(W3) Plunging into Jets, recommended?

Steeler83 · **Reply #15 on:** April 18, 2008, 03:29:07 am

I am about to have 2 Fokker F28-1000s, and 2 737-100s. I have one of each now in service, and collectively they make in excess of 1,000,000 Euros, almost 1.1 million...

yourefired · **Reply #16 on:** April 18, 2008, 03:46:32 am

My jets make me about a half million euros a day (doing longhauls) with some exceptional ones making 750k+. We'll see what my concorde makes when it comes in on saturday morning.

SE210B Caravelle 12s (I'm not sure if they're around in your world or not) are pretty good. BAC111 series is right up your alley too. They have about 2250nm range, 90-120 seats, pretty fast, around 35-47 million euros. Again, I'm in world 6 so I'm not sure if they're around in your world.

Steeler83 · **Reply #17 on:** April 18, 2008, 04:02:22 am

Quote from: "yourefired"

My jets make me about a half million euros a day (doing longhauls) with some exceptional ones making 750k+. We'll see what my concorde makes when it comes in on saturday morning.

SE210B Caravelle 12s (I'm not sure if they're around in your world or not) are pretty good. BAC111 series is right up your alley too. They have about 2250nm range, 90-120 seats, pretty fast, around 35-47 million euros. Again, I'm in world 6 so I'm not sure if they're around in your world.

Yeah, those planes are in my world, and I know they have to be pretty good because they're among the most popular planes! I intend to use Fokker F28s, 731, 732, 727, 747, and L-1011 equipment, or maybe just 707s and the SE210B Caravelles for longhaul instead of the jumbo jets, concerning the poor chances of making any considerable profit with a big aircraft on a longhaul route.

I have a 731 making 728,392 and a F28-1000 making 366,000+...

yourefired · **Reply #18 on:** April 18, 2008, 04:09:48 am

I like the Caravelle 12s (NOT the 10B, not enough range) but they're frankly not fast enough for my taste. I mean, when you're flying passengers 2500 miles, even 50 knots makes a huge difference. So I decided I'm going with the fastest planes I can find. When you do longhauls, speed and range more than anything are paramount.

So my conclusion is, given the same number of seats (or comparable) and the same range, spend the extra 3 million or whatever and go wit that plane that goes 50kts faster. That 50kts, while insignificant, is difference between 4 and 5 longhauls.

Jumbos frankly suck. They take too long to build and they have way too many seats for my taste. I think the biggest plane I'm going with is the A300, and at 336 seats, even that's a little too big. For the price of a jumbo, I can get a concorde and another plane in less than half the time. And with the concorde comes a certain prestige factor, a 747-200, not so much. 707's are excellent for those ultra-longhauls I think but the last of them go out of production in 1983 unfortunately. So now I have to find a replacement or get a jumbo.

Steeler83 · **Reply #19 on:** April 18, 2008, 04:24:56 am

Quote from: "yourefired"

I like the Caravelle 12s (NOT the 10B, not enough range) but they're frankly not fast enough for my taste. I mean, when you're flying passengers 2500 miles, even 50 knots makes a huge difference. So I decided I'm going with the fastest planes I can find. When you do longhauls, speed and range more than anything are paramount.

So my conclusion is, given the same number of seats (or comparable) and the same range, spend the extra 3 million or whatever and go wit that plane that goes 50kts faster. That 50kts, while insignificant, is difference between 4 and 5 longhauls.

Jumbos frankly suck. They take too long to build and they have way too many seats for my taste. I think the biggest plane I'm going with is the A300, and at 336 seats, even that's a little too big. For the price of a jumbo, I can get a concorde and another plane in less than half the time. And with the concorde comes a certain prestige factor, a 747-200, not so much. 707's are excellent for those ultra-longhauls I think but the last of them go out of production in 1983 unfortunately. So now I have to find a replacement or get a jumbo.

Hmm... Interesting. You know, in the 1990s and 2000s, I think the only large aircraft that did make any sense was the 777. I think I will decide and go against the 747, DC10, and L1011. I might just look into other aircraft, like you say, have the range and are fast. The Concorde never entered my mind, but it did now. I should be able to fly at least 3 or 4 flights on one of those, charge a very high fare, make a good profit (hopefully)...

yourefired · **Reply #20 on:** April 18, 2008, 04:30:43 am

I figured at 4439nm range, concorde can do most any routes (out of North America anyway) with a stopover somewhere. I usually go with 2x ~4200 for those ultra long hauls like LAX-BNE or something like that. Besides, even WITH a stopover at HNL and NRT (or AKL and BNE) passengers would get to places like SIN faster on concorde than in a slower subsonic plane going nonstop.

I plan on getting a fleet of those, since, well, if I run out of bizarre routings, I know how much the leases go for (last round it was 50 million).

How was the A330/A340 in those later rounds? I don't know, but I just prefer french planes for some reason.

