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: BAC 111  (Read 877 times)

Offline saetta

  • Members
  • Posts: 537
BAC 111
« on: August 21, 2014, 08:16:36 PM »
Wow, this plane is been around for a long time and still is very competitive. It's still back logged  expensive  and scarce in the used market. Probably the best British type...I know I know the Viscount and Britannia are pretty outstanding too.
Makes wonder why in real life British airliners were only moderately successful.... Just and observation. I theory one could avoid US planes thru a whole long game scenario. Still I think Boeing is better then Airbus. Cheers

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2014, 08:38:44 PM »
BAC is, falsely, a medium aircraft in the game what makes it far better than competitive large aircraft (the group it should be into).

There are two huge discussion threads about that issue:
http://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,53895.0.html
http://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,54466.0.html

Offline saetta

  • Members
  • Posts: 537
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2014, 09:13:49 PM »
Wow again. Didn't have any idea of this heated argument..... My 2 cents...The BAC success  is CLEARLY out of proportion in this game with real life. It's good for me since it saved my airline...but it's very weird as an aviation enthusiast of 50's and 60's, not to find any plane remotely competitive with this one in the game ...so SOMETHING is fishy !!
I remember the BAC very well, and to me it seemed surpassed by the DC9 -10/30. I always viewd the BAC  more in the Caravelle category...OH well !!

Offline JonesyUK

  • Members
  • Posts: 653
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2014, 02:05:27 AM »
Politics.....

Offline Marksw76

  • Members
  • Posts: 116
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2014, 10:16:52 PM »
Whats the natural successor to these likkle beauties? Fokker 100s???

When do players usually start retiring the BACs?


Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2014, 10:17:45 PM »
I'm not answering this in detail but yes, Fokker 100 is a possibility.

Offline Marksw76

  • Members
  • Posts: 116
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2014, 05:20:22 PM »
I'm not answering this in detail but yes, Fokker 100 is a possibility.

Aha! No probs, I can see your reason for playing one's cards 'close to their chest', Curse  ;D

There are alternatives to the F100 also, I've just remembered!!

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2014, 05:37:33 PM »
Would be boring if I'd tell everybody how to run the perfect airline, eh? As posted somwhere else earlier, I'm willing to mentor very closely in exchange for Dollars or Euros ;D

Offline Kadachiman

  • Members
  • Posts: 913
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2014, 06:06:28 PM »
I do not know what the natural successor is in real life, but in the game it varies dependant on the game airline

Example
I am replacing the BAC-500 with the A320-100

Why?
Similar max distance
50% increase in pax numbers (and the game pax numbers grows over time e.g from BAC era to Airbus era)

But mainly due to the fact that I also have B727-200Adv which I intend to replace with A320-200 (and later A321-200), so that will reduce 2 fleet types into 1 fleet type, which then opens up other game opportunities
« Last Edit: August 24, 2014, 06:08:45 PM by Kadachiman »

Offline spiff23

  • Members
  • Posts: 2136
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2014, 08:42:57 PM »
I think US govt put up obstacles for more BAC 111 imports to favor American DC-9s /727s...common types of trade battles at the time....although a number of US carriers ran them including BRaniff, American and Mohawk.  There's some good wikis that talk about BAC histories.   They also ran into issues in that in real life many of the British planes were subject to the design whims of BEA and BOAC which caused delays or peculiarities in new models and I think this also happened in the BAC program, or may have been Tridents...another amazing British plane btw 8)

Fokker is the logical successor in real life as I think this is the path that AA did.  Fokker also played a hand to make sure the BAC was retired permanently by working with EU to not allow them to be re-engined with the newer variants (forget type, but think BAC and Fokker have engines from same maker) (read in wiki or somewhere else).  The whole amazing BAC success in Airwaysim has fascinated me for year now.

Offline dmoose42

  • Members
  • Posts: 1264
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2014, 11:30:12 PM »
spiff23 - i think the real reason for the BAC success is that it's a medium plane instead of a large one so there are significant personnel savings.  If the BAC, DC-9, and 737 were all large, you would probably see more people run those fleet groups - although the DC-9 seems underpowered in the game as well given its real world success....

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #11 on: September 07, 2014, 10:01:39 AM »
DC-9 lacks the long range versions that made it superior to the 737-200Adv in real life in terms of range, so it was something like a "smaller" 727-200Adv.

In AWS DC-9 has similar or less range than BAC 1-11, consumes way more fuel and is a large aircraft, while it can transport just a little more pax than BAC 1-11.



Therefor, you use DC-9 exclusively if you are a fanboy. Every other reason is wrong, bad and you should get punished for it. :P

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: BAC 111
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2014, 10:40:13 AM »
BAC did some great aircraft but American marketing was stronger. Before long these excellent planes struggled to get far beyond the breakeven point of profits paying back their development costs. BOAC was a big culprit  in never really turning their backs on Boeing products.
BEA and others did very well with them on European routes.

And I think Sammi has amended the game rules a bit so Manufacturing continues for as long as there is game demand. HOORAY.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2014, 10:58:09 AM by 11Air »

 

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.