19 hours in Coach- Doable?

[Shawn Ryu]

Easily doable. I do it all the time. Seats are big and legroom is plenty.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I rode in coach from New York City to Indianapolis. I survived, but I much prefer a sleeper.

I wonder how often random passengers simply perish in coach and never reach their destination.

There was that lady that found her way off the Auto Train a few years back. Wasn't she a coach passenger?

Touche? :lol:

I wish they had an intermediate class, like the slumbercoach, or the Euro-style couchettes or something the the lie-flat seats the airlines have for business class/first class.

You're not alone in this desire. Airlines come up with new or updated service levels about every decade or so, but I can't even remember the last time Amtrak came out with a new class of service for the LD network. As a result I would not expect to ever see this or any other changes. If anything we may lose sleepers altogether if the war on mass transit funding continues.

It can't be anything near like as bad as the 24 hour flight from Sydney to London and I've survived that (and the equivalent to other destinations) a bunch of times but only because I don't really have any other choice, not having the time or money to take the Queen Mary II or fly first class. But since on a train I do have sleepers as a quite affordable option (compared to business class long haul), I chose sleepers every time.

Survival is something you can bring up after weeks or months traversing the ocean on a cargo ship. That's an actual burden. Bringing up survival in the age of passenger jet aircraft is just plane silly. I've followed itineraries with anywhere from thirty to forty hours worth of coach travel and waiting in airports numerous times, so I think I know what I'm talking about here. ^_^

The longest flights I'm aware of all top out around 18 hours or so, which I believe approaches what modern aircraft can accomplish before running out of fuel. However, I prefer to avoid such flights and break up long trips into segments of ten hours or so before the next stop when I can get up and move around again. On my early flights actual sleeping was nearly impossible for me.

Over time I figured out how to get around my issues with sleeping through trial and error, but there is still a limit on how long I can sleep continuously on a plane. Best case is about eight hours of sleep, so a ten hour flight is just about perfect for me with an hour to get settled on the front end and another hour to wake up and get ready for landing at other the end. It's true that if I don't (or can't) schedule a stop after ten hours or so I start becoming less and less comfortable, both mentally and physically, but at no point has it ever become an issue of survival. Just sayin'

 

[Montanan]

Totally depends on the individual ... I spent many nights in an Amtrak coach when I was younger, but I'm never going to do it again unless I absolutely have to.

 

[Ispolkom]

I wish they had an intermediate class, like the slumbercoach,

You know, the Superliner roomette resembles nothing so much to me as a slumbercoach double room. So I'd argue that Amtrak does have a slumbercoach option. They just charge sleeper prices for it. I had a unrenovated duplex roomette on a recent trip on the Canadian, and it was much nicer than an Viewliner or Superliner roomette (wider, softer bunk, better layout).

WRT to the original post, I have no problem with an overnight in an uncrowded coach, but nineteen hours seems a bit long, especially if you end up in a crowded coach with late-night cellphone users, people watching DVDs without headphones, etc., etc.

 

[MiRider]

I wish they had an intermediate class, like the slumbercoach,

You know, the Superliner roomette resembles nothing so much to me as a slumbercoach double room. So I'd argue that Amtrak does have a slumbercoach option. They just charge sleeper prices for it. I had a unrenovated duplex roomette on a recent trip on the Canadian, and it was much nicer than an Viewliner or Superliner roomette (wider, softer bunk, better layout).

WRT to the original post, I have no problem with an overnight in an uncrowded coach, but nineteen hours seems a bit long, especially if you end up in a crowded coach with late-night cellphone users, people watching DVDs without headphones, etc., etc.

On every one of my overnights (11) in coach in the past year, the coach attendants and conductors actually managed the cars, no disruptions that I heard or saw.

Also, if someone was being disruptive, I would have no problem insisting that the issue be taken care of - enforcing the rules is their job.

 

[Ispolkom]

Also, if someone was being disruptive, I would have no problem insisting that the issue be taken care of - enforcing the rules is their job.

Yes, but that doesn't help the fact that now you're awake.

 

[TimePeace]

Totally depends on the individual ... I spent many nights in an Amtrak coach when I was younger, but I'm never going to do it again unless I absolutely have to.

Too true.

