Revisit to this subject ..
Please list any missing aircraft models from AWS database to this page, I'm currently doing a data update. (Business jets, and other aircraft regarded as "general aviation" are not accepted)
https://www.airwaysim.com/Information/Aircraft/
Here's what I've come up with so far:
+ Lockheed Constellation
+ DH Comet
+ Handley Page Hermes
+ Cessna 400 series
+ Avro York
+ Avro Lancastrain
+ Avro Tudor
+ Ju52
+ Lockheed 18
Added:
+ Pilatus PC-12
+ Xian MA600
+ Antonov An-158
+ Antonov An-10
Well the Breda-Zappata_BZ.308 is not in the database however only one was built so there's not really any information available on it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breda-Zappata_BZ.308
For another rare airliner, the Bristol Brabazon is also not featured though it might make an interesting airliner for some airlines to use...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon
Both: 1 built ... so not significant enough to be included (nor any proper data available I would guess?)
Why on earth the Cessna 400? You can't even operate a Caravan at a profit.
well I expect there would be more data on the Brabazon than the Breda but yes, only 1 of each was built as in the real world they were replaced by turboprops and turbojets
Comet 4 : http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_dh106_en.php
I can give you some info to the Cessna 414. I own a pilot's manual.
We're gonna need some hardcore subsidising to operate the Cessna.
Quote from: Frogiton on October 23, 2010, 03:11:41 PM
We're gonna need some hardcore subsidising to operate the Cessna.
Just much cheaper maintenance costs. Having the AvGas fuel price equivalent to the Jet A-1 is already a big leap forward.
In the database, Comac is still listed as ACAC (for the ARJ21),
should add: Comac C919 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C919) for the modern times scenarios. also the Irkut MS-21-200 and -300 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irkut_MS-21)
Avro Canada C102 Jetliner - Only one was built, but the plane was promising and only went under because the company spent too much money on some military plane..... I'm sure interest would exist in AWS ;)
Harbin Y-12
Didn't I already do the Comet...?
Any thing in I need to do or is everything covered by someone?
Talentz
Another I just remembered is the Fokker F.VII though I'm not sure if it would be implemented as we've never had an inter-war period scenario.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fokker_F.VII
The Ilyushin Il-96-300M and 400M which are western versions with 2 crew cockpit, and Pratt & Whitney engines
Sukhoi Su-80 : 30 pax
Quote from: ArcherII on October 23, 2010, 03:22:59 PM
Just much cheaper maintenance costs. Having the AvGas fuel price equivalent to the Jet A-1 is already a big leap forward.
With cheaper maintenance you're not gonna survive. You need reduced overhead cost in staffing. If I have 10 Cessna's... why on earth do I need more staff then seats in my plane?
The number of staff requiried for the operation of an airline should NOT be based on the number of aircraft but on the number of SEATS one is able to sell.
Another solution is indeed to subsidize it... or to allow people who operate aircrafts till 40 seats to ask 150 to 200% of the RRP. Of course the game engine will need to support this.
What about the Lockheed L-100? http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=270
It was used commercially, and it would be interesting to see if it could be a commercial success in the game world.
-Matt
Quote from: Maarten Otto on October 24, 2010, 09:17:09 AM
With cheaper maintenance you're not gonna survive. You need reduced overhead cost in staffing. If I have 10 Cessna's... why on earth do I need more staff then seats in my plane?
The number of staff requiried for the operation of an airline should NOT be based on the number of aircraft but on the number of SEATS one is able to sell.
Another solution is indeed to subsidize it... or to allow people who operate aircrafts till 40 seats to ask 150 to 200% of the RRP. Of course the game engine will need to support this.
You are right in that aspect, though I was in the asumption that staffing costs for small commuters was being adressed.
How about the Sukhoi Superjet?
Quote from: Ilyushin on October 28, 2010, 09:24:08 PM
How about the Sukhoi Superjet?
It's in the game my friend. Both capacity variants.
Oh, haven't seen it yet. Neither found it at the Compare aircraft/global statistics screen, because I thought all airplanes listed there are the only ones in the game.
Quote from: Ilyushin on October 29, 2010, 10:33:07 AM
Oh, haven't seen it yet. Neither found it at the Compare aircraft/global statistics screen, because I thought all airplanes listed there are the only ones in the game.
If you had viewed the link Sami provided in the first post, you could easily see Sukhoi Superjet 100-75 and Sukhoi Superjet 100-95 ;)
Quotehttps://www.airwaysim.com/Information/Aircraft/
Sorry for the ignorance. :)
How many of the original list are now in the database, there really are some lovely aircraft in there that will fit with JA when it starts today. A fleet of Yorks and Lancastrians then moving into Comets and VC10s! ;D
Tupolev Tu-104 maybe?
Quote from: Dave4468 on October 29, 2010, 11:10:30 AM
How many of the original list are now in the database, there really are some lovely aircraft in there that will fit with JA when it starts today.
What you see in the Info section is what's available in present and future v.1.2 game worlds. So Comet won't be available here unfortunately. I am hoping to add all major missing historic models in v.1.3.
Fair enough then. Another reason to wait with baited breath for 1.3 ;D
How about the Lisunov Li-2/PS-84.
It may be a Soviet built version of the DC-3 but with a few differences.
Only a little one though.
how about the ill-known De Havilland Australia DHA-3 Drover?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Australia_DHA-3_Drover
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flugzeuginfo.net%2Facimages%2Fdha_dha3drover_jimwoodrow_t.jpg&hash=fa8e35ecbedd6b0a89032ba627a15ab7c7128fc7)
Not many used commercially, but...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-5
Quote from: norcarolinian on November 06, 2010, 11:08:02 PM
Not many used commercially, but...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-5
12 built. I put this on par with the Dasasult Mercure.
what about the Japanese built NAMC YS-11. There was 182 built - 64 seater capacity turboprop airplane
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAMC_YS-11
it's already there. ???
I like that DC-5. Smaller seating w/ slightly faster speed and 5x the range over a DC-3?
Does anyone have any creditable performance or ... should I research into it?
Talentz
How about the Gippsland Aeronautics GA-8 Airvan?
http://www.gippsaero.com/ZoneID=141.htm
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flightglobal.com%2Fblogs%2Faircraft-pictures%2Fassets_c%2F2010%2F01%2FGA8%2520Airvan%2520Credit_Gippsland-thumb-450x291-58035.jpg&hash=e53fa20a4db62306511ed8d80cfc5fea16726ee7)
(You can tell I'm Aussie...requesting all these Aussie aircraft to be added)
Quote from: Talentz on November 07, 2010, 02:27:36 AM
I like that DC-5. Smaller seating w/ slightly faster speed and 5x the range over a DC-3?
Does anyone have any creditable performance or ... should I research into it?
'
I tried to research this, but data was hard to come by. And no wonder given its history as outlined on Wikipedia. It was an interesting read, though. This is sometimes called the phantom Douglas plane.
any thoughts on adding the (WL) designation to Boeing 737, 757, 767, etc. to differentiate Winglet models?
with savings on fuel, etc.?
just a thought...
Quote from: raptorva on November 07, 2010, 03:50:18 AM
How about the Gippsland Aeronautics GA-8 Airvan?
http://www.gippsaero.com/ZoneID=141.htm
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flightglobal.com%2Fblogs%2Faircraft-pictures%2Fassets_c%2F2010%2F01%2FGA8%2520Airvan%2520Credit_Gippsland-thumb-450x291-58035.jpg&hash=e53fa20a4db62306511ed8d80cfc5fea16726ee7)
(You can tell I'm Aussie...requesting all these Aussie aircraft to be added)
Oooh, they use one of these for tours in Kauai. I went on one a few months ago... nice aircraft!
yeah, I've (briefly) flown one seeing as I live very close to where they are made. A simple, rugged aircraft. You can just wash it down with a hose on the inside if you need to. Basically a box with wings which makes it easily adaptable too. Plus now they have a turbocharged version out and might be putting the GAF Nomad back into production as a modernized version (akin to the Viking DHC-6 Twin Otter 400)
How about the Convair CV-540, -580, -600 and -640?
I just noticed AWS has the Cessna Caravan but not the Pilatus PC-12 or the PC-12NG in the database...single engine turboprop airliner with 9 seats I believe.
http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=51
The LET-610 is a 40 seat turboprop and enlarged version of the 410 which is in the database.
Not sure what the current situation on the -610 is though as I'm getting conflicting information as to how many have been made and in operation (some say its prototype only, others show in service, some show limited service but currently not in production, etc).
Here are a few more...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saunders_ST-27
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Aviation_Twin_Pioneer
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/cgi-bin/res.pl?keyword=Volpar+Turboliner&offset=0
Quote from: raptorva on November 13, 2010, 07:29:38 AM
yeah, I've (briefly) flown one seeing as I live very close to where they are made. A simple, rugged aircraft. You can just wash it down with a hose on the inside if you need to.
This description reminds me of bars in Queensland in the 1980s when "6 o'clock swill" still existed; the bars were washed down with a hose after the patrons headed home... :o You Aussies sure like the simple clean up. ::)
well we like to make things easy for ourselves because you don't want to spend more time out there than necessary in the sweltering heat of Summer ;)
Two Fokker F27 Friendship variants:
Fairchild F-27, licensed production of Fokker F27 in Fairchild
Fairchild Hiller FH-227, independently-developed stretched version of the Fokker F27/Fairchild F-27
only if we crash we get to eat the dead passengers.
Ilyushin Il-14M please! ;D
Quote from: Hugamuga on October 24, 2010, 08:35:50 AM
The Ilyushin Il-96-300M and 400M which are western versions with 2 crew cockpit, and Pratt & Whitney engines
This will be another choice for long haul operation. :)
A320 neo (see EN Wikipedia for info and related sources).
Quote from: MattDell on October 28, 2010, 07:18:55 PM
What about the Lockheed L-100? http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=270
It was used commercially, and it would be interesting to see if it could be a commercial success in the game world.
-Matt
It wasn't used for passenger service, was it?
Quote from: Daemus on October 24, 2010, 08:48:08 AM
Sukhoi Su-80 : 30 pax
really? we're already flooded with 6pax a/c and to be honest I'd rather not have another one flooding the UAM. :P
The addition of those Tu-134 models would be welcome (if you can find the specifications, that is)
Tu-134A-3
Second series, powered by two uprated Soloviev D-30 turbofan engines.
Tu-134A-5
Most recent version.
Thanks
3 built
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Dornier_728_family
0 built but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Dornier_428JET
I think these would be nice additions, and you could pull the 328JET out of the 328 family and put it with the other jet powered Dornier AC so the higher speed can be used.
Hawker Siddeley Trident 1E
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Siddeley_Trident
and anyone ever find anything else about that DC-5?
never heard of this bird before...
http://www.airliners.net/photo/United-Airlines-%28Douglas/Douglas-DC-4E/1966885/L/
Just glad to see the Constellation on the list!!!!
Quote from: norcarolinian on June 08, 2011, 06:03:31 AM
Hawker Siddeley Trident 1E
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Siddeley_Trident
and anyone ever find anything else about that DC-5?
Wasn't that project scrapped and they just moved on to the DC-6?
Quote from: Ilyushin on November 14, 2010, 10:10:59 PM
How about the Convair CV-540, -580, -600 and -640?
Good catch Illyushin!!! Those need to ne AWS for sure. ;)
Schro mentioned it in another thread, so I will put it officially here....
L1011 Tristar 250
How about an old China built jet :o
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Y-10
Quote from: L1011fan on August 15, 2011, 09:41:26 PM
Wasn't that project scrapped and they just moved on to the DC-6?
no it was built...although in limited numbers...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-5
Fairey Rotodyne... for those with slot Problems ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9633v6U0wo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9633v6U0wo)
A330-200HGW ... an old thread on it in here
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,27967.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,27967.0.html)
Useful source (Airbus)?
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/tech_data/AC/Airbus_AC_A330_Jan11.pdf (http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/tech_data/AC/Airbus_AC_A330_Jan11.pdf)
A330-300X and A330-300E ?