Of course, my strategy assumed you can afford to buy something other than the cheapest plane with the necessary range. If you can't then all this goes out the window. I actually saved up for 2+ days (real time) to pick up concorde #1. Looks like I'll save for another 2 days to pick up concorde #2.

Steeler83 · **Reply #21 on:** April 18, 2008, 04:48:13 am

I am considering getting a fleet of those myself. About the A330s and A340s, I heard they were pretty good. I used the 772s and 773s, and those worked wonders for me. They carried 400-500 people, were very fast, and burned a relatively small amount of fuel, like under 1000, whatever the units for fuel burn are...

yourefired · **Reply #22 on:** April 18, 2008, 04:55:43 am

Perhaps gallons? It can't be tons because there's no way a concorde burns 6177 tons of fuel per hour. Even a 747 can do a 4 hour flight on 55 tons, so I'm guessing its either dollars (euros, whatever) or gallons or kilograms. (saving up for concorde #2 already....I'm clearly out of my mind)

As a tangent, concorde #1's ID was 4590. The minute I saw that I started hearing in my head "Air France quarante-cinq quatre-vingt dix, nous recevez-vous?"

south frontier airlines · **Reply #23 on:** April 18, 2008, 09:36:33 pm

ya i got alot of them

Steeler83 · **Reply #24 on:** April 18, 2008, 10:08:54 pm

Quote from: "yourefired"

Perhaps gallons? It can't be tons because there's no way a concorde burns 6177 tons of fuel per hour. Even a 747 can do a 4 hour flight on 55 tons, so I'm guessing its either dollars (euros, whatever) or gallons or kilograms. (saving up for concorde #2 already....I'm clearly out of my mind)

As a tangent, concorde #1's ID was 4590. The minute I saw that I started hearing in my head "Air France quarante-cinq quatre-vingt dix, nous recevez-vous?"

I would think that myself. I just bought another Fokker F28 and launched routes all over the place (it now makes well over $300k. Pretty soon, I'll order another Boeing 731 and start service to DEN, COS, MIA, and a few other places. I might even tap into the Bahamas or the Caribbean. I am almost 2 million away (DOP wise) from opening my second base.

I think I will buy a slew of Concordes and other fast aircraft to start transatlantic routes, and I think I am retating that. I started looking at the 707s and DC8s, 520-540 kts. They are some of the fastest sub-sonic jets on here, and you don't have to wait as long for them to be assembled or pay out the nose for them. $160m - $170m isn't too terribly bad. That's about what the 767s cost in previous rounds...

yourefired · **Reply #25 on:** April 18, 2008, 10:41:45 pm

I'm getting a small fleet of concordes (5-10) and then getting 707s and such as well. But then the 707-320 (which was supposed to go to Australia) is going out of production this year, so I better pick those up fast. I might pick up some Airbuses too. The VC10 looks good too but it's too slow for my taste.

My other option once the 707-320 goes out of production is a stopover flight to Australia or the 747-200 which is huge and I have to pay out the nose for them. For that price I'd rather have the concorde. Sigh...time to go plane shopping again.

I figured the math pretty much evens out...since the concorde can handle about 3 times the flights that a 707 or something can handle, and a 707 costs half the cost of the concorde I'm ahead with the concorde, even though I'm out 340 million.

Steeler83 · **Reply #26 on:** April 18, 2008, 11:51:17 pm

You know, I actually realized something myself. The Concorde isn't available in my world yet. It's only 1970 in W3. When do they officially come out, 1975 or so? I thought they came out a little earlier than that. I looked up other aircraft myself. I might even go with a Convair 990. 131 seats, but 528 kts and 5000 nm... Those could be used on low density routes...

yourefired · **Reply #27 on:** April 19, 2008, 12:32:48 am

1976 for concorde, Tu-144 might be earlier. Just bought concorde #2. Concorde #1 comes in in like 14 days or so.

Anyway I'm gonna pick up some 707-320Bs before they go out of production. Otherwise, I have to wait until 2003 when the A340-500 comes out for an ultra long range plane (that doesn't cost 400 million and take 10 months to build).

yourefired · **Reply #28 on:** April 19, 2008, 07:26:23 pm

Although since I'm bored of having to change prices all day, I might move on to brokering by the end of the game year (or quit altogether).

I frankly ignore fuel cost in my decision because they're negligible. Speed and range are the #1 factors.

Seems the A340-500/600 series fly at 548kts (according to airliners.net) vs. the 777's 490kts.

Steeler83 · **Reply #29 on:** April 21, 2008, 10:34:13 pm

Quote from: "yourefired"

Although since I'm bored of having to change prices all day, I might move on to brokering by the end of the game year (or quit altogether).

I frankly ignore fuel cost in my decision because they're negligible. Speed and range are the #1 factors.

Seems the A340-500/600 series fly at 548kts (according to airliners.net) vs. the 777's 490kts.

Are you an a.net member?