Missing aircraft models from database

[Tha_Ape]

From GW#2 data, may 59.

But better not use this thread for that (as it's intended to post request/data about missing planes)

Thanks.

[jezbanks]

Apologies.

Since the DC7-F was available with the DC7B IRL it is technically currently 'missing'

[Talentz]

All historical records I've seen suggest the first DC7 freighter (of any variant) was the DC7CF rolled out:

N244B    Douglas DC-7C(F)    44876    673    R3350          1956    
rg Advance Airlines, bu 9/78 Farmerville LA   
N7344    leased       Aeronaves Del Peru    
N7344    leased 1970       CJS Cargo Service    
N7344    leased 1968       World American Airlift    
N7344    leased 1965 - 67       Airlift International    
N7344    rg 2/65 Liberty Air Leasing sold International Aerodyne Inc.          
N734PA    renamed converted to Freighter 1959    Clipper Seven Seas    Pan American World Airways    
N734PA    dd 4/28/56 - 1964    Clipper Bostonian    Pan American World Airways

If you have sources or even a pic dating in 1957 of a flying DC7BF please share


Talentz

[jezbanks]

Production list here shows DC7-Bs converted to freighters

http://rzjets.net/aircraft/?page=5&typeid=209

However, I have found quite a few places on the net reporting that Douglas offered the conversion from 1959 so not missing yet

Thanks for the understanding

[Talentz]

MD-XX LR or maybe MD-11 Advance would sound better.

Basically, it was the last study project from McD before the Boeing take over in 1997. A stretched MD-11 and MD-11LR of sorts. The focus would be on the MD-XX LR variant. Improved wing and more powerful engines along with another fuel tank would have been the aim. It would have given an MD-11ER more range, better take-off/landing performance and a slightly better fuel burn.

Of course this is all history as a few months after this project was cancelled, Boeing took over and shut the MD-11 down. The proposed specs for the MD-XX LR looks more achievable then the stretched MD-XX (which would have been something like a Trijet 773) but smaller and less efficient.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/md-xx.htm

Talentz

[MikeS]

McDonnell Douglas sure had an uncontrollable hang for stretching ....

DC8-10s to 60s: 45.9m to 57.11m + 24%
DC9 to MD90:    32.8m to 46.54m + 46%
DC10t o MDXX:  52.0m to 71.00m + 36%

Re-engine & stretch ... re-engine & stretch ... it was sadly their only modern market strategy. The MD-90 had to be stretched just to compensate for the heavier
engines at the back, making a difficult to balance plane even worse (difficult to use in HD seating due to excessive pax weight ahead of wing/centre of gravity).

Anyways, I've always loved their planes, sad they disappeared.

As far as I know there were 3 interesting projects studied:
A further stretched MD11 also referred to as MD12 for a while
A double decker MD-12 very much like todays A380
and a twin engined DCX similar to the B757

As Talentz mentioned, for the streched MD11 there seem to be enough info on the web in case one wanted to add it to the game - see attachment

Mike

[kscessandriver]

Is there a particular reason that the 737-200C ADV isn't capable of being converted to stage 3 noise while the 737-200F is?

[NovemberCharlie]

Currently in 2027 I notice some cargo players keeping a seperate fleet of previous generation aircraft due to their freight capabilities (i.e. A33F/B767F)
Both Airbus and Boeing have expressed themselves about developing freighter version of some of their aircraft:
A350-900F
A380-800F
B777-8F
B787-9F

Could these be added to help fleet replacement past 2020

[Talentz]

I thought I read somewhere that a A380F was built and test flown... but lack of orders cancelled the project. If I can find data, that would be great to have.

The 787F and A350F would be excellent to have, but is there some data out there or is it just still a dream?



Talentz

[NovemberCharlie]

I thought I read somewhere that a A380F was built and test flown... but lack of orders cancelled the project. If I can find data, that would be great to have.

The 787F and A350F would be excellent to have, but is there some data out there or is it just still a dream?



Talentz

It wasn't flown, but FedEx and UPS both ordered it. Airbus pushed back delivery dates, because they wanted to focus on the -800.
This (combined with the 2008 financial crisis) caused both airlines to cancel their orders, effectively cancelling the program.

[DanDan]

something for the "early days" scenarios:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_C102_Jetliner

[Tha_Ape]

something for the "early days" scenarios:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_C102_Jetliner

Stumbled across this one already in the past, but the problem will be to gather reliable info about the specs

[yoshininja]

Found some information on the TU204C from the Tupolev Website.
https://web.archive.org/web/20100503081923/http://www.tupolev.ru:80/english/Show.asp?SectionID=35

The key bit of info is this:
"TU-204C is a mid-range cargo aircraft is based on TU-204-100 passenger aircraft. TU-204-C is designed to carry cargo of 30 000 kg in international class containers for the ranges up to 2400 km or cargo of 13800 kg for the range of 6800 km. TU-204C a/c is provided with cargo door at LH side; passenger cabin is replaced by main cargo deck provided with loading/unloading ANCRA System (USA). Cargo compartment area is equal to 164,4 m2. Under the main cargo deck there are two baggage-cargo holds. The forward cargo hold area is equal to 14,7 m2, the aft one – 28,3 m2. TU-204C aircraft are used to carry cargo both within Russian Federation and abroad."