If the prototype aircraft idea is going on how about the Type 1180 and 1181 VC10, the Double Decker version!
http://www.vc10.net/History/doubledeck_super_vc10.html
Whole lot of old (predicted) performance data from the Vickers brochure.
What about SNCASE (Sud-Est):
SE-161 Languedoc
SE-2010 Armagnac
Not really significant but interesting additions, couldn't find any reliable info in English (unless we call wikipedia reliable 8) ), only in incomprehensible French :laugh:
what about the A320NEO and 737MAX for Modern Times?
Quote from: ARASKA on November 26, 2011, 12:23:38 AM
what about the A320NEO and 737MAX for Modern Times?
Answers here: https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,35826.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,35826.0.html)
Sure, it would be nice
How about the Harbin Y-12? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_Y-12
Another couple future aircraft (Xian MA700) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_MA700
(NAL Saras) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAL_Saras
The Rekkof Fokker 100 NG perhaps?
Second article (Dutch) says it will fly in 2013.
Would be a nice addition
http://www.rekkof.nl/ (http://www.rekkof.nl/)
http://www.nu.nl/economie/2603849/nieuwe-fokker-100-2-jaar-klaar.html (http://www.nu.nl/economie/2603849/nieuwe-fokker-100-2-jaar-klaar.html)
Regards,
Mike
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on January 20, 2012, 09:26:56 AM
The Rekkof Fokker 100 NG perhaps?
Second article (Dutch) says it will fly in 2013.
Would be a nice addition
http://www.rekkof.nl/ (http://www.rekkof.nl/)
http://www.nu.nl/economie/2603849/nieuwe-fokker-100-2-jaar-klaar.html (http://www.nu.nl/economie/2603849/nieuwe-fokker-100-2-jaar-klaar.html)
Regards,
Mike
The one which is scheduled to fly in 2013 is a modified F100, which will not be 100% similar to the production model XF100 :(
Quote from: alexgv1 on October 20, 2011, 03:21:18 PM
A330-200HGW ... an old thread on it in here
Quote from: alexgv1 on November 07, 2011, 07:02:08 PM
A330-300X and A330-300E ?
Apparently Airbus is to launch an A330-300S:
http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/20120130trib000681237/airbus-veut-doper-les-performances-de-son-a330-.html (http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/20120130trib000681237/airbus-veut-doper-les-performances-de-son-a330-.html)
Obviously nothing solid for the moment but may be interesting for the future.
Quote from: alexgv1 on October 20, 2011, 03:21:18 PM
A330-200HGW ... an old thread on it in here
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,27967.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,27967.0.html)
Useful source (Airbus)?
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/tech_data/AC/Airbus_AC_A330_Jan11.pdf (http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/tech_data/AC/Airbus_AC_A330_Jan11.pdf)
Reviving the A330-200HGW here, the link points to a 404, but this is Airbuses A330-200 page:
http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/a330-200/ (http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/a330-200/)
It specifically mentions a 238 ton MTOW variant offering a 7250nm range or 3.4 tonnes additional payload. The current highest MTOW 332 variant in AWS is 233 tonnes. That extra 350nm range would come in handy a lot of times!
Quote from: ARASKA on January 20, 2012, 03:51:26 AM
How about the Harbin Y-12? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_Y-12
Another source http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=241
Let L-610
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_L-610
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_l610_en.php
Avro York
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_York
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_york_en.php
Avro Tudor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Tudor
http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/avro_tudor.php
Beriev Be-30/32
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-30
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_be32_en.php
Bristol Brabazon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon
Dornier Do 28D-2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_28#Specifications_.28Do_28D-2.29
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_do28_en.php
Embraer/FMA CBA 123 Vector
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer/FMA_CBA_123_Vector
More to come..
Can sami please have a look at this as some of these aircraft could be useful.
Regards, Sean
Grumman Gulfstream I
Even though most people classify this as a business aircraft, it saw airline service with Cimber Airhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_G-159_Gulfstream_I
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_g159_en.php
Lisunov Li-2
If the DC-3 is on AWS, the Li-2 sould be also.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisunov_Li-2
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_li2_en.php
Piaggio P.166
Saw service with Ansetthttp://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_p166_en.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaggio_P.166
Tupolev ANT-20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_ANT-20
http://www.aviastar.org/air/russia/ant-20.php
Tupolev Tu-324
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-324
http://www.tupolev.ru/english/Show.asp?SectionID=124
Quote from: ARASKA on June 25, 2012, 10:17:27 PM
Can sami please have a look at this as some of these aircraft could be useful.
Same goes for this post..
Regards, Sean
Beriev A-40PM / Be-40P:
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_a40_en.php (http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_a40_en.php)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-40#Variants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-40#Variants)
Beriev Be-210
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_be200_en.php (http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_be200_en.php)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-200#Variants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-200#Variants)
^ both of these are passenger variants of Beriev A-40 and Beriev Be-200, respectively
A330NEO:http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/spotlight-on-a330neo/ (http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/spotlight-on-a330neo/)
B767-400ERX:https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/2000/2000%20-%200694.html (https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/2000/2000%20-%200694.html)https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/2000/2000-1%20-%200364.html (https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/2000/2000-1%20-%200364.html)
Embraer E2 http://beholdthepowerof2.com/ (http://beholdthepowerof2.com/)
Cheers
Quote from: wapp11 on October 13, 2011, 06:36:21 PM
How about an old China built jet :o
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Y-10
What he said! :laugh:
Also the Lockheed R6V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_R6V_Constitution
And Convair model 37 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_XC-99
Mentioned a few times, but still a fan Tupolev ANT-20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_ANT-20
Fairchild Dornier 428 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Dornier_428JET
Also I think it would be fun to include some proposed propfan aircraft like the
Yak-46 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-46
MD-94X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_MD-94X
Boeing 7J7 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_7J7
Antonov An-180 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-180
I know most of the time is probably spent figuring out cargo, but I just spent a lot of time on wiki reading about airplanes so figured I'd share.
some small suggestions:
- de Haviland Canada dhc3 otter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Canada_DHC-3_Otter
- de Haviland Canada dhc5 Buffalo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Canada_DHC-5_Buffalo
- antonov An2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-2
- pzl m28 skytrucks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL_M28_Skytruck
- vulcanair A-Viator: http://www.vulcanair.com/a-viator
With gigagames like current GW2, we need more models. You can't feed 600 players with just a small family of planes.
Messerschmitt please
May be add this concept to GWs ?
It will add interesting strategy choices and interest in late game periods.
http://boomsupersonic.com/
Our XB-1 Supersonic Demonstrator is scheduled to fly in late 2017.
Afterward, we will pursue rigorous safety-testing and FAA certification of our passenger airliner. We will pursue it as quickly as possible, while not skipping any steps. We look forward to the first record-setting passenger flights in the early 2020s.
Quote from: [ATA]MuzhikRB on November 16, 2016, 02:43:26 PM
May be add this concept to GWs ?
It will add interesting strategy choices and interest in late game periods.
http://boomsupersonic.com/
Our XB-1 Supersonic Demonstrator is scheduled to fly in late 2017.
Afterward, we will pursue rigorous safety-testing and FAA certification of our passenger airliner. We will pursue it as quickly as possible, while not skipping any steps. We look forward to the first record-setting passenger flights in the early 2020s.
Interesting. 200M$ for 45 business seats. With similar costs that 45 business seats in a normal plane. Due to speed, you fly more often, and therefore can spread the buying cost over more flights. If what they say is true, then maybe it could work. But if anything, just one thing, is too optimistic, they're toasted.
McDonnell Douglas MD12?
Gulfstream G550/G650
ATR-92
Airbus A319LR
Airbus A330-200Lite
Airbus A330-500
Airbus A330-300 HGW with GP7000 engine
Airbus A330 Regional
Airbus A350 Regional
Airbus A350-2000
Airbus A380-900
Boeing Sonic Cruiser
Boeing 747-400XQLR
Boeing 747X/747-500X/600X
Boeing 767-100
Boeing 767MR/LR
Boeing 767-400ERX
Boeing 777-100X
Boeing 777-10X
Boeing 2707
Boeing MoM
Bombardier CS500
Bombardier Dash 8 Q400X
Bombardier Dash 8 Q700
McDonnell Dogulas DC-8 Super 70s (Engine refit)
McDonnell Dogulas DC-10 Super 60s
McDonnell Dogulas MD-12
McDonnell Dogulas MD-94X, MD-92X, MD-91, MD-80 UHB
McDonnell Dogulas ATMR
McDonnell Dogulas Fokker MDF-100
Tupolev Tu-204SM
Tupolev Tu-204-300SR/MR/LR
Tupolev Tu-244
Tupolev Tu-304
Tupolev Tu-324
Tupolev Tu-414
Ilyushin Il-196
Antonov An-132
Antonov An-180
Antonov An-218
Antonov An-70TK
Antonov An-124
Sukhoi SSJ100-60
Sukhoi SSJ130
Xian MA700
Shanghai Y-10
Comac C929
Comac C939
Pilatus PC-6
Pilatus PC-24
Lockheed LM-100J
CASA C-295
IAe/IPTN N-245/250/219
Let L-410NG
PAC P-750 XSTOL
Quote from: Wizard on October 20, 2011, 03:15:47 PM
Fairey Rotodyne... for those with slot Problems ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9633v6U0wo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9633v6U0wo)
A good plane for st marys
Quote from: qunow on November 17, 2016, 11:14:35 AM
DHC-8-400
DHC-8-401
DHC-8-402
Bombardier Dash 8 Q400X
ATR-92
Airbus A350-2000
Airbus 380-900
Boeing Sonic Cruiser
DC-8-71
DC-8-73
DC-10-61
DC-10-62
DC-10-63
Tu-204SM
Tu-204-300HGW
Tu-244
Tu-304
Tu-324
Tu-414
An-180
An-218
Xian MA700
Comac C929
if you want to do an effort to get these in the game, some technical data for each of the aircraft is required,
look at some of the previous post and the data provided
Surely time for these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family
Quote from: Captim on November 18, 2016, 05:19:19 PM
Surely time for these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family
only problem with those are the delivery dates, imagine the backlog that will still be on those by the time the GW ended.
Look at the backlog on the ejets in GW2
8 years of deliverys, and by that stage there will be alot of big orders for new models, both for fleet replacement and UM spaming, unless they games lasted until 2040 there may be no use for them, just my thoughts but anyway
Quote from: TheLostNZ on November 21, 2016, 11:23:57 AM
only problem with those are the delivery dates, imagine the backlog that will still be on those by the time the GW ended.
Look at the backlog on the ejets in GW2
8 years of deliverys, and by that stage there will be alot of big orders for new models, both for fleet replacement and UM spaming, unless they games lasted until 2040 there may be no use for them, just my thoughts but anyway
Could say the same thing about the 777X, C919, A330NEO, A350...
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on November 21, 2016, 12:59:58 PM
Could say the same thing about the 777X, C919, A330NEO, A350...
true but by that stage only a few people can afford the neos and 777xs, not me thou ill be stuck with bac111s by that stage still :-[
Quote from: TheLostNZ on November 21, 2016, 02:19:43 PM
true but by that stage only a few people can afford the neos and 777xs, not me thou ill be stuck with bac111s by that stage still :-[
Who is to say the E2s won't be ridiculously expensive :P
gonna guess itll be between ejet classic and 777 classic
If the 2707 was put in the game do you think it would be used ?
Quote from: rntair on November 23, 2016, 10:11:57 PM
If the 2707 was put in the game do you think it would be used ?
YESS AWS supersonic revolution
Lockheed L2000
Boeing Sonic cruiser
Boeing 2707
Aerion AS2
Boom
The SNCASE Languedoc ..I think was produced and flown in much greater numbers then DC 5 or Mercure ...It has a place in post WW2 civil aviation history! Not the best plane around at the time, but it improved once fitted with PW engines. Air France flew them as well as AVIACO ( Spain) and the Lebanese carrier ..Two more I think also but can't remember who.