As I age, getting stiffer and creakier, overnight coach rides are more trying than they used to be. But I am still good for 24 hrs, at least I was last summer. What's most appealing about an overnight coach ride is if it is the first night of a two night trip, and I have a roomette (and a shower) for the second night!

 

[MiRider]

Also, if someone was being disruptive, I would have no problem insisting that the issue be taken care of - enforcing the rules is their job.

Yes, but that doesn't help the fact that now you're awake.

Anything can happen - no guarantees no matter where you are on the train.

You could be in your room on your trip of a lifetime and have a screaming, sick baby next door or even just in the car and there's nothing that can be done about that.

I believe rude, inconsiderate losers can buy sleeping accommodations too and I'm sure you'd be awakened in a situation like that too.

On the LSL, the guy in the next room was talking loudly on his phone with the door open - I would have said something to the SCA but we only saw him twice - when we got on and when we got off.

We made our own beds so, as I said.... no guarantees on the quality of your experience.

 

[Montanan]

Totally depends on the individual ... I spent many nights in an Amtrak coach when I was younger, but I'm never going to do it again unless I absolutely have to.

Too true.

As I age, getting stiffer and creakier, overnight coach rides are more trying than they used to be. But I am still good for 24 hrs, at least I was last summer. What's most appealing about an overnight coach ride is if it is the first night of a two night trip, and I have a roomette (and a shower) for the second night!

Honestly -- and I apologize if this makes me sound crankier than I promise I really am -- the issue is more about other passengers than myself. Whether or not it's likely, it's an unsettling prospect to be forced to share a seat pair for a day and a half with someone who doesn't respect personal space, doesn't like to bathe, brings along bags of smelly food, or is utterly devoid of social skills. I've walked through enough "morning after" coaches on long-distance trains to know that they can sometimes be pretty unpleasant places to be, both in terms of odor and cleanliness ... and that's not what I'm looking for in a vacation.

 

[TimePeace]

Totally depends on the individual ... I spent many nights in an Amtrak coach when I was younger, but I'm never going to do it again unless I absolutely have to.

Too true.

As I age, getting stiffer and creakier, overnight coach rides are more trying than they used to be. But I am still good for 24 hrs, at least I was last summer. What's most appealing about an overnight coach ride is if it is the first night of a two night trip, and I have a roomette (and a shower) for the second night!

Honestly -- and I apologize if this makes me sound crankier than I promise I really am -- the issue is more about other passengers than myself. Whether or not it's likely, it's an unsettling prospect to be forced to share a seat pair for a day and a half with someone who doesn't respect personal space, doesn't like to bathe, brings along bags of smelly food, or is utterly devoid of social skills. I've walked through enough "morning after" coaches on long-distance trains to know that they can sometimes be pretty unpleasant places to be, both in terms of odor and cleanliness ... and that's not what I'm looking for in a vacation.

Well yes, good points. I was speaking specifically about my own physical comfort - but certainly, the behavior of other passengers is a big factor in tolerating an overnight coach trip as well.

I appreciate the above comments about complaining about noisy and inconsiderate people in coach. I have tolerated it once or twice and lived to regret it, in the future I will be among the first to track down the coach attendant and complain, and if no response then find a conductor. We do have to right to expect the rules to be enforced (although we all know they are not always).

 

[Ana]

Survival is something you can bring up after weeks or months traversing the ocean on a cargo ship. That's an actual burden. Bringing up survival in the age of passenger jet aircraft is just plane silly. I've followed itineraries with anywhere from thirty to forty hours worth of coach travel and waiting in airports numerous times, so I think I know what I'm talking about here. ^_^

The longest flights I'm aware of all top out around 18 hours or so, which I believe approaches what modern aircraft can accomplish before running out of fuel. However, I prefer to avoid such flights and break up long trips into segments of ten hours or so before the next stop when I can get up and move around again. On my early flights actual sleeping was nearly impossible for me.

