[W350] A good replacement for the Fokker F27-400

[csturdiv]

I have a couple of F27-400s based in my ABQ hub in W350 and am thinking about replacing them.  What is a good replacement for these aircraft.  My routes they are on are not major routes (not sure if the links below will work or not)

http://www.airlinemogul.com/airlinemogul/ac_info.php?id=8874
http://www.airlinemogul.com/airlinemogul/ac_info.php?id=8915

Would a better prop work or if I upgrade it to something like the DC9-15 would that be good for these routes?  I feel that 40 seats is not enough, but these routes do not need my smallest jet, the SE 210 Caravelle Super 10B.

[gisa]

Actually, I'm one step behind you at the moment (replacing my early cheaper planes with f27's).  I'd like to know what the next natural upgrade would be.

If your planes are on low competition routes, it wont really matter what you fly as you wont have any competition.   I think the key is to aim for a plane that holds as many people as possible, with the lowest fuel consumption you can get (which is why I am going with the f27's).

 

Gisa ^^

[skywaker9]

I really like the HS-48s.  My basic fleet structure is this:

HS-48, Short and/or low passenger flights.
SE Caravelle, Longer flights to mid-sized (100 to 200k/gate) cities.
HS Trident, all flights to 250k and up/gate cities....

[trimotor43]

I've tried a few turboprops and have pretty much settled on the Convair 580 as it seems to have the best balance between speed, passenger load and range. The FH-227B is a good one for reaching destinations that are out of reach of the 580 without having to go to a jet. The 227B carries 56 people, but is slower than the 580 so it isn't able to do as many routes.

[gisa]

I agree: convairs are similar in scope to fokkers and are good replacements.

That being said, in 1969 I prefer to replace the fokkers with fokker friendship jets.  Cheaper than a caravelle and faster, they have a lot of potential in my books.  MY airline is fairly healthy in a financial sense, so I'm content with a 20 million price tag, but for a smaller airline, convairs and HS's can hold their own.



Gisa ^^

[trimotor43]

The only thing I don't like about the F28 is the rather short range. Then again, I'm using a single hub per region right now so distances tend to be farther with that strategy.

[gisa]

Yeah you are right.  I didn't mention that because I have my own strategy when it comes to what planes I use for certain cities and ranges.  I tend to use the smaller planes for small cities nearby.  I think of the friendship as a regional jet that flies to smaller cities. I find that smaller cities that are very far away are not worth as much trouble.  I'd probably use a caravelle for those if anything at all.

8-)

Gisa ^^

[trimotor43]

yeah, if they're to small I don't bother with them. Though some medium size cities are quite profitable. I wouldn't use a Caravelle though. I don't like them. I'd use a 737 

[gisa]

Touche.  737 costs more though, but roughly the same I figure for what they pull in.  The stats are great but unfortunately, caravelles are used in the game nothing like in real life (I read somewhere that only 20 caravelles made their way to North America for example).

I like to aim for a sense of realism by putting the smaller planes on smaller cities.  Plus, it ups the ticket price too and since a fokker is actually faster than a caravelle, it can do more. ^^

I think if the guys here at AM can adjust planes construction time based on demand, parts, etc...it will make the demand for caravelles drop and we'd see other planes.  Further, would a 737 still pull in a profit flying to the smaller city?  I hope they can make certain airports have a limited runway size.  No way would you see a DC 8-61 or a 747 landing in the middle of nowhere at an airport with 63 PDX per year.


Gisa ^^

[trimotor43]

They're supposed to be working on somehow limiting plane production and runway size as you just suggested. Though there are some airports that don't have a lot of passenger traffic but have at least one long runway. Also i think that once they get the hub effect working and AM passengers can have connecting flights, we may see a reduction in major city hubs as someone could build a fortress hub in Cleveland for example and it would work because of all the passengers moving through the airport as well as to the airport.

[CHR]

Things like runway lengths will be a long way off, as the data needs to be gathered for all the airports (and planes) in the database.

[gisa]

Yeah, I figure that would be tough to do and would take a lot of time.  One could base runway length based on the airport's size but that would not factor the exceptions in this case.  I would be content if they did this however as I think it's a fairly general correlation.

Gisa ^^

[dktc]

After a lot of efforts, the runway data for airports are looking pretty good actually. It is the data for the planes that is the problem.

[Cheung Airlines]

I don't think the runway issue is going to affect the game in the short term coz different plane have different performance in different height. Say, SE-161 Armagnac (Sth. like that) is said to be seriously underpowered. Then, its runway requirement in London Heathrow and in Denver will be totally different. However, if its a B-727, rather than a SE-161, I don't think the runway requirement will have a big difference.

And, I think there are Caravelles with a longer range but less pax. (either VI-*sth* or *sth*R, forgotten ) It has 80/99 pax and 21xx range. Im not sure if theyll fit into your requirement, but I think Caravelles aint gonna be anywhere worse than Fokkers.

[XeniaAirways]

Too lazy to read through everything, so go ahead and delete if I repeated.

I suggest upgrading to the Fokker F27-200 or Convair 440 if you want to keep the same capacity with a cheaper (but slow -- same speed as F27-400) aircraft.

I personally like fast aircraft, so I'd go with the Tupolev Tu-124 (released 1968 I think), which flies almost twice as fast, but can seat 56 passengers and is great.