SAMI give history a chance and revive this unique, slow, uneconomical, and relatively dangerous airliner , that did not flop as bad as it should have !!
Has anyone mentioned the BAe 125 yet?
Quote from: TheLostNZ on November 21, 2016, 11:23:57 AM
only problem with those are the delivery dates, imagine the backlog that will still be on those by the time the GW ended.
Look at the backlog on the ejets in GW2 8 years of deliverys, and by that stage there will be alot of big orders for new models, both for fleet replacement and UM spaming, unless they games lasted until 2040 there may be no use for them, just my thoughts but anyway
The huge production on a medium a/c model will clear the old gen orders pretty quickly. It will actually offer an interesting strategy choice for those operators. Keep ordering or wait for the new models to come on stream...?
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on November 21, 2016, 12:59:58 PM
Could say the same thing about the 777X, C919, A330NEO, A350...
Exactly, IMO the GW standard end in 2030 make these a/c essentially vanity projects, they barely break even in nett CV terms. GW's need another 5 to 10 years in my view, when the shiny new stuff that many players want to field can actually sing.
Anyway, it's all a moot point. They are actually in the air today ( and the project was announced over three years ago ), as opposed to the F120 and 77X. They must be included ASAP.
http://www.embraer.com/en-US/ImprensaEventos/Press-releases/noticias/Pages/First-E190-E2-Jet-Completes-Maiden-Flight-Ahead-of-Schedule-.aspx
I think these models should be added regardless...
Before the game can be extended beyond 2030 there need to be sufficient viable options in all classes to sustain all airlines.
So I think this discussion is kind of a chicken and the egg discussion.
Just add them and if there is enough support extend the game.
Hello
How about another Russian plane for Soviet fans.
MC-21
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irkut_MC-21#Specifications (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irkut_MC-21#Specifications)
While it has little strict data about fuel consumption, but 2 of 3 modifications have Pratt&Whittney engine option which can help in this estimation.
First deliveries 2016-2017 mean it can be good fit for current GW timing.
Not a huge amount of info but there was plans for a stretch of the Dornier 328 turboprop (no mention of the stretch applying for the jet);
48 seat stretch (compared to the normal 30-33 seat in standard seating, not high density) involving newer, more powerful P&W engines of the PW100 family, a larger wing and fuselage plugs inserted fore and aft of the wing. Same cruise speed as the standard model. Would also need stronger main gear, spoilers, refined engine nacelle and larger propellers.
Seen as being a competitor to the Saab 2000 and the Jetstream 51, ATR42 and Dash 8-300.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1991/1991%20-%202730.html
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1991/1991%20-%202731.html
Production seems to have been delayed and ultimately shelved by DASA after the DASA-Fokker merger to avoid competition with the Fokker 50. Article suggests a model name of 328S (presumably 328 Stretch, like the 328JET).
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1991/1991%20-%201429.html
Above article linked (from before the 328s first flight) lists a proposed availability for the stretch as being in 1996 and using more powerful PW119 engines.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1996/1996%20-%202413.html
This article in 1996 lists not only a stretch for the turboprop but also a stretch for the jet, the turbofan stretch here being called the 328-700. The stretch turboprop here is being called the 328-500 and listes the possibility of using PW-150/2s.Also a few proposals of engine options for a standard model improvement the 328-300 with various new turboprop engines for a higher top cruise speed of 375kts at 22,000ft, with the -700 listed as 410 knots and the -500 listed as 370 knots. Also mentions talk of a 900nm range for both variants with future ER versions for up to 1200nm.
As a fan of the Dorniers, I'd love to see these being in game, even if the larger stretch of the jet would probably clash with the 528/728/928 family of RJs. The turboprop though could have a place. Would be nice to have more options in current GW3 for regional birds in this size category.
Edit; looks like at least a stretch of the jet was seriously considered and got the name 428JET. Maybe a stretch of the turboprop then would be just the 428?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Dornier_428JET
Some nice additions
Boeing has "soft launched" the 737 MAX 10, meaning that if it receives orders it will be build (which I believe is the AWS prerequisite).
Would make for a nice addition in the longer gameworlds, *hint* current gw3 *hint* :D
Manufacturer Boeing
Fleet group Boeing 737-600/700/800/900/MAX
Model Boeing 737 MAX 10
Size class Large aircraft
Project launched 07th March 2017
First deliveries 2020
Area of production United States
Description "The 737 MAX 10 is a development of the 737 MAX 9, having a stretched fuselage and lengthened landing gear."
Cruise speed Mach 0.78 / 447 kts TAS
Runway requirement Slightly more than MAX 9, but not too much due to trailing link MLG(@ MTOW)
Turn-around time 40 mins
Minimum crew Pilots: 2, Cabin crew: 4
Seating configuration Y: 174, C: 15, F: 0 (Factory default), Maximum 230
MTOW Slightly more than MAX 9
Payload Slightly more than MAX 9
Range 3100nm
Average fuel burn Slightly more than MAX 9
List price Slightly more than MAX 9
Italics mark "uncertain values"
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-unveils-first-image-of-737-max-10-434859/ (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-unveils-first-image-of-737-max-10-434859/)
http://www.b737.org.uk/737max10.htm (http://www.b737.org.uk/737max10.htm)
https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/839536382682914816 (https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/839536382682914816)
Also while I am at it the 737 MAX 200.
It's the same as the MAX 8, however it has a different exit configuration allowing for a higher amount of passengers (in high density seating).
http://www.b737.org.uk/737max.htm#200 (http://www.b737.org.uk/737max.htm#200)
And let's not forget the A321LR
Manufacturer Airbus
Fleet group Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Model Airbus A321LR
Size class Large aircraft
Project launched 21st October 2017
First deliveries 2018
Area of production Europe (joint project)
Description "The A321LR is a long range medium sized aircraft intended to open new smaller routes over longer distances."
Cruise speed Mach 0.79 / 450 kts TAS
Runway requirement Slightly more than A321NEO(@ MTOW)[/i]
Turn-around time 40 mins
Minimum crew Pilots: 2, Cabin crew: 4
Seating configuration Y: 186, C: 15, F: 0 (Factory default), Maximum 240
MTOW 97000kg
Payload Slightly more than A321NEO
Range 3900nm
Average fuel burn Slightly more than A321NEO
List price Slightly more than A321NEO
https://leehamnews.com/2014/10/21/exclusive-airbus-launches-a321neolr-long-range-to-replace-757-200w/ (https://leehamnews.com/2014/10/21/exclusive-airbus-launches-a321neolr-long-range-to-replace-757-200w/)
http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airbus-launches-long-range-a321neo-version (http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airbus-launches-long-range-a321neo-version)
LOW PRIORITY/placeholder
For when cargo gets into the game:
I found a good source for the Antonov 124:
http://www.maximus.aero/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Antonov.pdf (http://www.maximus.aero/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Antonov.pdf)
and the Ilyushin-76:
http://www.maximus.aero/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Ilyushin-IL-76.pdf (http://www.maximus.aero/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Ilyushin-IL-76.pdf)
MC-21
https://leehamnews.com/2016/02/08/irkut-mc-21-first-analysis/
http://www.rusaviainsider.com/irkut-mc-21-russian-aircraft/
http://mc21eng.irkut.com/family/characteristics/
http://www.uacrussia.ru/ru/aircraft/lineup/civil/ms-21/aircraft-specific/
Info for -100 variant: https://aviationvoice.com/is-russian-ms-21-good-enough-to-join-the-oligopolistic-market-201608171550/
For -400: http://www.deagel.com/Airliners/MS-21-400_a001815003.aspx
Sukhoi Superjet 130(/120?):
http://en.avia.pro/blog/suhoy-superdzhet-130-ng-tehnicheskie-harakteristiki-foto
http://aviationweek.com/shownews/sukhoi-developing-120-seat-superjet
Ilyushin Il-96-400M:
http://www.ruaviation.com/docs/7/2016/4/13/104/
Ilyushin Il-96-550:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-96-550.htm
Ilyushin Il-196:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-196.htm
Comac C929:
http://www.chinaaviationdaily.com/news/57/57615.html
Variants: http://www.popsci.com/mega-planes-zhuhai-chinas-shows-off-its-next-generation-air-cargo-and-transportation
Pilatus PC-24:
http://www.synerjet.com/assets/pc-24-fact-sheet.pdf
Boom XB-1:
http://boomsupersonic.com/xb-1/
Boeing Sonic Cruiser:
http://www.mh-aerotools.de/company/paper_7/astec_2002.htm
Aerion AS2:
https://www.bjtonline.com/business-jet-news/flying/aerion-as2
https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2016/12/28/airbus-aerion-takes-it-easy-on-fittings-for-acj350-while-aerion-readies-for-dramatic-as2-debut/
Boeing 2707 and Lockheed L-2000:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160321-the-american-concordes-that-never-flew
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/b2707.htm
McDonnell Dogulas MD-12X:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/md-12.htm
Tupolev Tu-204SM:
http://www.tupolev.ru/en/civil_aviation/tu-204sm
Tu-324, Tu-324A, Tu-414, Tu-414A:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/tu-324-specs.htm
Tu-244:
http://www.tu144sst.com/techspecs/tu-244.html
Xian MA700:
http://aviationweek.com/awin/avic-launches-narrower-lighter-ma700
Pilatus PC-6:
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_pc6_en.php
Tu-304:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/tupolev-reveals-tu-304-details-21310/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/tu-304.htm
McDonnell Dogulas ATMR:
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1979/1979%20-%203811.PDF
Airbus A330 Regional:
http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/corporate-information/key-documents/?eID=maglisting_push&tx_maglisting_pi1[docID]=109178
http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/presskits/?eID=maglisting_push&tx_maglisting_pi1%5BdocID%5D=104575 (MTOW: 199t standard, options include 190t and 205t)
Airbus A350 Regional:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/singapore-launches-lower-weight-regional-a350-388540/
Airbus A330-200 Lite:
http://old.seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2001942029_airbuslite29.html
Airbus A330-500:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-eyes-2004-for-service-entry-of-a330-500-68716/
Tu-204-500, Tu-204-300(SR/MR/LR variants):
http://www.civil-aviation.net/flugzeuge/tupolev.phtml
Sukhoi Superjet 100-60:
http://www.deagel.com/Regional-Jets/Superjet-100-60_a000129001.aspx
A380-900:
https://www.ausbt.com.au/supersizing-the-superjumbo-1-000-seat-airbus-a380-due-by-2020
ATR-92:
http://manny4life-airline-economics.blogspot.hk/2014/01/atr-pursues-90-seat-twin-turboprop.html
Boeing 767-400ERX:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-offers-airlines-767-400erx-stretch-1304/
Boeing 747-400 XQLR:
http://www.boeing-747.com/boeing_747_family/747-400xqlr-quiet-long-range.html
DC-10-61/62/63:
http://www.widebodyaircraft.nl/dc10.htm
DC-8-71/72/73:
http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/acaps/dc8.pdf
Let L-410NG:
http://www.airportspotting.com/l410ng-aircraft-rolled/
McDonnell Dogulas Fokker MDF-100:
http://www.dutch-aviation.nl/index5/Civil/index5-2%20F29.html
Antonov An-218:
http://ram-home.com/ram-old/an-218.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/an-218.htm
Antonov An-180:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/ukraine/an-180.htm
http://en.avia.pro/blog/an-180
Antonov An-70TK:
http://www.redstar.gr/Foto_red/Eng/Aircraft/An_70.html
http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/an70.asp
Airbus A350-2000:
http://aviationweek.com/shownews/airbus-details-status-possible-a350-2000
Boeing 777-10X:
https://airwaysmag.com/industry/boeing-awaits-a350-2000-to-launch-777-10x/
Boeing 777-100X
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/sia-warms-to-777-100x-23318/
Boeing 777-100MR/777-100LR/767-100/757-100/767MR/767LR:
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1978/1978%20-%200788.PDF
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PUc3JMr6CwAJ:www.modernairliners.com/boeing-767/+&cd=8&hl=zh-TW&ct=clnk&gl=hk
DC-X-200:
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1975/1975%20-%202331.html
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19840020666.pdf
RAI RegioProp R-80, PTDI N-250
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2015/09/12/regio-seeking-investors-support-r80-jet-project.html
IAe N-219/N-245/N-270
http://www.trussty.com/2015/12/indonesia-aggressively-develops.html#axzz4c3m0vTWs
MD-80 UHF engine refit, MD-91X, MD-92X, MD-94X
http://www.joc.com/new-engine-gets-first-test-flight_19870519.html
https://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/profan.html
Boeing 717-300
http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=204767
Bombardier dash-8 q400x:
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2009-06-08/bombardier-considers-stretch-variant-q400
Boeing 747-500X/600X/700X:
http://www.boeing-747.com/boeing_747_family/boeing-747-500x-600x-and-700X.html
Shanhai Y-10:
http://www.airlinereporter.com/2013/12/classic-airliner-the-shanghai-y-10-chinas-first-commercial-airliner/
GP7000 on A330-300:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-has-39informal-talks39-over-use-of-gp7000-on-growth-a330-300-69061/
PAC 750XL:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/assembly-starts-on-pac-750xl-201106/
http://www.jsc.co.za/docs/PAC_SPECS_750XL_Specification_Sept_06%5B2%5D.pdf
Airbus A319LR
http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-detail/detail/privatair-selects-a319-long-range-for-lufthansa-flights/
Ilyushin Il-98
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/two-crew-il-96-flightdeck-near-as-ilyushin-studies-twinjet-24359/
Ilyushin Il-90
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-90.htm
Some cargo aircraft:
Antonov An-132
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/an-132-light-multipurpose-transport-aircraft/
CASA C-295
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_c295_en.php
Lockheed LM-100J
http://news.lockheedmartin.com/2017-02-09-Lockheed-Martin-Rolls-Out-First-LM-100J-Super-Hercules-Commercial-Freighter
Some aircrafts that are not clearly defined yet:
Boeing MoM/797X
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-airline-support-gathers-around-boeing-mom-434961/
Bombardier CS500
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/bombardier-confirms-cseries-wing-could-accommodate-l-427129/
Bombardier Dash 8 Q700
http://aviationclub.aero/article/view/3627/
Comac C939
http://www.deagel.com/Airliners/COMAC-C939_a002812001.aspx
Boeing 757-200X
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-close-to-decision-on-757-200x-launch-57114/
Airbus A350-900ULR
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/a350-900ulr-range-figure-not-a-revision-airbus-437060/
Airbus A350-900 with 280t MTOW
http://atwonline.com/airframes/airbus-build-280-tonne-mtow-a350-900
Airbus A330-200 with 238t MTOW (should be available before they make the 242t A332)
http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-detail/detail/airbus-offers-new-242-tonne-a330-takeoff-weight-capability-to-extend-market-coverage/
Quote from: qunow on March 17, 2017, 07:46:57 AM
MC-21
https://leehamnews.com/2016/02/08/irkut-mc-21-first-analysis/
http://www.rusaviainsider.com/irkut-mc-21-russian-aircraft/
http://mc21eng.irkut.com/family/characteristics/
http://www.uacrussia.ru/ru/aircraft/lineup/civil/ms-21/aircraft-specific/
Info for -100 variant: https://aviationvoice.com/is-russian-ms-21-good-enough-to-join-the-oligopolistic-market-201608171550/
For -400: http://www.deagel.com/Airliners/MS-21-400_a001815003.aspx
It's already made it's first flight. Can we expect this one in the next new GW2?
