AirwaySim
Online Airline Management Simulation
Login
Username
Password
 
or login using:
 
My Account
Username:
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Author Topic: Quick question about long haul  (Read 577 times)

Offline Frogiton

  • Members
  • Posts: 784
Quick question about long haul
« on: July 30, 2012, 04:08:44 PM »
On LH routes below 5000nm, what is more effective, the 767 or 777? Demand for routes in mind is anywhere from 300-1000.
No replacement for displacement

ucfknightryan

  • Former member
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2012, 04:23:31 PM »
On LH routes below 5000nm, what is more effective, the 767 or 777? Demand for routes in mind is anywhere from 300-1000.

For that demand level and range I would go with the 767 every time.  Much lower operating costs, and the -400ER is almost the same size as a 777-200.

Offline Sanabas

  • Members
  • Posts: 2161
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2012, 04:53:44 PM »
Depends on the comp, and the difference in lease prices compared to the price of fuel. The 772 burns less fuel per passenger than the 762 or 763, especially when they both have the same type of seat. You also need less staff & slots per passenger. 773 is better again on fuel & staff/passenger. Round trip times are roughly equal at 5000 NM. 767 is quicker if it's shorter thanks to shorter turns, 777 is faster if it's longer thanks to quicker flight time.

So if there's no comp, and fuel is expensive enough and/or you own the planes, 772 & 773 will be better than 762 & 763. If there is enough comp so either plane will get roughly the same number of pax on each flight, or if fuel is cheap & you're leasing, 762 & 763 will be better. 764 will likely beat them all, but don't have exact stats handy.

Offline Frogiton

  • Members
  • Posts: 784
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #3 on: July 30, 2012, 05:01:54 PM »
Ok, you pretty confirmed what I thought. Thanks.  And, shhhh, dont tell people about the 400. Thats a secret.
No replacement for displacement

Offline Sanabas

  • Members
  • Posts: 2161
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #4 on: July 30, 2012, 05:09:14 PM »
a330/340 beat the lot anyway, provided you stay away from the dodgier ones like the 342

ucfknightryan

  • Former member
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #5 on: July 30, 2012, 05:23:03 PM »
a330/340 beat the lot anyway, provided you stay away from the dodgier ones like the 342

Eh, they have a slight range advantage, but 5000 NM (range he asked about) is within the reach of the -400ER, and iirc it has slightly better economics than the A333.  Not that it's really that significant of a difference, they're both two of the best aircraft in AWS.  :)

Offline EsquireFlyer

  • Members
  • Posts: 1327
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2012, 05:30:26 PM »
a330/340 beat the lot anyway, provided you stay away from the dodgier ones like the 342

 :o Why is the 342 bad? I just got some of those things. Are they OK for routes beyond the range of the 343?

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5994
Re: Quick question about long haul
« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2012, 05:33:47 PM »
:o Why is the 342 bad? I just got some of those things. Are they OK for routes beyond the range of the 343?

Fuel consumption is not that great...  343X and E are better...

 

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.

If you are using the latest version please turn OFF the compatibility mode.