Over time I figured out how to get around my issues with sleeping through trial and error, but there is still a limit on how long I can sleep continuously on a plane. Best case is about eight hours of sleep, so a ten hour flight is just about perfect for me with an hour to get settled on the front end and another hour to wake up and get ready for landing at other the end. It's true that if I don't (or can't) schedule a stop after ten hours or so I start becoming less and less comfortable, both mentally and physically, but at no point has it ever become an issue of survival. Just sayin'

I guess it's all each to their own because I'd much rather spend weeks of months traversing the ocean by ship than sitting in economy for the 15 hour flight from Los Angeles to Sydney But I know it's perfectly survivable which is why I used that word. The OP asked if 19 hours in coach was doable and of course it is. I'm also very familiar with trips like you describe (30-40 hours) since I live down under and my family live in the UK and I'm still here to tell the tale, despite how horrible it feels at the time. It sounds like you're a way better flier than I am. I am super jealous of you getting 8 hours sleep! I have a lot of trouble sleeping for more than a few minutes at a time, my legs ache for days afterward and despite drinking many litres of water during the flight, I get really dehydrated. So towards the end of the trip, the "surviving" bit seems up in the air . and I don't think it's hyperbole (considering how I feel) to use it. On one trip back (bad scheduling and some delays) I was awake for 52 hours, I lurched between being a drooling wreck and being super wired. It was pretty pathetic - I landed around hour 42, too brain dead to remember my PIN for my cashcard and I had to get the bus home because I couldn't get money out for a cab. Got home to discover my new employer wanted me in to meet my new boss' boss (before I started the following week) and I remember him saying "tell me about yourself" and all I could think was "I'm so tired I don't even remember my middle name". But other times I was bouncing off the walls. If I could get from here to the UK in mini trips of say 6-8 hours with a night in between, that would be pretty good. But it's not feasible.

I do wonder why aircraft manufacturers think 18 hours or more non stop would be at all attractive. The hour or two in transit part way is most appreciated. The train is awesome because you can move around so much and with the doors opening at stops, there's fresh air coming in but even so, I love being able to get out and wander around during the service / smoke break stops (well away from the smokers).

 

[johnny.menhennet]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

To answer the actual question, I think that it is completely doable. I have never done a coach overnight, although plenty on airlines. If I can actually manage maybe 2 hours of sleep in AA's coach overnight then I could definitely make a go at it on Amtrak. I have always had the privilege of traveling with family so that I don't foot any of the bill, but when I can go on my own, I will not hesitate to take the train in coach. Being able to travel on the train in general is what I care about, and getting on in the first place is my top priority.

 

[Shanghai]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

 

[Shanghai]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

OK sorry. I saw the 8 at the beginning of the # and 5 at the end. I assumed you were talking about the same flight, and just mistyped when you wrote Newark. It puzzles me that Chicago is farther by multiple hours than Newark. i assume there might be some Pacific stop for fuel or something.

 

[AutoTrDvr]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

OK sorry. I saw the 8 at the beginning of the # and 5 at the end. I assumed you were talking about the same flight, and just mistyped when you wrote Newark. It puzzles me that Chicago is farther by multiple hours than Newark. i assume there might be some Pacific stop for fuel or something.

I've traveled Newark --> Hong Kong before, 16 hrs west bound. They take the "polar" route, which seems faster. They fly directly north and get to within 50 miles or so of the north pole, and they start to turn towards Asia. Then, they start flying down through Russia and mainland China, before landing in Hong Kong. On the way back, the curve is much less dramatic (they only get up to near Anchorage, Alaska), and it takes less time. 15:35 hrs.

I'm thinking that Newark-->SIN does the same thing, so the time of 18:55hrs for that is about right. UAs Chicago --> SIN might involve less of a "polar" type route and, therefore, take more time.

 

[Bierboy]

...I've walked through enough "morning after" coaches on long-distance trains to know that they can sometimes be pretty unpleasant places to be, both in terms of odor and cleanliness ... and that's not what I'm looking for in a vacation.

Exactly...I am an early riser, so I usually leave my sleeper well before the wife and enjoy the SSL before breakfast with her. So I often go through coaches early in the AM, and they are NOT a pleasant car to walk through early in the morning.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

Last I was aware UA895 was blocked at 15 hours and change with a conventional 744 flying ORD-HKG on its way to SIN. Has something changed since then?

 

[Ryan]

That's what it looks like:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL895

 

[Devil's Advocate]

It sounds like you're a way better flier than I am. I am super jealous of you getting 8 hours sleep!

In order to achieve this result I employ incremental schedule shifting with careful use of intentional deprivation aided by a methodical intake of caffeine, melatonin, and diphenhydramine along with a seasonally appropriate distillate.

