheAV8R]

The reason is because the pilot didn't want to use full power on takeoff. He only set the throttle to about 75% N1, which is the air pressure coming in through the air compressors. I had to.

[@proclaimer2u]

Yup. The average take off time is 40 to 50 seconds. This took 55 seconds. Very heavy plane. the wings are also bent more than usual.

[@condorfan98]

sehr schönes Video und wirklich ein schön langer run:D

[@phatcarz]

@airbuntie 18 hours 53 mins Its the worlds Longgest commerical flight

[@christopherescott6787]

I don't remember the last take off that was so shallow. She was real heavy!!!

[@rolfmais8524]

Well, what do you expect with this weight and OAT?

[@makethman007]

there was a lot of runway left maybe a quarter i was once on a 747 ff to Vancouver that took a huge run to get airbourne and climbed super slowly, took nearly an hour to get to cruise altitude

[@ecoRfan]

I hear that SQ22 may return in a few years, but will use an A350 long-range version

[@ecoRfan]

Going to be either EWR or JFK. Surprised they used EWR, since JFK's runways are longer and the A345 is known to use a lot of runway to get airborne.

[@TolgaEastCoast]

Great video. My Lufthansa Boeing 747-400 flight to Frankfurt-Am-Main took about the same time from KMIA, maybe slightly less. But these airbuses have slow climbs, and it's for the fuel economy.

[@dbn52]

I do not know what you mean.Could you please explain?

[@helixvonsmelix]

You should have seen the South African Airways 747-200 leaving LHR and heading home. They had to fly out over the South Atlantic because no overfly rights. That was a long take off at highest power.

[@HarryVancity]

Great video. How long is the flight from Singapore to Newark?

[@waltdombrowski3789]

Im surprised they used the 340, normally that is a 777 route. That take off wasnt too bad. Remember its hot and heavy so you are gonna have a longer takeoff roll. There is a video of a singapore airlines 777 taking off from Manchester and you can see they are trying to horse the plane into the air, because you see the nose trying to lift then come back down a few times. Finally they are able to liftoff just before the numbers on the other end of the runway. That was a long takeoff...

[@DAIRX]

Walt Dombrowski on this Route to JFK they Never deployed a777

[@crayz745]

those engines are straining! very powerful

[@epten]

@DAIRX when the windows begun shaking?

[@BananaT3arz]

Yes, it's a shame, I really love the A340's too :(

[@reinhardlehmann8161]

Waren die Vorflügel nicht ausgefahren ?

[@hotelgulf]

That was about 59 seconds....Very Heavy!!!

[@silvialoren9400]

No, takeofd starts at 0:44, lifting off at 1:41. So the takeoff is 57 seconds long.

[@DAIRX]

1. the runway in SXM is way shorter 2. the KLM-Aircrafts have not much fuel onboard for the short hop to Bonaire.... You really can not compare!

[@kingkoolkata]

I'm glad that earth has got a curvature, otherwhise this heavy A345 would never leave the ground :D

[@mloula]

This aircraft is loaded for an 18 hour flight. I think if the takeoff roll were shorter you'd be stopping for fuel in Detroit.

[@elyasf]

The slow climb is due to safety reasons. The plane is enourmesly heavy with extremely much fuel on board, therefor, they have to maintain an above safety speed, so if a emergency accure, they have plenty of speed. And that's the reason why so low angle of attack. It's not a problem for the A340-500 to climb faster than this, it got 4 Trent 500 engines wich produces over 60,000lb each. This baby is runnin fiine!! Good video too m8 :)

[@henrivanbemmel]

And the B777 has just two engines whivh can produce the same total power. I've seen a340 specs with engines rated at only 40,000 lbs each. Pretty tight margins.

[@runningman9688]

I use Newark Airport as my main airport.

[@danielkandisnooker7990]

I think i remember an a340-300 takeoff of mine to be longer. Might be wrong. But i was starting to panic like people probably was here... heh

[@cjracer1000]

That was almost an entire minute. Gotta love those A340s. Ha, and that awful climb rate. I'm pretty sure I've seen piston twins climb faster.

[@dbn52]

Thank You

[@edwardsedgley1714]

This A340 probably was completely booked and going a long distance so they probably filled the tanks all the way up. or the pilot pulled up at the last second.

[@redskinsfanqca]

That is one heavy bird!

[@shawnwhite74]

The A340 is under powered!

[@notschwifty2217]

why does the a340 taking off so Long?

[@zszs100]

Can you tell me what you mean i am really curious. :)

[@Scott2122232425]

Time from throttle up to rotation

[@madrx2]

You will see I have a longer one in my videos of a Philippine airlines a330.

[@dylanclinger]

2.23 WTF gas station was I the only on that saw that WTF

[@notircm]

and here its not all about performance but also fuel efficiency

[@leocommandeur2447]

this airbus is heavy , max fuel is loaded, max pax load. because of the hot air temperature , air is thinner, requiring max takeoff speed for lift.

[@trent8002003]

Very long indeed. Almost a minute. Initial rolling was indeed sluggish. What do we expect? 18 hrs in the air. Even the septic tanks must be filled with fuel.

[@losteroni]

I estimate it at about 1800 yards or about a mile so yeah it's up there .

[@shrike2000]

Looks like they had plenty of runway to me. Anyway, there are a number of factors they consider when calculating a takeoff roll. In densely populated areas they may need to get off the ground and gain altitude quickly to reduce the amount of noise washing over people. They'd use max thrust for that. Other noise procedures require them to use the minimum thrust necessary to take off - just a different way to reduce noise. It also may depend on the particular type of aircraft. Old, loud aircraft may have different required takeoff profiles depending on airport regulations. For example, the USAF C-5 Galaxy with the old engines is often power limited on takeoff. They take off with minimum power necessary, then at a certain altitude they increase to climb power. If a pilot has plenty of runway and no noise abatement procedures to follow, they are likely going to use just enough power to get them off the runway to save fuel, maintenance, etc. No sense in pushing the engines to their limits if you don't have to. Then of course if the airplane is at max gross weight, it's a hot day, the runway is short, or a combination of the three they may have to go balls to the wall no matter what the airport regulations are.