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: DC8 Range  (Read 557 times)

henkehoops7

  • Former member
DC8 Range
« on: August 11, 2014, 04:03:22 AM »
Hi I'm curious as to why I'm flying a DC8-62 which states a 5200mile range on the spec, but only allows me 25passengers on a 3000mile flight?

Offline Mr.HP

  • Members
  • Posts: 2730
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2014, 04:15:27 AM »
Possibly the airport you're flying to have limited runway, thus the plane can't take off at MTOW

henkehoops7

  • Former member
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #2 on: August 11, 2014, 04:39:36 AM »
Ahh, another lesson learn't the hard way!  :'( thanks for the info!

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #3 on: August 11, 2014, 09:16:37 AM »
DC-8 have ridiculous (and as far as I know non-realistic) runway requirements in AirwaySim. You are limited on many airports, techstop and destination.

Try to fit a techstop airport not too far away from your problematic airport thath as enough runway, so the aircraft can take off with full pax but less fuel, refuel there and then fly back to your base.

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14538
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #4 on: August 11, 2014, 09:58:11 AM »
DC-8 have ridiculous (and as far as I know non-realistic) runway requirements in AirwaySim.

Bah bah. Actually a bit lower than what the docs state. Example: DC-8-61 runway requirement at MTOW in AWS is 3000m, and chart "FAR takeoff runway length requirements, standard day DC-8-61" says that at MTOW and sea level (ISA conditions) the rwy needed is about 3200m.

(the rwy requirement is a purely calculated value here, based on various specs of the a/c, and that's why it's not always accurate to the nearest hundred meters since there are extremely many things affecting it)

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #5 on: August 11, 2014, 11:31:31 AM »
Damn, you are right. I once did research when  I found the DC-8 runway requirement odd compared to 707. However, I just checked the sources again as well as new sources and it seems I somehow was mislead by DC-8-7x data.

I still don't understand why the DC-8 is so bad compared to 707 (I'm not an engineer or pilot) but I accept it's a fact.


So, I'm sorry sami for falsely stating your aircraft data of the DC-8 are wrong in AWS. :)

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14538
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #6 on: August 11, 2014, 11:35:04 AM »
Could the 707 be incorrect in aws, or what did you mean?  (on mobile so don't have the original 707 data here, but to my logic too they should be rather similar since they are very similar planes...)

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: DC8 Range
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2014, 11:56:04 AM »
I'm not an expert nor am I a huge aircraft enthusiast in technical details, therefor it was just my feeling 707 and DC-8 should have a similar performance. My feeling told me the DC-8 is wrong but it was incorrect (as stated). So, let's have a look at 707 then;

A short search lead me to this official NASA page that states 707 had actually similiar runway requirements:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-468/ch13-3.htm
"The takeoff field length on a standard day is a relatively long 10 000 feet, which can be directly related to the low thrust loading of 0.23 and the high wing loading of 111.6 pounds per square foot. (See chapter 3 of ref. 176.)"

From the same document are some more aircraft data: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-468/app-a4.htm
I have no clue if they help you in some way. :) They don't list the runway requirements as far as I can see.


That also explains to me the huge runway requirements of DC-8 and 707: They have tiny and very inefficient engines for not perfectly designed aerodynamics and an extreme weight due to early production materials (hah, and people say you don't learn anything through computer games).
« Last Edit: August 11, 2014, 11:59:11 AM by CUR$E - CEO King Airways »

 

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.