On one trip back (bad scheduling and some delays) I was awake for 52 hours, I lurched between being a drooling wreck and being super wired.

Yikes. I haven't stayed up anywhere near that long since high school. Not sure if my method would help or not, but it has made a huge difference in how I feel at the end of a long trip.

If I could get from here to the UK in mini trips of say 6-8 hours with a night in between, that would be pretty good. But it's not feasible.

I'm no expert on UK <> Australia routing, but I would expect there could be many such options from a major hub like LHR or LGW. The trick would be working out a decent airfare, which would most likely require manual linking by a travel agent to ensure no single layover was longer than 23 hours as booked. That's still more than enough time to work with if all you want to do is have a good rest. Travel agents make no sense for most domestic trips and they can't do much to help for award redemptions, but they can still be extremely helpful for crafting international revenue tickets across multiple in-network carriers. You should give one a try sometime. Just be sure you're using someone who is already acutely familiar with helping folks traveling to your destination at a price range you're comfortable paying. A few extra specific questions in the early going can help ensure you're dealing with someone who actually knows what they're doing.

 

[Shanghai]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

Last I was aware UA895 was blocked at 15 hours and change with a conventional 744 flying ORD-HKG on its way to SIN. Has something changed since then?

I am confused by what I am finding regarding the longest nonstop commercial flight in the world.

I went to united.com and it showed UA895 as a 22 hour nonstop flight. After seeing Ryan's post

that showed 14 to 15 hours times for UA895, I further searched Google, I found that SQ21 at 18hr 55mn

and SQ22 at 18hr 40mn as being the longest flight. So I will retract my posting regarding UA895 and

say that Johnny's post of the Singapore flight from Newark, NJ to Singapore of 18hr 55mn is correct.

I'm not sure what this has to do with Amtrak, but it has been an interesting exercise!!

 

[PRR 60]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

UA895 is non-stop ORD-HKG: 15hr, 18min. UA does not have non-stop service ORD-SIN.

 

[Texan Eagle]

The longest non-stop commercial airline route operated is Singapore Airline's direct Newark - Singapore service.

 

Johnny, SQ22 between Singapore and Newark is 18hr 55mn. UA895 between Chicago and Singapore is 22hr 00mn.

When we were living in Hong Kong, the UA805 from San Francisco to Hong Kong was 14hr 55mn, following a

6hr flight from Newark to San Francisco. UA805 then continued from Hong Kong to Singapore in 3hr 30mn.

The flights when we were living in Hong Kong were from 1986 to 1994.

Well as you just proved that is not a direct non-stop route.

Johnny, UA895 is a nonstop flight.

UA895 is non-stop ORD-HKG: 15hr, 18min. UA does not have non-stop service ORD-SIN.

Longest currently operating actual non-stop flights without any fuel stops en route are as follows-

SQ21 Newark-Singapore 18 hr 50 min on A340-500

SQ37 Los Angeles-Singapore 18 hr 05 min on A340-500

AI126 Chicago-New Delhi 17 hr 00 min on B777-300ER (temporarily suspended)

DL201 Atlanta-Johannesburg 16 hr 55 min on B777-200LR

These are some atrociously long flights to do in Economy/coach. Few years back Delta used to operate Mumbai-Atlanta non-stop. I traveled by that flight once and 17 hours in coach seat later I took an oath never ever to take such a long non-stop flight in coach. It was never-ending! After that experience I traveled to India twice by Middle Eastern carriers which is not much better because it ends up being a 14-ish hour flight from USA to Middle East followed by a layover and a 3 hour flight to India. Two more times I traveled with a layover in Europe, which breaks up the 24 hour journey into two halves of 10 hours each with a 3-4 hour layover in the middle. That is much more humane, though still it is way more uncomfortable than doing overnight on Amtrak coach. In a plane's Economy seat you are virtually sitting upright for entire journey with little wriggle room, while on Amtrak there is really good recline, calf rests, and the freedom to move about if you wish to. I'd take up a 19 hour overnight trip on Amtrak without thinking twice but a 19 hour flight in coach, no thank you, I'll pass!

 

[johnny.menhennet]

Mwahahaha Shanghai Johnny wins this battle!

(I personally would've thought that LA-Dubai would be on that list, but it ranks at only 15:55 for the eastbound)