Quote from: Dasha on June 04, 2017, 02:03:44 PM
It's already made it's first flight. Can we expect this one in the next new GW2?
The cool thing is that it would make more next-gen aircraft. In current GW3, there won't be anything new for the last 16 years :(
If Sami is going to take games beyond 2020 then new variants are more interesting.
For Aircraft Types - Initially take a newer type (not a version) and apply a sensible stretch to it.
For Variants - Assume new engine developments provided as upgrade kits to improve take-off power (+ to GTOW or - to Runway Length).
Some aircraft types may also benefit from a reduction in pax allowing smaller engine types, shorter runways, etc.
Just apply some common sense rather than worry about if it's right. Predicting the future isn't what the game is about.
And by the way, all our established players have a pretty good idea of how to match routes and types.
Why not change all the aircraft names, the history of cities and countries, and have a completely fictional game where types and routes are not recognisable.
By the way, the Britten Norman Islander (the twin version) is still in manufacture (2017) in Portsmouth UK for a foreign military customer.
Loving the game
Sami,
For long term play ability I urge you to add some of the models discussed in this thread, particularly:
MC21 Family
A330 Regional
A350ULR
COMAC C939
737 MAX 200
A321LR
and the two aircraft launched at the PAS17, yesterday and today:
737 MAX 10
A380 Plus
If you act now, the latter two could still be added even to GW3, however I think it is especially important to add all of these before the new GW2 1950-2035 hits the selling point of these aircraft.
As I have mentioned before, I 'd be glad to help, however I don't have the opportunity...
Cheers,
NC
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on June 19, 2017, 09:12:32 AM
COMAC C939
I think you mean C929, as the only thing known about the C939 is its appx. capacity, we don't even know when will they start work on it other than after C929.
Quote
A321LR
I think I have read about it somewhere that A321LR are basically A321neo with additional fuel tank. Not sure would it be better to be offer as an new model, or as an option under A321neo like 77L.
Quote
A380 Plus
IIRC the most major improvement for A380Plus are engine PIP improvement, cabin layout reconfiguration, and then winglet. I don't know if that justify a new model in AWS....
C929, of course, my bad
As for the A321LR. Could be added as a variant of the neo or as a new one. Either way it has a market for smaller route pairs and 757 replacement
A380neo, should (according to Airbus) give 4% less fuel burn and 80 extra seats. Or extra range at the same seats... perhaps not the most interesting of my requests, but it could open more options and the A380 replacement is needed more in this game than before (new builds would hit their 3rd D check at game end), and less new aircraft would have their second for sure. 77x and new 380s can do some of the work. But in my opinion this option would give some relief
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on June 19, 2017, 12:58:05 PM
A380neo, should (according to Airbus) give 4% less fuel burn and 80 extra seats. Or extra range at the same seats... perhaps not the most interesting of my requests, but it could open more options and the A380 replacement is needed more in this game than before (new builds would hit their 3rd D check at game end), and less new aircraft would have their second for sure. 77x and new 380s can do some of the work. But in my opinion this option would give some relief
hum. Just come over a photo https://imagr.eu/up/bfsjK_DCrWhiIWsAA2qZo.jpg that said they are also adding 3t MTOW to the A380 plus. And also extended A check and C check interval - but I think that is not modelled in AWS?
ATR42-600S
http://www.atraircraft.com/newsroom/pressrelease/atr-sees-strong-market-potential-for-atr-42-600-with-enhanced-stol-capabilities-1452-en.html
Data for some A350 MTOW variants https://leehamnews.com/2017/06/27/airbus-augments-a350-1000-capability/#more-23972
--------------------------------
Tecnam P2012 https://p2012.tecnam.org/news/tecnam-celebrate-traveller-sales-success-at-aero-friedrichshafen-2017/
IPTN N-2130 https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/iptn-speeds-up-n-2130-regional-jet-programme-19739/
TRJet TRP328/TRJ328 https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2016/07/19/328-type-certificate-holder-breathes-new-life-into-aircraft/
TRJet TRP628/TRJ628 http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/bizwatch/2015/10/10/how-turkish-turkeys-planned-trjet-program/73572570/
Denel SARA http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2016-09-21/south-africas-denel-unveils-regional-airliner-mockup
AVIC Y-12F http://www.defenseworld.net/news/15461/FAA_Type_Certification_For_Chinese_Y_12F_Turboprop_Aircraft
Cessna Denali https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/july/25/textron-unveils-denali-single-engine-turboprop
Eviation Alice http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/electric-planes-have-gone-april-fools-joke-reality-two-years-1627372
As we are getting the cargo gameworld, I think it would be a good idea if we get some combi aircrafts which have less seats in exchange for more rooms for cargo.
Off my head and from wiki some aircrafts available in combi variants include: DC-6, DC-7, DC-8, 707, 727, 737, ATR, PC-12, Dash-8, 747, DC-10, MD-11, L-188, HS-748, 757, F-27, CV-240, A300, A310, Caravelle
What about DC-8 Super 70s? 110 were "made" or converted and were used in both passenger and freight service by big name airlines and freight companies; For those who dont know DC-8 Super 70's were DC-8 60 series that had CMF-56-2 installed at a cost of about $12 million per aircraft.
"The Super 70s were about 70% quieter than the Super 60 Series and between 18% and 25% more fuel efficient than the JT3D, depending on the model"
DC-8-71 - range of at least 4100nm a fuel burn of 8300 kg/hr FAA certification on August 15th 1981
DC-8-72 - range of at least 6070nm a fuel burn of 7060 kg/hr FAA certification on September 17th 1982.
DC-8-73 - range of at least 5860nm a fuel burn of 7320 kg/hr FAA certification on June 23rd 1983
those are going off the conservative numbers, they also had decreased take off run and all models would then qualify for Chapter 4 certification. It was reported that all versions of the aircraft gained at least a 40% increase in usable range but were still limited to 60 series operational limits. I would think these would be an easy update to incorporate much like when you can install hush kits for certain aircraft.
http://www.airlineratings.com/news.php?id=187
http://tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/8139/dc-dedication-first-last-v2
DC-5
http://www.boeing.com/history/products/dc-5.page
Fairchild F-27
- Basically Fokker F27 but manufactured in America, but still differ in some aspects.
http://all-aero.com/index.php/contactus/45-planes-d-e-f/3918-fokker-f-27-friendship
Fairchild Hiller FH-227
- Stretch version of Fairchild F27.
http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/fair_fh-227.php
Avia Av-14
- Ilyushin Il-14Ms built by Avia under licence in Czechoslovakia. Include Avia 14-24, Avia 14-32, Avia 14-40, which are the 24, 32, 40 seats versions respectively.
http://ruslet.webnode.cz/technika/ruska-technika/letecka-technika/s-v-iljusin/avia-av-14-il-14-/
Avia Av-14 Super
- 1960-model by Avia with a pressurized cabin for 32, 36, or 42 passengers, fitted with long-range wing-tip fuel tanks.
http://ruslet.webnode.cz/technika/ruska-technika/letecka-technika/s-v-iljusin/avia-av-14-il-14-/
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden Il-14P
- Ilyushin Il-14Ps built by VVB Flugzeugbau under licence in East Germany.
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd.html
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd/il-14p.html
Basler Turbo BT-67, it is an upgraded DC-3. It replaces the piston engine with P&W PT6 engines, increases range by double, which by the way is 800 NM not 300nm as in the game :-[
The BT-67 was launched in 1990 and costs around $2 million to build, this zero times the aircraft, gives it new engines, places a 10ft plug in the front, increases max usable load by 42%, lightens the plane, increases MTOW, known icing certified and a whole slew of other goodies. I think it would be a good addition to those still holding onto the past or for cargo users on short fat routes where a larger, than a cessna, would be helpful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basler_BT-67
http://www.baslerturbo.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=yAHcAbxuu00
Thanks Sami for all you do! Loving the GW2 and the cargo world!
Junkers Ju 90
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_90
I think it would do very well on the used market against the DC-3. Since it seat 40 pax.
