Great Circle Route over the pole cleared for Branson's Virgin Air

This will shave six hours off a flight from London to Fiji, which had to either stop in Los Angeles or Seoul en-route.

There’s a good side and a bad side to this.

The good side: Thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of people traveling the Virgin Air (and other airlines) great circle route from London to Hawaii or Fiji will be able to see that the North polar ice cap has not melted away as some would believe have forecast.

The bad side: Sir Richard Branson, who has paired up with Al Gore in the past as a global eco champion, may take a hit from having planes spew jet exhaust in what some people call a highly sensitive region. I wonder if an EIR had to be filed for stratospheric effects? From The Independent:

Airlines cleared to use Santa’s short-cut

New destinations and shorter journey times on way after North Pole route is approved for passenger jets.

Hard-pressed airlines have been handed the perfect Christmas present: permission to fly twin-jet aircraft over the North Pole, saving millions on fuel costs, opening up new destinations and reducing damage to the environment.

Sir Richard Branson, president of Virgin Atlantic, told The Independent: “This new development really does open up a whole new world and will allow us to take our Dreamliners to more exciting and exotic places. Our new fleet of 787s could well be flying to Honolulu or even Fiji one day.” Fiji straddles the 180-degree line of latitude, and the most direct track passes directly over the North Pole – though because of the distance, over 10,000 miles, the payload would need to be restricted. The new policy could also make no-non-stop routes to Tahiti in the South Pacific and Anchorage in Alaska viable.

And Sir Richard Branson looked forward to new sightseeing opportunities: “Apart from the stunning destinations on arrival, the Arctic scenery will be just amazing on the way.”

================================================================

I look forward to all those tourist photos and video from the window seats saying;

“Gosh, look at all that ice, I thought the North Pole had melted according to the Guardian!”

Full story at The Independent

h/t to Dr. Ryan Maue

Addendum: Since some people haven’t clicked through the link to the article, they get the mistaken impression this is “new”. It’s only new for two engine jets, of which Branson has many. Four engine jets have been making great circle routes for years but two engine jets have been limited by ETOP rules related to an engine failing and distance to nearest airport. – Anthony

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

137 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
rossshiremannie
December 24, 2011 1:44 am

Hmmmp ! and what do they expect to see in the dark? – Black Ice ?

John Marshall
December 24, 2011 1:54 am

Just shows the reliability of aero-engines today. In fact total aircraft reliability compared to my time in the RAF in the 60’s/70’s.

TP
December 24, 2011 1:54 am

The article is talking about ETOPS approval (Extended Two engine Operations). I operate over the pole all the time in a 747-400. 3 and 4 engine aircraft operate under a different set of operating rules due to their ability to lose and engine and still get to an extended alternate airport. Two engine aircraft operating under ETOPS regs (especially passenger ops) have to able to reach an alternate airport in 60, 129, or 180 minutes – 60/120/180 ETOPS – from engine failure and that airport has to have facilities that can handle all your passengers. That invalidates most military and Siberian airports. Operating the 787 under 180 or 210 ETOPS allows Virgin to reach acceptable alternates – probably Fairbanks. It’s not really about an EIS, it’s simply operating a new aircraft type under a very aggressive version of existing regulations.

December 24, 2011 1:56 am

I guess I went off at half cock.
I’ve just read the whole newspaper article and this is a new regulation for TWIN engined aircraft.
3 and 4 engined ones have been using the route for ages. Its all to do with how far you can fly with one engine out of action.

Billy Liar
December 24, 2011 2:02 am

Philip Bradley says:
December 23, 2011 at 11:15 pm
Contrail at the North Pole:
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/npole/2011/images/noaa2-2011-0722-095637.jpg

TP
December 24, 2011 2:04 am

KBray-
We operate north of 78 degrees north latitude using grid navigation. The Flight Managemet Computer uses alternate (grid) navigation and doesn’t follow compass headings. Actually, the compass can flip back and forth several times over a several hundred mile segment. More fun than that is that GPS is useless above about N84 – there is a sizable hole in coverage near the poles. Modern FMC equipped aircraft have to revert to Inertial Navigation, which effectively dumbs down the aircraft by about 30 years. Nonetheless, operating in Polar regions is surprisingly uneventful after being trained in the unique issues it presents. And Branson is right – the view is amazing. The best scenery I’ve seen anywhere in the world was north of Thule, Greenland a few days after summer solstice.

Roger Longstaff
December 24, 2011 2:06 am

Huh – that’s nothing. For something new try:
http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/lapcat_facts.html
(We had to fly over the north pole to avoid breaking every window along the way with a sonic boom!).
Happy Christmas to all!

David, UK
December 24, 2011 2:15 am

Louise says:
December 23, 2011 at 11:33 pm
By shortening the duration of the flight there will be a net reduction in greenhouse gases emitted. A win-win, what’s the problem?

No problem for me either. But it would be a problem for touchy-feely AGW believers if they actually thought for a change. After all, if you actually bother to read what Branson is saying, you will see that this venture is not designed to cut down flight times, but rather is designed to open up routes and destinations hitherto unattainable: “This new development really does open up a whole new world and will allow us to take our Dreamliners to more exciting and exotic places.” Greens of course will love this regardless, because it is wonderful propaganda, to be lapped up by the media, missing the obvious irony as indeed they always do, as indeed you just did. That’s why you’re a Green: you’re naive. You’ll get wise with time, don’t worry. Until that time, keep lapping it up.

mikemUK
December 24, 2011 2:26 am

We must remember that saving the earth is a Branson hobby, just like ballooning.
This, however is business!
Happy Christmas to one and all.

