Why choose MD81 when MD90 is avail?

[swiftus27]

The MD90 is 27% more fuel efficient versus the MD81.

Why are people leasing the MD81 so much when both are available?  (especially when games are new and you can go after a MD90 fleet)

The price of the MD90 is about 7.5 million more but that will easily be re captured by the time anyone is through using the plane.

They hold the same number of pax and yes, the MD90 does need an extra flight attendant.  

I just dont see the value in it.

[Ile]

MD90 is just not available.

You can get only 12-14 MD90 per year, so if you need more, you just lease MD80s until you get enough MD90s 5-10 years later.

Ile

[swiftus27]

You're missing my point.

Some of these airlines have no orders in for MD90s but are ordering many MD81s.   

This just doesn't make any sense to me.

[Maarten Otto]

So.....   To me it does.

And that's because it's a game and people like to play they want.

[jordanD]

Used or new? I've stayed with the -80s just because sure, they use more fuel, but the leases or outright buying costs are a ton cheaper. When D checks come up simply chuck them and get more cheap ones. Disposable airplanes.

[swiftus27]

of course I am talking new.

[Hugamuga]

why choose the MD90 when the B734 is available...

[swiftus27]

2640 kg/hr for 150 pax (MD90) vs 2940 kg/hr for 162 pax (734).

The MD90 has a 17.6 kg/hr for each passenger versus The Boeing 737-40 getting a 18.1 kg/hr.

The MD90 is 3% more efficient, is .02 faster, and has the same turn time.

[Curse]

And is 6 to 7 years later available, has no smaller variant and no bigger one.

The MD-90 is a good aircraft and, same as MD-80, mostly choosen because it's cheap and fast available because most players use A320series or B737classic/NG.

[swiftus27]

ah... but you can get MDs almost as fast as you can get Russian planes.

[Hachiko]

swiftus has a good point here, I agree. Production line might be a proble. I saw @ Alliance Challenge game opponent ordering 10 MD-90´s and first delivery was after 2 years. I ordered only one and will received it after 5 months. But still I´ll go for MD-90´s as swiftus pointed out.
Kim.

[mtnlion]

Why bother to go with MD90 when MD80 is generating 700k profit a week. 

[swiftus27]

OKAY... I WILL EXPLAIN AGAIN...

You can choose EITHER as NEW aircraft. 

Not used.

Why would ANYONE choose a less efficient plane?

[schro]

They would chose it to p*** off the NIMBYs near the airports they fly to.

For the price of 5 M90's if you can get 6 M81s, the way the game is structured, you'll make more money overall with the 6 M81's even if your profit per plane is going to be higher with the M90s.

[swiftus27]

Okay, since some of you dont look at the big picture....

For alliance challenge, the current price is 37.71m per plane (MD81) and the MD90 is 45.21m
The MD90 uses 2640 kg/hr vs 3370 kg/hr for the MD81

So, you will use 28% more fuel money flying the plane.  
The MD90 only costs 19.9% more to purchase.  

In 8 years of maint (D Check cycle), you will have paid:

MD81:  (8819 x (52 x 8)) + (22930 x (12 x 8)) + (528166 x 12) + 2645825 = 14853801
MD90:  (6658 x (52 x 8)) + (17311 x (12 x 8)) + (399483 x 12) + 1997413 = 11222793

So, in 8 years, the MD90 costs 3,631,008 less to maintain.  Couple that with the 28% fuel savings and you have a much better plane!

[Sami]

Okay, since some of you dont look at the big picture....

That's probably your answer. The sim does not bring all those figures on a plate to you and you'd need to make some maths to count the total expenses over plane's life like you did. And I suppose many just look at the price tag.

[schro]

Whats the going fuel price in the alliance challenge right now? 28% in fuel savings does not translate in to a 28% drop in direct operating costs. It'd be more like 15% if you've got fuel and ground handling costs being about equal.

Your math IS correct over an 8 year span as far as which individual plane will be more profitable, however, your breakeven point after the acquisition costs is 2-3 game years out before you recoup the additional capital expense. In those 2-3 years, you could have used that money (aka opportunity cost of tying it up in an M90) and bought even more M81's. You should know more than anyone that he who gets the most planes first tends to dominate, so in overall game play a good strategy would be to dominate with the M81's and then start replacing them with M90's once you have no further expansion aspirations.

I'd take a fleet of 300 M81's over 250 M90's any day :-).

(wel, really, I probably wouldn't go the M81 route but I'm just trying to show how they _could_ fit in the big picture per your OP... I don't think most making the choice for them are thinking along those lines though...)

[swiftus27]

It is not like you get your planes in batches here.  Either plane you order will still take months to come in.  You will generate profits with both lanes well in excess of what you need to lunk down on the next one.  The op cost argument is moot because you aren't adding in the time it takes to get that extra plane.  No matter what, you will get a 90 or an 81 about one a month.  Why not spend the little extra now and have a great fleet in the end?

The only benefit here is the sales price.  If you are strapped for cash, fine.  I really doubt the extra 20k per month on a lease is a big difference when you save that each month in maint costs.

[mtnlion]

Man it's not just about operating costs. Ask from American Airlines or Allegiant! 

I've done my math and the MD80s ended up being better temporary solution. Of course I'll dump them way before D-checks...