IL-96-400M
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2017-04-11/ilyushin-il-96-400m-widebody-taking-shape
http://www.rusaviainsider.com/improved-ilyushin-il-96-airliner-to-fly-in-2019/
Grumman G-159 Gulfstream I
(Although it's designed as bizjet, many airlines used it for scheduled passenger services)
http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/grumman-g-159-gulfstream-i/236
Grumman G-159C Gulfstream I-C
(And it is the stretched version for regional airlines)
http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/grumman-g-159-gulfstream-i/236
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 152
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd.html
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd/152.html
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 153
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd.html
http://www.flugzeug-lorenz.de/index.php?id=86
http://www.flugzeug-lorenz.de/fileadmin/user_upload/2015/153A_Seiten_70-71.pdf
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 154
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd.html
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 155
https://www.biancahoegel.de/flug/typen/ddr/fwd.html
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 156
(pending online reference search)
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 157
(pending online reference search)
VEB Flugzeugwerke Dresden 160
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/160_(Flugzeug)
Air Express AE100>AE316/317/318
http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/97/0425/aa1.html
http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/97/0425/aa1a.html
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/timeout-in-asia-28931/
NAMC YS-X
http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/97/0425/aa1.html
http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/97/0425/aa1a.html
AI(R) Airjet 70
http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/97/0425/aa1.html
http://edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/97/0425/aa1a.html
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airjet-cancellation-sparks-reactions-30709/
Kawasaki YP-X(YPX-10/YPX-11/YPX-12)/YC-X
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/yp-x.htm
http://wind.ap.teacup.com/aviationbusiness/50.html
Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm MPC75
http://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/MPC75.html
ATRA-90
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1986/1986%20-%202425.PDF
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1986/1986%20-%201611.PDF
NAMC YS-33 (YS-33-10/20/30//YX-B/C/D)
(links to be insrted here)
NAMC YS-11J
(links to be insrted here)
NAMC YS-11S
(links to be insrted here)
Tupolev Tu-334-100D/-200
http://our-russia.com/26052016114228/russias-tupolev-revive-tu-334-aircraft
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/tupolev-rolls-out-tu-334-24356/
(btw shouldn't 334 and 204 belong to same family?)
Tupolev Tu-304/330
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/tupolev-10213/
MD-90-10EC/30EC/40/40EC
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1990/1990%20-%200486.PDF
Boeing 717-300X/100X
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/2003/2003%20-%201787.PDF
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-maintains-717-campaign-50825/ The currently available 717 with less than 50t MTOW that are marked as standard in game should probably be labelled as minus MTOW variant?
There is one Baade 152 model already in the game that summarizes all your VEBs. Considering the "success" of the aircraft, it's far enough.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on July 27, 2017, 05:40:36 AM
There is one Baade 152 model already in the game that summarizes all your VEBs. Considering the "success" of the aircraft, it's far enough.
They are all different aircrafts with vastly different design, for example 152 was a quad jet and 153 was to be a twin turboprop and 154 was to be a large quad turboprop aircraft and 155 was to be a smaller twin jet according to webpages listed above. And I don't think all of them can be named under Baade
IAe N-219 first flight have just completed, http://www.janes.com/article/73140/indonesia-s-dirgantara-n219-completes-maiden-flight , can we have that added into the game?
And request for Y-11/Y-12/Y-12E http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/harbin-y-1112/241 and http://www.oldwings.nl/st/chinese_built.pdf and Y-12F http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2016-04-14/avic-y-12f-turboprop-gets-faa-nod
Don't know if this has been brought up yet but how about the Fairchild Metro V/25? Per the wiki, the model was first advertised at the Paris Air Show in 1987 and a prototype built in 1989.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Swearingen_Metroliner
Info states the capacity for the 25/V increases to 25 (the Metro 23 we have in-game is listed at 19).
Additionally, flightglobal archives lists a gross weight is 16,000lbs. Range goes up 220nm with newer Garrett TPE-331-12 engines (Metro 23 has -11 engines). Engine power goes up 8% and field performance is also improved.
Flightglobal also lists cargo volumes. This is something we are currently missing for the Metro 23 so I hope this can be added very soon. It lists the Metro 23 aft baggage volume at 143.5 cubic feet. For the Metro V/25, the aft baggage volume is 206 cubic feet.
For use as a pure freighter (which the Metro 23 has been used as), the cabin volume is 622 cubic feet. So forward, cabin, and aft would be 45 + 622 + 143.5 = 810.5 cubic feet of cargo volume. For the Metro V/25, the forward/cabin/aft total freighter volume would be 45 + 622 + 206 = 873 cubic feet.
Sources:
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%200878.html
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%200878.html
Ilyushin Il-114-300
Available from 2022
http://www.ilyushin.org/en/aircrafts/projects/6292/
Avro Lancastrian
http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/coming%20of%20age/Avro%20Lancastrian.htm
McDonnell Douglas MD-17
http://aviationweek.com/awin/mcdonnell-douglas-studying-future-commercial-md-17
Ilyushin Il-103
http://www.ilyushin.org/en/aircrafts/passenger/1176/
Fiat G.12
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/cww2/g12.html
Fiat G.212
http://www.aeronautica.difesa.it/storia/museostorico/Pagine/FiatG212.aspx
Manshukoku MT-1 Hayabusa
http://www.aviastar.org/air/china/manko_mt-1.php
CBA123
https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=330
VVB135
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1960/1960%20-%202717.PDF
Lockheed Jetstar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_JetStar
VFW-Fokker VFW 614
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFW-Fokker_614
Lockheed L-400 Twin Hercules
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1980/1980%20-%200337.PDF
Nakajima AT2
http://all-aero.com/index.php/53-planes-l-m-n-o/7173-nakajima-at2--ki-34--l1n1
Mitsubishi MC-20
http://www.aviastar.org/air/japan/mitsubishi_ki-57.php
Quote from: drhyed (Crash Airline) on July 03, 2017, 09:47:36 PM
What about DC-8 Super 70s? 110 were "made" or converted and were used in both passenger and freight service by big name airlines and freight companies; For those who dont know DC-8 Super 70's were DC-8 60 series that had CMF-56-2 installed at a cost of about $12 million per aircraft.
"The Super 70s were about 70% quieter than the Super 60 Series and between 18% and 25% more fuel efficient than the JT3D, depending on the model"
DC-8-71 - range of at least 4100nm a fuel burn of 8300 kg/hr FAA certification on August 15th 1981
DC-8-72 - range of at least 6070nm a fuel burn of 7060 kg/hr FAA certification on September 17th 1982.
DC-8-73 - range of at least 5860nm a fuel burn of 7320 kg/hr FAA certification on June 23rd 1983
those are going off the conservative numbers, they also had decreased take off run and all models would then qualify for Chapter 4 certification. It was reported that all versions of the aircraft gained at least a 40% increase in usable range but were still limited to 60 series operational limits. I would think these would be an easy update to incorporate much like when you can install hush kits for certain aircraft.
http://www.airlineratings.com/news.php?id=187
http://tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/8139/dc-dedication-first-last-v2
With the upgrades option appearing soon, will the Super 70s finally make it into the game? If so Ill be very looking forward to it :D
The aircraft originally known as C-929 is now officially named as CR929. Its three proposed variants will be CR929-500, CR929-600, CR929-700. It is to be design/make by the CRAIC.
Quote from: qunow on September 29, 2017, 08:41:41 AM
The aircraft originally known as C-929 is now officially named as CR929. Its three proposed variants will be CR929-500, CR929-600, CR929-700. It is to be design/make by the CRAIC.
I think we read the same papers ;)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uac-and-comac-christen-widebody-family-as-cr-929-441648/?cmpid=SOC|Twitter|Flightglobal|sf117626376|sf117626376&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf117626376 (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uac-and-comac-christen-widebody-family-as-cr-929-441648/?cmpid=SOC%7CTwitter%7CFlightglobal%7Csf117626376%7Csf117626376&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf117626376)
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on September 29, 2017, 09:13:37 AM
I think we read the same papers ;)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uac-and-comac-christen-widebody-family-as-cr-929-441648/?cmpid=SOC|Twitter|Flightglobal|sf117626376|sf117626376&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf117626376 (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uac-and-comac-christen-widebody-family-as-cr-929-441648/?cmpid=SOC%7CTwitter%7CFlightglobal%7Csf117626376%7Csf117626376&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf117626376)
Data:
CR929-600: length 63.07m, wingspan 61m, height 17.91m. Fuelsage height 6.068m and fuelsage width 5.920m, cabin width: 5.588m, range 12000km is with a payload of 28.84t and typical seating of 280, MTOW 234t, MLW 190t
Proposed to use RR or GE engine at launch but will offer Chinese CJ2000 engine or/and Russian PD35 engine when they're developed.
Project expected to take 10 years' time until delivery although the most ambitious plan call for first flight at 2021.
CR929-500: 250 seats 14000km
CR929-700: 320 seats 10000km
Convair 600 and 640, which are upgraded versions of Convair 240/340/440s with turboprop engines. I think it's worth adding because Convair itself would make the modifications and these models are considered new models. This page shows relevant technical specs for them (http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/convair-2403404405405806006405800/169).
Convair 640s tech specs (http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/convair_600.php)
Quote from: wilian.souza2 on November 02, 2017, 03:10:57 PM
Convair 600 and 640, which are upgraded versions of Convair 240/340/440s with turboprop engines. I think it's worth adding because Convair itself would make the modifications and these models are considered new models. This page shows relevant technical specs for them (http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/convair-2403404405405806006405800/169).
Convair 640s tech specs (http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/convair_600.php)
Hello. I've submitted the data for the CV-580 to Sami. The -580 covers the CV-340/440. Unfortunately, it leaves the CV-240 out to dry. I choose the CV-580 (Allison 501-D13D) over the CV600/640 (RR Dart) conversions because the former had a higher cruise and longer legs. Also, I am not sure Sami would be keen to add multiple different conversions for 1 base model. Could the system handle that and what would be the value in having those models all overlap one another..?
That said, it takes time for new models (as opposed to variants that share flight data) to be added. Hopefully sooner rather then later.
Talentz
Quote from: Talentz on November 02, 2017, 06:02:11 PM
I am not sure Sami would be keen to add multiple different conversions for 1 base model. Could the system handle that and what would be the value in having those models all overlap one another..?
I think they could be added as new models, not necessarily upgrades for the current models. Anyway, it's worth adding because they were a commercial success, and in AWS we see models who didn't get past prototype stage in real life thriving in some gameworlds, like Aviation Traders' Accouuntant Series in GW2...
New aircraft type as been launched: ATR 72-600F.
Inaugural order placed by FedEx and announced Nov 8, 2017. Entry into service set for 2020.
Info on launch dates: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/atr-launches-600-freighter-with-large-fedex-order-442989/
Regarding capacity, it is reported to have 74.3 cubic meters of space - enough for 7 LD3 containers
Info on capacity: http://atwonline.com/airframes/fedex-express-orders-50-new-build-atr-freighters
So thanks to whoever including the DC-8-Super 70's in the game!
WHY DO THEY HAVE WORSE FUEL BURN THAN DC-8-60'S???????????
WHY DO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME RUNWAY PERFORMANCE??????
The in game description even says:
QuoteThe Conversions are straight engine swaps from JT8D's to CFM56s. The end result was a quitter, far more efficient engine. Along with reduced take off/landing roll.
Hey thanks for the 10% boost in range, IF it had been accompanied with a 15-20% reduction in fuel burn and take off roll, the performance would almost resemble the real life aircraft. The in game fuel burn for the DC-8-63 is 8900kg per hr and the DC-8-73 is 9600kg per hr... math was never my best subject in school but how is an 8% INCREASE "far more efficent"?
Since this seems to be beyond the grasp of whoever sets aircraft performance Ill baseline this for you free of charge: It should look something very close to this using very conservative DC-8 Super 70 performance date
Model Weight Range Fuel Burn KG HR Take Off Run
DC-8-61 147418 3310 nm 10120 Kg Hr 3000 M
DC-8-71 147418 3900 nm 7598 Kg Hr 2600 M
DC-8-62 158760 5150 nm 8620 Kg Hr 2930 M
DC-8-72 158760 6075 nm 7068 Kg Hr 2600 M
DC-8-63 161628 4970 nm 8920 Kg Hr 3300 M
DC-8-73 161628 5865 nm 7310 Kg Hr 2700 M
Hey the hard work is done, the aircraft is in the game! All we need is a few changes to the performance tables, maybe update the pictures, and I can find something else to rant about ;D
Quote from: drhyed (Crash Airline) on November 11, 2017, 07:35:49 PM
So thanks to whoever including the DC-8-Super 70's in the game!
