B747 Classics lack of range!

[Airbuseric]

I was just wondering because on Boeings webpage the maximum range is far longer than in the game.

for example:
B747-100B in game:4740nm/Boeing:6100nm
B747-200   in game:4780nm/Boeing:7900nm
B747-300   in game:4480nm/Boeing:7700nm
(heaviest config used in game)

[Sami]

Hi, all the data and ranges on those planes too is based on the docs / payload&range charts from Boeing so they should be ok.

[Airbuseric]

Allrght, thanks

[ArcherII]

Sorry, but I'd like to bump this thread as I've been reading some charts (out of boredom) provided by Boeing in their own website, and the apparent inaccuracies reported by quite a number of people here in the 747 Classic's ranges seem to have some ground.

As per this link http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7471sec3.pdf  provided by Boeing Commercial Airplanes website, in the different charts you can actually determine an almost 1,000nm difference between AWS's nominal range and the actual charts, which according to them the 747CL have that difference to their favor.

Didn't mean to be picky, but this could turn the 747 Classics, and especially the 200 and 200B (however simulated by AWS), actually useful in JA and DOTM games.

EDIT: Sorry, this should be addressed to the Bugs section. On it.

[Sami]

As mentioned on the other thread, do not compare the nominal range values, but compare the actual payload vs charts instead. They definitely do not have 1000 nm differences in them (unless there is a gross error at some individual value).