Cold Englishman
December 24, 2011 2:45 am

Yes, he really is good at PR, but he failed to secure the UK Lottery franchise, mainly because of his perceived dishonesty. He probably would have made a good job of it, but his history is not helpful– he devised an illicit pseudo-export scam that allowed him to evade the tax payments on his merchandise. For a time he eluded the authorities but was eventually brought to justice and to jail. It cost him (and his mother) $45,000 in bail to secure his freedom.
http://www.answers.com/topic/richard-branson

steveta_uk
December 24, 2011 2:45 am

Cementafriend, I think your memory is playing tricks – the Denmark-Japan route is very similar to the UK-Korea route in the map.
I’ve done London-Tokyo, the Siberian scenery is amazing in places, and the north was totally frozen (in spring).
But some way from the pole.

ferdinand
December 24, 2011 2:47 am

Philip Bradley has not read Lindzen and Choi.

Carsten Arnholm
December 24, 2011 2:51 am

Cementafriend says:
December 23, 2011 at 11:10 pm
Is this new? I have flown over the pole from Coepenhaven (I think that is how the Danish spell it) to Tokyo. Just PR I reckon. Branson is good at that.

Try København instead 🙂
Merry Christmas!

Eimear
December 24, 2011 3:03 am

The other bad side is if the aircraft develops problems it will be far from help.
Happy Holidays to All.

December 24, 2011 3:23 am

Call me cynical but there may be more to this than saving time and the cost of fuel. Branson actively turns cartwheels to not pay tax if he can help it. Has Branson effectively created a loophole that will reduce the cost of those thrice damned EU flight surcharges on long haul flights? That his green credentials are taking a back seat to his wallet is a mere detail. He is a busy and important man after all and therefore not subject the the rules he would level on the rest of us. That is the nature of this particular beast.
What I actually think of the creature would not be appropriate for this site.

SandyInDerby
December 24, 2011 3:31 am

rossshiremannie says:
December 24, 2011 at 1:44 am
Hmmmp ! and what do they expect to see in the dark? – Black Ice ?
Land of the midnight sun? Approx 6 months of the year it’s permanent daylight at the north pole; Rest of the year permanent night. So the time of day irrelevent, it’s seasonal.

December 24, 2011 3:39 am

‘This is the tower here, whats your heading Beardy One’
‘Beardy One here, heading due south’
‘Ok beardy One, alter course to 90 degrees. Confirm your heading’
‘Beardy One here, heading due south’
‘Ok beardy One, alter course ANOTHER 90 degrees. Confirm your heading’
‘Beardy One here, heading due south’
Ait traffic controller to assistant ‘I think dicks been at the whacky baccy again’

Richard111
December 24, 2011 4:10 am

More wierd and wonderful talk about contrails and positive forcings and negative forcings whatever the hell they are. Have you ever seen a sky with 100% coverage of contrails? Well, I am pretty sure you have seen a sky with 100% cloud cover. I know from personal experience that 100% cloud cover certainly stops the surface getting colder. You might notice a small increase in temperature if the cloud appears late after an early clear night but that is simply surface heat.
So why should a few contrails have any more effect on local climate than a few clouds?
I live under an airline freeway known as Green1 and have never noticed any soot. What I have noticed is that my solar oven stops heating if a contrail moves between it and the sun. It can get so bad that I have to abandon outdoor cooking. Remember the aftermath of 911.

R Barker
December 24, 2011 4:33 am

In the case of light twin engine aircraft, it is said that the remaining engine will always get you to the crash site. ;<))

arguethefacts
December 24, 2011 4:34 am

…to see that the North polar ice cap has not melted away as some would believe.
What a stupid sentence. Name one person who says the North polar ice cap has melted away? This is terrible writing. The North Polar ice cap is melting (provable, just look at satellite shots for 2011 and compare them with 1970), but no one says they’ve melted. Please correct this sentence. Seems you were just trying to take a political swipe at environmentalists using a straw dog argument.
REPLY: Gladly, I’ll name three.
Al Gore (on his current TV website) and NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally
http://current.com/green/88653981_polar-ice-gone-by-2012.htm
Mark “death Spiral” Serreze from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22203980/ns/us_news-environment/t/rate-ice-melt-shocks-warming-experts/#.TvX25VbnuuM
Though since you got your panties in a twist, I edited the text to add “have forecast”. The routes won’t start until 2012, and that’s what I was saying in the sentence. Since you “arguethefacts” I presume now you’ll send a letter to Al Gore, Zwally, and Serreze telling them they are stupid for believing this? If you do, please send a copy to WUWT and we’ll gladly post it.- Anthony

Confused
December 24, 2011 4:43 am

But if he flies straight over the North Pole, won’t the Earth be turning underneath him, so that when he comes down, it won’t be Fiji he lands at, but somewhere like Brazil or Peru ?

December 24, 2011 4:43 am

One silver lining for passengers whose aircraft needs to make an emergency landing on the dwindling Arctic snowpack: They won’t be eaten by all of those dead or drowning polar bears! 🙂

guam
December 24, 2011 4:46 am

@arguethe facts
The Polar Ice caps expand and contract the North polar Ice cap has been documented as virtually dissapearing in the past, so what?
None of it is due to us, so why pick up on the descriptive terminology over what is an overblown myth anyhow?
Now go agrgue those FACTS

DEEBEE
December 24, 2011 4:57 am

No problemo — Branson can buy carbon offsets fron Al. That should be good for us all peerin in through the window (cf Animal Farm)

December 24, 2011 5:08 am

Persistent contrails are not always narrow. Under the right conditions they widen into actual clouds. If Branson’s polar flights are fairly frequent, the Arctic could end up almost entirely covered with clouds, at times when it wouldn’t have been cloudy without the jets.
I noted a similar phenomenon from repeated contrails here:
http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2011/08/sharp-shadows-contrail-dictaphone.html