WHY DO THEY HAVE WORSE FUEL BURN THAN DC-8-60'S???????????
WHY DO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME RUNWAY PERFORMANCE??????
The in game description even says:
Hey thanks for the 10% boost in range, IF it had been accompanied with a 15-20% reduction in fuel burn and take off roll, the performance would almost resemble the real life aircraft. The in game fuel burn for the DC-8-63 is 8900kg per hr and the DC-8-73 is 9600kg per hr... math was never my best subject in school but how is an 8% INCREASE "far more efficent"?
Since this seems to be beyond the grasp of whoever sets aircraft performance Ill baseline this for you free of charge: It should look something very close to this using very conservative DC-8 Super 70 performance date
Model Weight Range Fuel Burn KG HR Take Off Run
DC-8-61 147418 3310 nm 10120 Kg Hr 3000 M
DC-8-71 147418 3900 nm 7598 Kg Hr 2600 M
DC-8-62 158760 5150 nm 8620 Kg Hr 2930 M
DC-8-72 158760 6075 nm 7068 Kg Hr 2600 M
DC-8-63 161628 4970 nm 8920 Kg Hr 3300 M
DC-8-73 161628 5865 nm 7310 Kg Hr 2700 M
Hey the hard work is done, the aircraft is in the game! All we need is a few changes to the performance tables, maybe update the pictures, and I can find something else to rant about ;D
Where is the data your getting for this? From the launching of the new BW perhaps...? If so, Sami hasn't finalized the data yet. It's just in the DB now.
Once you see a changelog update from Sami: https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,58865.msg434488.html#msg434488 (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,58865.msg434488.html#msg434488) The aircraft or feature is 100% ready for AWS GWs.
So.. relax, it should be final very soon. 8)
Talentz
Fresh from the press, but finally a new addition for the sub 20 seat segment: the Cessna 408 SkyCourier
http://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/skycourier (http://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/skycourier)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/textron-launches-beech-1900-sized-skycourier-with-fe-443667/ (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/textron-launches-beech-1900-sized-skycourier-with-fe-443667/)
Initially a cargo plane, but also marketed as a 19 seater.
(https://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/sites/default/files/styles/artikel/public/website_633x300/slider-technologie/cessna_skycourier_pax_1_ccessna-1000_0.jpg?itok=oARROqya)
Specs are as follows:
| Model: | Cessna 408 SkyCourier |
| Size class: | Small |
| Project launched: | 28-11-2017 |
| First deliveries: | 2020 |
| Cruise speed: | up to 200kts |
| Runway requirement: | 3300ft (1006m) |
| Minimum crew: | ? 1 or 2, 0 cabin |
| Seating configuration: | 19Y |
| Cargo capacity: | 6000lb (2722kg) payload, in three LD3 containers (so standard cargo should be possible) and volume for three LD3 would be 13.5m3 |
| Engine: | PWC PT6A-65SC 1100shp |
| MTOW: | ??? |
| Max payload: | 5000lb for the commuter, 6000 for the freighter |
| Range: | max 900nm, 4000nm at 5000lb payload |
| Fuel burn: | similiar to other PT6A aircraft (BE1900 or DHC6 has the closest engine, in game) |
| List price: | approximately 5.5mln USD |
Speaking of high wing props --
https://www.tecnam.com/us/aircraft/p2012-traveller/
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hwWgKqTyl7c/WOZz8ngi3fI/AAAAAAAAP2M/zfA8vfiiRM0Uc-36c8ZiNYuC6vZvzQRbwCLcB/s1600/P2012-Traveller144-810x309.jpg)
Cape Air is switching to these since Cessna didn't want to play along and give them anything non-turbo.
I've been in and out of the game for literally a decade now (Thanks Sami!) -- has there been any talk of adding different types of fuel for these smaller av-gas props?
Crew: 1/2 pilots
Capacity: 9 passengers
Payload: 1130 kg (2491 lb)
Length: 11.8 m (38.6 ft)
Wingspan: 14.0 m (45.93 ft)
Height: 4.4 m (14.4 ft)
Wing area: 25.4 m² (273.7 ft²)
Empty weight: 2250 kg (4960 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 3600 kg (7937 lb)
Fuel capacity: 800 l (212 USgal)
Powerplant: 2 × Lycoming TEO540C1A horizontally-opposed, turbocharged, six-cylinder, direct-drive air-cooled piston engines, 375 hp () each
Propellers: MT-Propeller propeller
Performance
Cruise speed: 190 kts (352 km/h)
Stall speed: 60 kts (111 km/h)
Range: 907 nm (1,680 km)
Rate of climb: 1500 ft/min (7.6 m/s) Single engine: 300 ft/min (1.5 m/s)
Wing loading: 142 kg/m² (29 lb/ft²)
Fuel consumption: 30 US gal/h (114 l/h) at 150 kn (278 km/h) [5 nmi/gal; 2.4 km/l] to 47.6 US gal/h (180 l/h) at 180 kn (333 km/h) [3.78 nmi/gal; 1.9 km/l][9]
Power/mass: 4.8 kg/hp ()
Takeoff: 600 m (1,969 ft)
Landing: 500 m (1,640 ft)
Stumbled upon this browsing the Flight International Archives:
Convair 880 Freighter conversion!
The add was from the 17 October 1979 edition.
Cheers!
Mike
Quote from: MikeS on December 10, 2017, 09:24:40 PM
Stumbled upon this browsing the Flight International Archives:
Convair 880 Freighter conversion!
The add was from the 17 October 1979 edition.
Cheers!
Mike
I couldn't find actual data on the CV880F. I look for awhile then decided to skip. But it doesn't mean I've given up completely. Just put on the back burner for a bit.
Talentz
Another family in the small aircraft sector, which has been around for a while:
The Piaggio Avanti series.
P.180 (Initial variant, 1990)
P.180 II (2005)
P.180 EVO (2016)
Could be a good aircraft in the commuter sector. Fast and updated over a longer period...
B727-200ADV
Conversion to B727AF already exists but only as freighter.
Suggest add same option for pax model.
This document from 1993 details the option offered then by Valsan:
https://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1110&context=jaaer
And another from flight International:
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1987/1987%20-%201488.html?search=valsan%20b727
The modification included exchanging the two outer engines for $8.6 Million, adding winglets for $0.5 Million and converting the cockpit to 2-man crew for
$1 Million. Total: $10.1 Million.
-Fuel burned is reduced by 12%
-Take-off field length reduced by 17%
-Range increased by 300nm
Cheers!
Mike
Cheers!
Mike
Quote from: MikeS on December 24, 2017, 03:00:49 PM
B727-200ADV
Conversion to B727AF already exists but only as freighter.
Suggest add same option for pax model.
This document from 1993 details the option offered then by Valsan:
https://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1110&context=jaaer
And another from flight International:
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1987/1987%20-%201488.html?search=valsan%20b727
The modification included exchanging the two outer engines for $8.6 Million, adding winglets for $0.5 Million and converting the cockpit to 2-man crew for
$1 Million. Total: $10.1 Million.
-Fuel burned is reduced by 12%
-Take-off field length reduced by 17%
-Range increased by 300nm
Cheers!
Mike
Yes, now that Sami has added the conversion option to AWS, this brings alot of conversion-only models into play and they will make their long awaited debut.
That said: https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,58865.msg434488.html#msg434488 (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,58865.msg434488.html#msg434488)
Quote(nb. the DC-8 and all dozens of variants is a mess .. There are probably a lot more conversion possibilities available but we've just focused on the cargo conversions for now; the system does support further pax version conversions too if data is entered. -70 series is coming soon too.)
The focus is cargo and combi for now with a nugget or two of conversions. But they will be added in due time.
So everyone keep posting models/links to data. It helps alot as opposed to researching from scratch.
Talentz
TU-204-100C
Cargo model of TU-204 family.
Extensive details available directly on the Tupolev website:
http://www.tupolev.ru/en/civil_aviation/tu-204-100s
Most probably can use existing data on aircraft and adjust the payload/range data for cargo version.
TU-204-120CE with RR engines is also shown and could be added too.
When will the A321NEO LR and the A350-900 ULR be added?
Hawker Siddeley HS.748 quick change combi version (up until full freighter configs)
Exists for the 748 2a, 2b and Super 748.
During production of the 2a, a cargo door was installed in the forward fuselage. Later version also got a large cargo door on the rear. Both doors are on the left side.
It has no specific designation, but general rule would tend to call it 2aC 2bC, etc.
Technical info and pictures here:
http://www.flyairnorth.com/Experience/our-fleet.aspx (http://www.flyairnorth.com/Experience/our-fleet.aspx)
Are there any cargo options for BAC 1-11 in AWS?
These are the specifications I found online - have no idea how reliable the data is.
http://www.bac1-11jet.co.uk/bac1-11jet.co.uk%20Specifications.htm
I am kind of concerned, as this is 1978 in GW2 and I planned to stick to BACs for some time.
Boeing 747-200F (hugely popular early cargo plane).
Bombardier Q400 Freighter - 2008 variant. Can fly 8400kg of cargo 1100nm, with a max of 9000kg at 750nm.
http://www.bombardier.com/en/media/newsList/details.1032-bombardier-q400-package-freighter-launched-by-nord-flyg.bombardiercom.html
As far as I know there never was a cargo version of the 1-11. Neither new built, nor conversion. I doubt we would see a cargo version in this game so better make
alternate plans.
Quote from: yearofthecactus on January 22, 2018, 12:31:51 AM
Boeing 747-200F (hugely popular early cargo plane).
Bombardier Q400 Freighter - 2008 variant. Can fly 8400kg of cargo 1100nm, with a max of 9000kg at 750nm.
http://www.bombardier.com/en/media/newsList/details.1032-bombardier-q400-package-freighter-launched-by-nord-flyg.bombardiercom.html
The 747 family and all of its variants is in the works. It should be ready for the next full GW.
Talentz
Quote from: MikeS on January 22, 2018, 12:33:08 AM
As far as I know there never was a cargo version of the 1-11. Neither new built, nor conversion. I doubt we would see a cargo version in this game so better make
alternate plans.
If the info on this site is good, seems there has been only a sole freighter built, model 485. However, it would still require more info to implement it in the game.
I did a bit of research. Apparently 3 were built for the Royal Omani Air Force. They have a large cargo door for the main cabin up front.
The specs seem to be based on the 475 series which makes sense. They were designated 1-11-485GD. So I guess, could be added to the game
as a 475 series conversion, using same payload/range graph?
https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/bac1-11
Quote from: Tha_Ape on January 22, 2018, 06:02:23 AM
If the info on this site is good, seems there has been only a sole freighter built, model 485. However, it would still require more info to implement it in the game.
BAe 146 Cargo and Combi
There is a combi and a cargo variant for the -200 and -300 models. And for the later improved RJ85 and RJ100
Combis are designated QC (Quick Change) and cargos QT (Quite Trader).
Some docs states that only the -200 has a QC, but that doc from BAe (with internal dimensions) says the -300 has also a combi
https://www.regional-services.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/146-RJ-Versatility-8pp-brochure-Civilian-2015-FOR-WEB-2.pdf (https://www.regional-services.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/146-RJ-Versatility-8pp-brochure-Civilian-2015-FOR-WEB-2.pdf)
(even though it's from the manufacturer, I think they don't cheat on dimensions, only on fuel burn or such)
Technical data from the EASA here (payloads, dimensions, volume, etc.)
https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/EASA-TCDS-A.182_Bae_146---AVRO_146_RJ-02-20102010.pdf (https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/EASA-TCDS-A.182_Bae_146---AVRO_146_RJ-02-20102010.pdf)
Boeing 767-200F
Quote from: DiCH on January 26, 2018, 10:43:08 PM
Boeing 767-200F
The Boeing 767-200SF and -200ER/SF are being researched. There is no 762 production freighter currently. Some will argue that the 767-2C is a factory variant offered at one point, but until some hard data surfaces, only the P2F 762s will be added.
