Well off the topic now, but looking at flight profiles, and fuel burn, I've wondered if we might not see shorter hops reappear anyway as a world wide response to fuel shortages. Basically, within certain parameters, they can burn less fuel. I guess passengers don't like them as much, and they will have increased handling and perhaps crewing costs (although, you may not need 'heavy' crews).
Basically, the tonne of fuel that I burn at, say, the 12 hour mark, on a flight, will have cost me about 1/2 a tonne to carry. The upshot is that with ultra long haul ops, you eventually reach the point where all you can carry is fuel, even if operating at max take off numbers (I don't think anyone actually builds an aircraft that can hit MTOW with just fuel, but you get my drift).
Playing with the numbers a few years ago, showed that on a 14 hour sector, if you broke it into two even sectors, you burnt about 10 tonnes less fuel (744), and could max the aircraft out on payload on both sectors. Obviously there is a time cost, and handling charges, but interesting numbers nevertheless.
Just playing with 380 numbers, and on a 7000 NM sector, with 12 tonnes of fuel on arrival, the aircraft operating direct and taking off at 569 tonnes (max) would burn 195.4 tonnes, and deliver a mass of 361 tonnes (aircraft, plus all payload). Breaking the sector in half, you would burn 188 tonnes, but actually be able to deliver 379 tonnes. This is actually in excess of the maximum zero fuel weight, so you would be structurally limited to 366. Operating to that 366 tonne limit would give a fuel burn of 182.4 tonnes for the two sectors. So, breaking a 7000 mile trip into two 3500 mile legs results in a fuel burn reduction of 13 tonnes, and an increase in the payload of 5 tonnes..(which is roughly 50 passengers).