This aircraft type may be too small for this route

[Zombie Slayer]

Sure, I understand this.... but you just can NOT compare 1960s planes to 1990s...   Doing that solely based on the width/height of the tube the cabin is in isn't a fair way to assess.

IRL, no, but in AWS nothing changes from 1950 to 2010. As far as we can tell, the seats in a 1958 DC-8 are the exact same ones being installed in a 2012 737-900ER. If we can't tell the difference I am sure the system can't either, so in AWS life the passenger likely would not be able to tell the comfort difference between a new build DC-8-63 or a new build 737-200Adv.

Don

[alexgv1]

The DC-8 is a 6 across plane.

The 707, 727, 737 and 757 all share the SAME cross section, so the passenger comfort level is really no different between ANY of the types in reality...

This does not include seat pitch, restroom sizes, galleys, etc...

The point exactly. Cabin width is just one thing, I'm sure we all know the above mentioned fact. Hence why I spoke of seat pitch and not width. Now does anybody have any thoughts on the proposed idea of cabin comfort (or whatever it is to be called) coming into play or will someone reel off A330 wingspan to the nearest inch or seat width on a Fokker 50 to the millimetre because I know what is more constructive.

[JumboShrimp]

Sure, I understand this.... but you just can NOT compare 1960s planes to 1990s...   Doing that solely based on the width/height of the tube the cabin is in isn't a fair way to assess.

In what way did the interriors change between 1960s and 1990s?

[alexgv1]

In what way did the interriors change between 1960s and 1990s?

Look at Boeing's new Sky Interior for example. Innovations such as overhead lockers, no smoking in cabin, mood lighting over the past decades as well.

[Jona L.]

no smoking in cabin

a) that was an unvelopment

b) only with passengers on board... you wouldn't believe how many flight crews smoke in the cabins (mostly the rear galley) during the Turn Arounds... about 30% of the pilots smoke in the cockpit as well...

[brique]

This does not include seat pitch, restroom sizes, galleys, etc...


The point exactly. Cabin width is just one thing, I'm sure we all know the above mentioned fact. Hence why I spoke of seat pitch and not width. Now does anybody have any thoughts on the proposed idea of cabin comfort (or whatever it is to be called) coming into play or will someone reel off A330 wingspan to the nearest inch or seat width on a Fokker 50 to the millimetre because I know what is more constructive.

Obviously, its the Fokker seat width...

*hides

[alexgv1]

Obviously, its the Fokker seat width...

*hides

Well you may as well go find out and share the actual dimensions now 

No need to hide from me 

[brique]

Well you may as well go find out and share the actual dimensions now 

No need to hide from me 

Apparently, you have a choice : 17.8 inches.... or 18inches....

in metrical milli-meterers.. that's... that's..... narrow....

[alexgv1]

Apparently, you have a choice : 17.8 inches.... or 18inches....

in metrical milli-meterers.. that's... that's..... narrow....

So standard size right? Always interesting to know. And kudos for actually going out and finding it 

[exchlbg]

I don´t understand this discussion at all. Making the huge advantages of smaller planes a little bit smaller was the effect a lot of people wished to see in the first place. Now that they begin to see some of the consequences they cry out loud: this is not realistic ! Not in MY case !
The warnings say you MIGHT have a disadvantage using this plane. But you still have the advantages of keeping your fleet lean, being able to tolerate lower fares, quicker turn-arounds and so on. And as long nobody with more "appropiate" plane crosses your way you will be fine....or have to offer lower fares.

[brique]

So standard size right? Always interesting to know. And kudos for actually going out and finding it 

wasn't hard, the googlers did the work... but you wouldn't believe how many sites there are seemingly devoted to the accumulation of every known aircraft type's seat widths, pitches and lay-outs... its slightly scary 

[Jona L.]

wasn't hard, the googlers did the work... but you wouldn't believe how many sites there are seemingly devoted to the accumulation of every known aircraft type's seat widths, pitches and lay-outs... its slightly scary 

Just ask seatguru.com

[diskoerekto]

I have to say this would be a great new feature, but the fine tuning is very important. In my original post, I had this message in JA6 which does not use this feature but in JA7 that would be a problem in my opinion. Didn't people fly 3000-4000nm routes with DC-8s in the past? I've never flown with one but would that be such bad experience?

Flying on a techstopping 737 from Zurich to Hong Kong is one thing, a direct flight with an appropriate plane of an era is another thing.

[swiftus27]

Flying on a techstopping 737 from Zurich to Hong Kong is one thing, a direct flight with an appropriate plane of an era is another thing.

People sailed the Atlantic taking a month to cross...

I don't care if you gave me $1 seats on the next sailing of the Nina or Pinta....  I am not going. 

[Jona L.]

I don't care if you gave me $1 seats on the next sailing of the Nina or Pinta....  I am not going. 

That part about Nina or Pinta... is that a common saying in English? I recall the quote from S1E1 of "The West Wing". Still finding it pretty funny

However in a JA scenario a DC-8 is already a good choice of an aircraft for these routes... I'd call it worse if he was using Bristol Britannias still

cheers,
Jona L.

[swiftus27]

That part about Nina or Pinta... is that a common saying in English? I recall the quote from S1E1 of "The West Wing". Still finding it pretty funny

However in a JA scenario a DC-8 is already a good choice of an aircraft for these routes... I'd call it worse if he was using Bristol Britannias still

cheers,
Jona L.

Jona, Christopher Columbus sailed to the new world on 3 ships....  Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria.

[esquireflyer]

Look at Boeing's new Sky Interior for example. Innovations such as overhead lockers, no smoking in cabin, mood lighting over the past decades as well.

Actually that's an interesting point.. the 707s had overhead racks, not overhead bins..I can just imagine the kind of injuries that falling suitcases caused during turbulence!

But I do think that the standards for plane size should be lower in JA7 as compared to MT7, due to the lack of availability of long-range widebodies for most of that period.

[esquireflyer]

IRL, no, but in AWS nothing changes from 1950 to 2010. As far as we can tell, the seats in a 1958 DC-8 are the exact same ones being installed in a 2012 737-900ER. If we can't tell the difference I am sure the system can't either, so in AWS life the passenger likely would not be able to tell the comfort difference between a new build DC-8-63 or a new build 737-200Adv.

Don

This is the interior of a Saha Air 707-320C. The last airline still flying 707s. The seats and cabin are not exactly the same as a 2012 737-900ER. It looks more like a bus in the sky.  
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Saha-Air/Boeing-707-3J9C/0923419/M/

And this is a sister plane (but I think this one is not flying anymore):
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Saha-Air/Boeing-707-3J9C/0594147/M/

The caption says that the lack of overhead bins is due to conversion from a military role, but that's not correct. The original cabin design of the Boeing 707 used overhead racks and not bins, as shown in this old pic of a TWA 707:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/0038883/M/

Also, it seems the the discussion above has focused on Y seats, but F and C seats have obviously improved dramatically from 1958 to 2012.

In the next Jet Age game, I think the A/C size limit should be modified from the MT limit, to allow flying 707/DC8 up to their maximum range, because it's realistic and accurate for the era. On the other hand, tech-stopping classic 737s across oceans should still incur a penalty, because it's neither realistic (no ETOPS) nor historically accurate.

[Saul Goodman]

Dudes, 2000 nm is a 6 hour flight. On a 737-200... Huh.

=> works just fine there.

same here.  YUL-LAX on A319s are flown regularly, 5.5 hours ... no big deal 

[swiftus27]

Lots of places to land between montreal and la to land a plane