Talentz
dreading up a few months old topic of the DC-8 super 70s ;D
The numbers I pulled for each aircraft were from several hours spent searching the internet, from information on airliners.net and other pilots sights like it, some Boeing and Douglas POH information, pilot reports, CAMcorp literature ect. The fuel burn numbers went from 8000 kg an hour at MTOW right after takeoff down to reports of dual qualified check airman who often got fuel burns within 2% of 767's so around 4800-5200 kg an hour at cruise altitude. On top of this fuel burn reduction over the 60's, they all had greatly increased range, if you research "Cammacorp" there is a ton of good information on performance specifics from when they had to get the aircraft re certified by the FAA, including setting the DC-8 non stop world record distance of 8800 miles with the standard MTOW/fuel tank's as a DC-8-62. I really appreciate that they were added to the game, but there performance doesn't really come close to reflecting the true aircraft. Even if you use the fuel burns as they are in the game their RANGE would increase proportionate to the decreased fuel burn. So even as the fuel burn sits the ranges would be 4200 nm for the DC-8-71, 6000 nm for the DC-8-72 and 5700nm for the DC-8-73.
Hmmm interesting.
8800 miles is something like 7600-ish nm. I doubt that's a normal operating range if required reserves in pax operation. Probably a max ferry with some very favorable winds. But I do get your point. You feel the ranges are still off by about 300-600nm each.
I'll look through it deeper and see what docs support this.
Talentz
I strongly suggest using
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/index.html -
you can search all their back articles for decades, they are a commercial aircraft magazine which has been an industry guide for a very long time.
Ive attached 3 different charts they provided I'll summarize as follows and come from the Oct 8 1988 edition pages 72 and 73
DC-8-71 burns 5012 kg/hr - Range 7250 nm mi
DC-8-72 burns 4890 kg/hr - Range 6225 nm mi
DC-8-73 burns 4881 kg/hr - Range 6050 nm mi
links
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1998/1998%20-%202157.html - direct link to JPG
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%202938.html - direct link to PDF 1
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%202939.html - direct link to PDF 2
http://atv.seti.org/DC8handbook.pdf - NASA Semi POH for their DC-8-72
Boeing is now the cert holder for the DC-8 and still supplies many parts, they are a wealth of information
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/dc8.pdf - Boeing DC-8 aircraft planning guide with pages DIRECTLY from DC-8-70's POH
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/company/about_bca/startup/pdf/historical/dc8-passenger.pdf - Sales Material
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/company/about_bca/startup/pdf/freighters/DC-8F.pdf - Freighter and Combi Sales/conversion Material with data DIRECT from POH
Delta did their own conversions but bought the kits from CAMMACORP
http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dl_digest_198203_article_dc-8-71.pdf?sfvrsn=2 - Delta historical reference
I forwent most of the Pilot Reports, Forum posts ect but did include the most complete I could find
https://www.yesterdaysairlines.com/airline-history-blog/united-dc-8s-pt6-super-70s-into-the-80s
If you need any more specific information Ill be happy to dig it up, hopefully you will find my efforts worthy enough to get the information updated in the game.
Thanks
Jay
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2Fkbduh5.jpg&hash=622d6db3355e4e7c99a7da8f362a1ca4ecdc2078)
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi67.tinypic.com%2Fivxoxz.jpg&hash=32c1831b952177e0e31f57343cd3a4c3b14ab91c)
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi67.tinypic.com%2F2ldfucw.jpg&hash=bbb6b94e08980f7591a2977f32c60343616146ff)
Further info on the Super 70s
I found this documentation which is rather interesting as it comes from an actual operator (ie, less likely to be twisted than the manufacturer data).
http://ialcargo.com/specs/DC8_GE.pdf (http://ialcargo.com/specs/DC8_GE.pdf)
Another one from the US authorities (Civil Aircraft Reserve Fleet)
http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/amc/publication/amcpam24-2v4_add-a/amcpam24-2v4_add-a.pdf (http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/amc/publication/amcpam24-2v4_add-a/amcpam24-2v4_add-a.pdf)
Page 9 - the range with max ACL (Aircraft Cabin Load) seems twisted, but the max ferry range might be accurate. That's for the AF variants.
Could someone please cross-check those informations with those of GW#3?
Note 1
Jay probably made a typo on the 71 max range. No way it can be 7250, exceeding the range of both the 72 and the 73.
Note 2
The range at max payload I found, taken from Jay's docs are:
71: ~ 3400 nm @ 27000 kg so a 800 nm range increase compared to GW#2's 61 at the same payload
72: ~ 5800 nm @ 20000 kg so a 1000 nm range increase compared to GW#2's 62 at the same payload
73: ~ 4200 nm @ 29000 kg so a 900 nm range increase compared to GW#2's 63 at the same payload
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on March 09, 2017, 11:11:54 PM
And let's not forget the A321LR
Manufacturer Airbus
Fleet group Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Model Airbus A321LR
Size class Large aircraft
Project launched 21st October 2017
First deliveries 2018
Area of production Europe (joint project)
Description "The A321LR is a long range medium sized aircraft intended to open new smaller routes over longer distances."
Cruise speed Mach 0.79 / 450 kts TAS
Runway requirement Slightly more than A321NEO(@ MTOW)[/i]
Turn-around time 40 mins
Minimum crew Pilots: 2, Cabin crew: 4
Seating configuration Y: 186, C: 15, F: 0 (Factory default), Maximum 240
MTOW 97000kg
Payload Slightly more than A321NEO
Range 3900nm
Average fuel burn Slightly more than A321NEO
List price Slightly more than A321NEO
https://leehamnews.com/2014/10/21/exclusive-airbus-launches-a321neolr-long-range-to-replace-757-200w/ (https://leehamnews.com/2014/10/21/exclusive-airbus-launches-a321neolr-long-range-to-replace-757-200w/)
http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airbus-launches-long-range-a321neo-version (http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airbus-launches-long-range-a321neo-version)
Today the A321LR made it's maiden voyage: http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2018/01/first-a321lr-successfully-completes-maiden-flight.html (http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2018/01/first-a321lr-successfully-completes-maiden-flight.html)
Seems like it should be in the game for at least the current GW3...
Quote from: drhyed (Crash Airline) on January 31, 2018, 12:53:39 AM
I strongly suggest using
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/index.html -
you can search all their back articles for decades, they are a commercial aircraft magazine which has been an industry guide for a very long time.
Ive attached 3 different charts they provided I'll summarize as follows and come from the Oct 8 1988 edition pages 72 and 73
DC-8-71 burns 5012 kg/hr - Range 7250 nm mi
DC-8-72 burns 4890 kg/hr - Range 6225 nm mi
DC-8-73 burns 4881 kg/hr - Range 6050 nm mi
links
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1998/1998%20-%202157.html - direct link to JPG
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%202938.html - direct link to PDF 1
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%202939.html - direct link to PDF 2
http://atv.seti.org/DC8handbook.pdf - NASA Semi POH for their DC-8-72
Boeing is now the cert holder for the DC-8 and still supplies many parts, they are a wealth of information
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/dc8.pdf - Boeing DC-8 aircraft planning guide with pages DIRECTLY from DC-8-70's POH
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/company/about_bca/startup/pdf/historical/dc8-passenger.pdf - Sales Material
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/company/about_bca/startup/pdf/freighters/DC-8F.pdf - Freighter and Combi Sales/conversion Material with data DIRECT from POH
Delta did their own conversions but bought the kits from CAMMACORP
http://www.deltamuseum.org/docs/site/aircraft-pages/dl_digest_198203_article_dc-8-71.pdf?sfvrsn=2 - Delta historical reference
I forwent most of the Pilot Reports, Forum posts ect but did include the most complete I could find
https://www.yesterdaysairlines.com/airline-history-blog/united-dc-8s-pt6-super-70s-into-the-80s
If you need any more specific information Ill be happy to dig it up, hopefully you will find my efforts worthy enough to get the information updated in the game.
Thanks
Jay
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2Fkbduh5.jpg&hash=622d6db3355e4e7c99a7da8f362a1ca4ecdc2078)
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi67.tinypic.com%2Fivxoxz.jpg&hash=32c1831b952177e0e31f57343cd3a4c3b14ab91c)
(https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi67.tinypic.com%2F2ldfucw.jpg&hash=bbb6b94e08980f7591a2977f32c60343616146ff)
Thank you for your time in looking up this data. Most of these docs have been reviewed and are part of the docs sourced that Sami has in his storage.
Overall, I see no huge holes in the ranges of the Super 70s. The majority of the docs show ranges in "
still air, no reserves". Thus, the number adjust by Sami would be lower then what the docs show to reflect "winds and typical reserve fuel (1hr)". While Im sure airlines in the early 80s managed to stretch there fuel to make a flight work, AWS can't replicate that...
Please keep in mind that the configurations for the Super 70s are increased over the -60s. The -71/73 take additional 18 pax and the -72 takes 3 more pax. Thus the range values for the aircraft's would seem "off" in general.
That said, I will make a bug report for the DC-8-72. It seems its max payload range should be increased by about 225nm and its max range should be about 7225nm.
Talentz
It's interesting all the work that has gone in to finding these details on the DC-8, given these planes are nerfed by the too small warning in the late 70s, making how far they can fly and how economically almost entirely redundant ;D
Quote from: yearofthecactus on February 04, 2018, 11:35:28 AM
It's interesting all the work that has gone in to finding these details on the DC-8, given these planes are nerfed by the too small warning in the late 70s, making how far they can fly and how economically almost entirely redundant ;D
As for where I'm flying from, I don't know what's worse, either the "too small" penalty I might get, or the 3/4 empty larger bird I would get if selecting something more recent. ;D
QuotePlease keep in mind that the configurations for the Super 70s are increased over the -60s. The -71/73 take additional 18 pax and the -72 takes 3 more pax. Thus the range values for the aircraft's would seem "off" in general.
Where are you getting that info from? If you configure any of the seating in the -60 series aircraft to match the "default" seating as the -70 series they are EXACTLY THE SAME!
The default for the -61 is 180-15-6 the default for the -71 is 204-15, guess what happens when you select 15 standard C class seats on a -61? you can install a maximum of 204 standard Y class seats, which means it defaults to the EXACT SAME SEATING CAPACITY.
So no they dont take any more additional pax, and since the MTOW for both aircraft is the same (60 series and 70 series) where would they find the room to stuff additional seats?
At this point its become obvious from the rationalizations and justifications given to refute the evidence I have presented that this is a pointless argument on my part. There wasn't ever any intent to correct the aircraft performance. It would be operationally and scientifically impossible for the 70 series aircraft to perform as poorly as they do in the game. The CFM-56 engines as installed on the 70 series were 28% to 33% more fuel efficient in all phases of flight than the JT-3's they replaced while producing 3000 lbs more thrust. So when you factor the Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption for each engine along with all the other data given (performance charts, POH's, multiple pilot reports that repeatedly point out the DC-8-70's achieved fuel burn within 2% of the 767-200 which in the game is 5020 kg/hr) it would be impossible for the DC-8-73 to have ONLY A 1% INCREASE IN RANGE and ONLY A 15% REDUCTION IN FUEL BURN. How is it that the 70's series can defy physics? The Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption for the 2 engines is:
JT3D-7 0.52 lb/lbf hr
CFM56-2C1 0.35 lb/lbf hr
A difference of 33% less fuel burned while producing 3000lbs more thrust, as stated above.
Unless the DC-8-73 can defy the laws of physics it would be impossible for an aircrew to achieve the performance as it currently sits in the game.
