Airline Mogul Forum
Airline Mogul => Game Data => Topic started by: OliAir on May 11, 2008, 03:33:13 pm
-
With regards to the A340-300 Range i believe it is about 500nm under what it actually is. http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/a340-300/specifications.html "Range (w/max. passengers) 13,350 (13,700) km. 7,200 (7,400) nm. " Wheras on AM with the best engine it is "Range 6,750".
To use another example the MD-11 (as obtained from the Boeing information page http://www.boeing.com/commercial/md-11family/index.html ) "The nonstop range of the standard MD-11 operating at a maximum takeoff weight of 602,500 pounds (273,290 kg) is approximately 7,630 statute miles (12,270 km) with 285 passengers and their bags. The extended-range version of the MD-11, equipped with an auxiliary fuel tank and operating at a higher maximum takeoff weight of 630,500 pounds (285,990 kg), has a range of approximately 8,225 statute miles (13,230 km)." Now i know that Delta had to MD-11's modified to do Los Angeles to Hong Kong so perhaps that version was used for the range quote. AM has the range as "McDonnell Douglas MD-11 7980"
I am not saying you guys have made a mistake but perhaps this one was overlooked. Thank you for taking the time to read this message.
OliAir
-
Hello!
-
Also, I think that the A340's capacity should be higher-I have not proof but it looks awkward that the A330 has way more seats than the A340 and also how the price is still lower than the A340.
And I think it's weird that the A300 has more seats than the A340.
Just Wondering...
-
The A340-300 should definitely have at least the same capacity of the 767-300ER.
OliAir
-
I should have much more than the 763. the A340 is longer than the 767-400 and is wider by 1 seat
-
I should have much more than the 763. the A340 is longer than the 767-400 and is wider by 1 seat
The 400's are smaller than the 300's.... At least thats what I recal from AWS :P
-
well but they are longer than all 767's and I suppose the A332 and maybe A333.
-
I should have much more than the 763. the A340 is longer than the 767-400 and is wider by 1 seat
The 400's are smaller than the 300's.... At least thats what I recal from AWS :P
From Boeing
Technical Characteristics - Boeing 767-300ER
Passenger Seating Configuration
Typical 3-class
Typical 2-class
Typical 1-class
218
269
350
Technical Characteristics -- Boeing 767-400ER
Passenger Seating Configuration
Typical 3-class
Typical 2-class
Typical 1-class
245
304
375
From Airbus (A340-300)
Typical passenger seating 295
I know that is for a 3 class setup as that is what we used at Air Jamaica
-
oopsss :P
-
With regards to the A340-300 Range i believe it is about 500nm under what it actually is. http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/a340-300/specifications.html "Range (w/max. passengers) 13,350 (13,700) km. 7,200 (7,400) nm. " Wheras on AM with the best engine it is "Range 6,750".
The range quoted in Airbus' website is for either -300X or -300E, first delievered 1996 and 2004 respectively. Those two have the same range (8510mi) in the database.
A typical three-class layout seats 295 in A340-300, 239 in the A340-200, 313 in A340-500 and 380 in A340-600. Single-class seating capacities for A340-300/200/500/600 are 440, 420, 375 and 475 respectively.
Thus corrected.
-
Is the tiny bit with the MD-11 that important? We tend to use max seats max range fyi.
Pax for B767's should be reasonably close to real data... except JAWA claims one could squeeze 409 seats in -400ER, whiile we have 390 as pax. (And ofc, Seattle's source is dead wrong.)
-
Thank you very much for updating the seats, one other thing
Aircraft Name Seats Cargo Speed Range Withdrawn Cockpit Crew Cabin Crew Turn Time Price Engines Fuel Usage
Airbus A330-300 440 0 464 4500 2013 2 9 1.76 €193,057,610 General Electric CF6-80E1A2 1,701.00 Buy
Airbus A330-300 LR 440 0 464 5450 2013 2 9 1.76 €204,475,897 Pratt & Whitney PW-4164 1,701.00 Buy
Airbus A340-200 420 0 475 7450 2013 2 9 1.68 €357,549,413 CFM International CFM56-5C 4,453.00 Buy
Airbus A340-300 440 0 475 6700 2013 2 9 1.76 €363,631,893 CFM International CFM56-5C 4,642.00 Buy
The fuel usage for the A340 seems to be way off compared to the A330-300 (I won't even argue about the new price).
-
Actually its quite correct since the engines are called "hairdryers" since A340 uses 4 smaller engines than 2 777/767 sized engines. As well as the engines are a bit outdated compared to newer one (corect me if I'm wrong).
-
It may use 4 engines instead of two but those 4 engines are each not consuming anything near what the engines of the A330 or 767/777 are consuming. The A343 at cruise consumes between 12k and 14k pph total at cruise (which is around 2300 gallons per hour) which is actually near what the A330-300 consumes with its two Larger engines. Its interesting to note that they have the 747-400's fuel consumption as 4,320.00 which using the current figures would suggest that the A343 consumes more than it :)
-
Fuel is calculated by a formula, not real life data.
-
Oh ok, I guess this would be the first time i've seen the formula way off then.
-
Is the tiny bit with the MD-11 that important? We tend to use max seats max range fyi.
Pax for B767's should be reasonably close to real data... except JAWA claims one could squeeze 409 seats in -400ER, whiile we have 390 as pax. (And ofc, Seattle's source is dead wrong.)
How is my source dead wrong!? I was just trying to remeber of the top of my head! It was from AWS, were I later checked and found out that the -400 is larger than the -300, even though AWS uses the optimal seating (first, biz, economy) from Boeing.
-
So you remember wrong... no need to get all defensive :roll:
-
So you remember wrong... no need to get all defensive :roll:
yup :D
-
kids these days :roll: :P
-
kids these days :roll: :P
Well, its fun to be like that.... :P
-
A bit ot, but I have ever only done a couple of flights on an A340. I was tugging at the arm rests to try to lift it off the runway. :?
-
Yeah they do have a disturbingly long take off roll don't they... but it's a lovely and quiet flight once your up compared to a 777