Additional information can be found on old captures of the UAC website:
https://web.archive.org/web/20130429092432/http://www.uacrussia.ru:80/en/models/civil/tu_204_214/tu-204c/

Key info from the above source is:
"The performance characteristics of the Tu-204C are the same as of the Tu-204-100. The crew’s cockpit copies the Tu-204-100’s cockpit.

Cargo compartment volume is 164.4 m3. Volume of the front baggage-cargo compartment is 14.7m3. The volume of the rear baggage-cargo compartment is 28.3 m3.

Cargo door dimensions: 3,408 x 2,080 mm; front baggage-cargo compartment door: 1,350x1,162 mm; rear baggage-cargo department door – 1,350 x 1,162 mm.

A single cargo unit weight can reach 3,100 kg. The maximum longitudinal size of a long item of cargo is 10 meters. Long size items of cargo are transported on standard pallets while being locked on to the pallets. A single long item of cargo could be placed on two, three or four pallets.

The cargo compartment can store six “narrow” type 2 pallets (88" х 108" or 2,235 x 2,747 mm) or ten type 3pallets (53" х 88" or 1,346 х 2,235 mm) for container transportation.

The Tu-204C is equipped with a cargo handling system manufactured by ANCRA (USA)."

Hope the above information is useful

[yoshininja]

Following on from my previous post, I've managed to somehow hit the gold mine in terms of hardcore stats and have managed to find detailed specs for the TU204 SM which is meant to be from what I can tell more efficient than the 757 but still worse than the 737NG's and A320 families.

In terms of a brief summary, this is an outline of what the SM (or CM) brings to the table;

Aerodynamic improvements
Latest safety certification which complies with all the latest Eurocontrol legislation
New flight management and more modern cockpit with electronic displays
Vastly better reliability and operating cost

The reason for the better reliability is with the utilisation of the PS90A2 engine which is of course a development of the original PS90A. These engines are supposedly meant to have 1.5 to 2 times better reliability along with much-improved fuel consumption figures as shown below: 

PS90A has an SFC of 0.595
PS90A2 has an SFC of 0.396

All the information that I've quoted can be found here:
http://www.tupolev.ru/tu-204sm

They even have the range/payload chart (I think) which makes things a million times easier.

[yoshininja]

Also even more info on the cargo versions of the Tupolev.

RB powered version: http://www.tupolev.ru/tu-204-120se
PS 90 powered version: http://www.tupolev.ru/tu-204-100c

Hope it helps

[NovemberCharlie]

With the first A321LR being delivered might we expect it for GW3 at least
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-arkia-becomes-first-customer-to-receive-ai-453624/

Also Airbus is considering an A321XLR: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-indicates-a321xlr-would-have-over-100t-mtow-453590/?cmpid=SOC|Twitter|Flightglobal|sf202285070|sf202285070&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf202285070
I think it could be added as well on a prototype basis:

“As soon as the market is asking, we’re studying,”

Not 100% sure but I believe LR/XLR are marketing terms, while the aircraft is in fact an aux tank version of the A321neo

[jezbanks]

With the first A321LR being delivered might we expect it for GW3 at least
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-arkia-becomes-first-customer-to-receive-ai-453624/

We has the Arkia A21NLR on the ramp this morning.

We were going to see it one way or another as it was a Primera order originally.

Crying shame they arent in the game - the LR is a market disruptor for sure

[11Air]

A quick review of Southampton's current aircraft on schedule services today shows:-

DH8D AT7 DH4 E75L S20 E75.

I'm familiar with most of those types, I was interested to see if the tiny twin engine aircraft was on the list which I assume serves one or more of the channel isles.

There's also a long Airport Operators report which starts:-
Southampton Airport is an award winning, regional airport which supports the growing commercial, leisure and cultural success of the region.  Around 1,200 people work at Southampton Airport for 30 different companies.   The airport’s economic contribution to the region is in excess of £86 million per year and it provides air services that are valued for both business and leisure.  However, I know how important it is to balance the social and economic benefits against any negative impacts, such as noise, that our business may have on the local community.  It is our desire, working in partnership with the airlines and National Air Traffic Services, known as NATS (who provide air traffic control), to manage the impacts of noise.

I add that there are preliminary plans for a second runway, in a very constrained area limited by geography to the east, and a busy railway to the west.

11Air

[Springbal]

The Bombardier CRJ NextGen, are they allready included?

[wasgehtdichdasan]

bae146qt https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,79701.0.html