Super 63 - 9350 kg Hr burn, Super 73 - 7990 kg Hr burn, a reduction of 15%
Super 63 - 4970 nm range, Super 73 - 5020nm range, an increase of 1%
So what are they doing with all that fuel they couldnt possible burn even if they wanted to? Just dumping it overboard to get below maximum landing weight (MLW)? How are they remaining at Mach 0.80 / 459 kts TAS with engines that produce MORE THRUST AND BURN LESS FUEL at any given power setting? Kicking the aircraft grossly out of trim and flying with the landing gear down? (Which anyone who knows anything about aircraft airspeed limitations knows is impossible)
I wish you would have told me weeks ago there was never any chance you were willing to correct the data on the 70's series to reflect actual aircraft performance. I wouldn't have wasted a several hours of my time to produce irrefutable evidence in the hopes I would find an open minded audience of Administrators. Hopefully this will serve as a lesson to others who are willing to give freely of there time to help improve the game that its a waste of time and they will face nothing but rationalizations and justifications about why the data already in the game is "correct" even in the face of multiple sets of empirical evidence and the laws of physics (thermodynamics, aerodynamics, structural dynamics)
So thanks anyway
Jay
Hi Jay,
I understand your frustration. It does take a lot of time to find data sometimes, but I think you should post it under "Bug Reports" in order to get the data reviewed.
I made another search on the subject and came up with the Boeing document for airport planing:
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/dc8.pdf
Accordingly, as an example, the payload range of DC8-63 vs 73 in proper operational conditions (with reserves, alternate etc) is:
DC8-63: ~ 4050nm at 259 pax with baggage (page 69 of PDF)
DC8-73: ~ 4550nm at 259 pax with baggage (page 73 of PDF) ~12.5% increase in range
So, it would apear, ranges would need to be reduced in AWS!?
Cheers!
Mike
Quote from: drhyed (Crash Airline) on February 04, 2018, 03:59:50 PM
my time to produce irrefutable evidence in the hopes I would find an open minded audience of Administrators. Hopefully this will serve as a lesson to others who are willing to give freely of there time to help improve the game that its a waste of time and they will face nothing but rationalizations and justifications about why the data already in the game is "correct
What on earth are you talking about here?
I have made absolutely no comment on anything talked here about these aircraft so far.
Any indications when the changelog to insert the aircraft added in the database in the last week will happen? :)
Regionals will be added today, others later.
Quote from: qunow on September 29, 2017, 07:24:44 PM
Data:
CR929-600: length 63.07m, wingspan 61m, height 17.91m. Fuelsage height 6.068m and fuelsage width 5.920m, cabin width: 5.588m, range 12000km is with a payload of 28.84t and typical seating of 280, MTOW 234t, MLW 190t
Proposed to use RR or GE engine at launch but will offer Chinese CJ2000 engine or/and Russian PD35 engine when they're developed.
Project expected to take 10 years' time until delivery although the most ambitious plan call for first flight at 2021.
CR929-500: 250 seats 14000km
CR929-700: 320 seats 10000km
LNC (independant analysist) has posted some articles regarding the CRC929 Series:
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/15/chinese-russian-widebody-project-takes-shape/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/15/chinese-russian-widebody-project-takes-shape/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/18/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-2/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/18/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-2/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/25/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-3/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/25/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-3/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/01/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-4/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/01/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-4/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/12/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-5/#more-26269 (https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/12/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-5/#more-26269)
Highlights:
Quote
- The Chinese and Russian widebody program has taken off after the joint company was established spring 2017.
- The organization of the company is set, with the Chinese taking the rudder by the power of a five times larger market and economy and a 10 times larger population.
- The joint company, CRAIC, issued its first vendor RFP to GE and Rolls-Royce before Christmas for the aircraft's propulsion system.
- The CR929-600 is closely modelled after the Boeing 787-9. The overall design and dimensions are similar.
- The major difference to the 787-9 is in cabin width, allowing comfortable nine abreast seating, and the Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW).
- The decision to design CR929-600 for a lower MTOW has restricted range to 6,500nm with the nominal cabin capacity of 280 passengers.
- The Chinese and Russian widebody program has high ambitions. The structure shall be composites and the systems state of the art.
- The Chinese and Russian widebody program needs engines in the 75,000lbf thrust class.
- The project's engine specification is closely modeled after the engines available from the Boeing 787 project.
- In addition to the available 787 engines, the Chinese and Russian engine industry is trying to unite behind a joint engine proposal.
- The CR929-600 is modeled closely after the 787-9. The technology for structures, systems, engines and aerodynamics are similar.
- With a similar payload capacity, the fuel consumption should be better as the CR929 is defined with a lower maximum range.
- It's wider cabin eats up the weight and drag advantage, however.
- There will be little difference between the efficiency of the 787-9 and the 15 years younger CR929.
The BAe Jetstream 31 is in the game, but the predecessor Handley Page Jetstream 1 and Series 200 is missing.
Jetstream 1
Cruise - 244kt
Turn time - 15 minutes
Seating - 18 pax
Max range - 410NM
Powerplants - X2 Turbomeca Astazou XIV
MTOW - 5657 kg
Max payload - 1814 kg
Minimum runway - 777 m
Fuel burn - 312 kg/hr
Crew - 2
Announced 1967
EIS 1969
I don't have pricing and I'm not sure how you usually determine that...but I found list for the 200, so maybe it can be generated from that.
Source - https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1969/1969%20-%203021.PDF
Jetstream 200
Cruise - 248kt
Turn time - 15 minutes
Seating - 18 pax
Max range - 420NM
Powerplants - X2 Turbomeca Astazou XVI
MTOW - 5670 kg
Max payload - 1740 kg
Minimum runway - 792 m
Fuel burn - 310 kg/hr
Crew - 2
Announced 1969
EIS 1972
Cost - $800,000 in 1972
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1972/1972%20-%201927.html?search=%22jetstream%20200%22
Sami, do you have any timeline for the 747 cargo models which have been on the aircraft in game page for a couple of weeks now. This is something I've been waiting for for such a long time, it'd be great to get them in :)
Sorry to keep banging this drum, but the 747 freighters were added to the "aircraft in game" page towards the end of January, yet they are nowhere to be seen and the scent has gone quiet.
They 747-200fs are a key part of my airlines strategy in gw1, and the 747-400fs are key to pending/in development strategy in gw2.
I don't need either right now (gw1 3-4 game years) and gw2 10 years from now. But in gw1 I'm getting very nervous about their availability.
Please can we have some kind of timeline as to when they might be arriving. The 747 freighters were hugely important IRL, and the most frequently flown long range freighter of the 70s and 80s. It's pretty odd that so much effort has gone into researching and adding minor freighter variants of other aircraft and these have taken so long. I really appreciate the complexities and you're doing a great job increasing the database so much recently, but lets fill in the big gaps.
On that note and just to add, if they are not going to be added within the next real life month, that's OK. But tell me so I can change airline planning. When you run an airline of several hundred aircraft, you are learning cargo, and you are limited to 3 fleet types (effectively 2 with space for a switch), planning is super important. Not knowing if the cargo variant for the long haul plane I went for is going to be added affects decisions on switching out the short haul planes... both what type and more important when it can be done.
I don't want anything added that isn't ready, and I don't want anything rushed. But please offer some kind, even tentatively of a timeline, as having been added to the in game aircraft page, I assumed they'd be here already. The game I'm playing atm is the guessing game, and with the DC-10 having a brilliant and known about cargo variant that my rivals chose, it's just isn't fair that I don't know if I'll have a plane available to compete at all, when in reality I went with that aircraft thinking it was a given as they were added to the in game aircraft game a long time ago.
If they aren't likely to come in the next few weeks, just say (and remove them from the in game aircraft page). It's imperative I know however.
Why no Antonov cargo birds?
AN124-100
AN74TK-300 (Combi cargo/pax)
AN148 Frieghter option
And Antonov-225!
Quote from: MidWorld on March 01, 2018, 03:04:05 PM
And Antonov-225!
The Mriya would make the 747-8 and the A380 look an A321 in terms of its usefulness in AWS
Maybe an oversized cargo could be added? This would require nose or tail loading. Aircraft in this category would be 748F, A124, A225, L100 Hercules and a few others.
Flights would be limited around some oil/aviation industrial cities, but incredibly lucrative. E.g. fixed lines that require these aircraft like PAE/SEA-NGO (787 parts). Would be interesting to think of the choice of adding another fleet for limited routes, opening another route for said routes, etc.
P.s. the 747-8 can be really useful
(https://i.imgur.com/9FFELjC.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/aCpi6XS.png)
Tecnam P2012
Planned release 2019
Cape Air has 100 ordered for commercial use.
https://www.tecnam.com/us/aircraft/p2012-traveller/
MD 80 freighter conversion.
I do not know if anyone has ever noted that this aircraft is missing or requested that it be added to the database.
Here is the information I have been able to find out about it:
1. From Wikipedia:Freighter conversions
In February 2010, Aeronautical Engineers Inc. (AEI) based in Miami, Florida announced it was beginning a freighter conversion program for the MD-80 series.[7] The converted aircraft use the "MD-80SF" designation. AEI was the first firm to receive a supplemental type certificate for the MD-80 family from the FAA in February 2013.[8] The first conversion was undertaken on an ex-American Airlines MD-82 aircraft, which was used as a testbed for the supplemental type.[9] The MD-80SF made its inaugural flight on 28 September 2012. AEI is certified to perform conversions on MD-81, MD-82, MD-83, and MD-88 aircraft. The launch customer for the conversion service is Everts Air Cargo.[7] In October 2015, the MD-80SF was approved by the EASA.[8] The first MD-80SF was delivered to Everts Air Cargo in February 2013.[10]
2. From Aeronatical Engineers Inc website: Please see attached image. The data sheet can be found at the following link: http://www.aeronautical-engineers.com/media/products/data_sheets/MD-80_Spec_Sheet.pdf (http://www.aeronautical-engineers.com/media/products/data_sheets/MD-80_Spec_Sheet.pdf)
Hello,
Quick request for info on the 767 line of freighters. This is in relation to GW2. I have a fleet of 747´s that are not getting younger and I need to make plans.
Thank you in advance for the info.
Cheers
Scott
There will be 763F in early 1990s
I wonder when freighter versions of MD80s and MD90s will be available in gameworlds. I also wonder if it will ever have freighter versions of regional jets like Fokker 100s, ERJs, E-jets, Fairchild-Dornier 528 family...
Quote from: wilian.souza2 on April 13, 2018, 04:33:49 PM
I wonder when freighter versions of MD80s and MD90s will be available in gameworlds. I also wonder if it will ever have freighter versions of regional jets like Fokker 100s, ERJs, E-jets, Fairchild-Dornier 528 family...
uh...
MD-80 freighter: Eventually..
MD-90 freighter: Doesn't exist.
F-100: Doesn't exist
ERJ-145: Program started in 2016; no info or aircraft as of today.
EMBs: Doesn't exist
FD-528: Truly doesn't exist...
Hope that clears things a bit.
Talentz
Don't remember the date the MD F was introduced, but it could become quite important and make the family more attractive, as there is no modern workhorse-derived freighter between the 732F and 733F (bar the 757, which can't really be considered a workhorse, and that only a handful of airlines have a use for).
Makes a big hole in the continuity of cargo ops for airlines that try to cover cargo as well but can't afford an extra type.
Quote from: Tha_Ape on April 13, 2018, 06:21:36 PM
Don't remember the date the MD F was introduced, but it could become quite important and make the family more attractive, as there is no modern workhorse-derived freighter between the 732F and 733F (bar the 757, which can't really be considered a workhorse, and that only a handful of airlines have a use for).
Makes a big hole in the continuity of cargo ops for airlines that try to cover cargo as well but can't afford an extra type.
March 2013 revenue service is when the MD-82SF (all variants) began... So that doesn't really help.
As far as Lg freighters, no, there really is no option between the 2nd gen and 3rd gen.
Err actually, the Tu-204 family has freighter and combi variants. New builds. So, when those are added (no idea when), then we'll have a new build 90s freighter.
Also, were missing freighter and combi variants on the Russian metal side... there could be options there as well. Its standard practice for Russian aircraft family to have a minimum of 25 variants™. :laugh:
Talentz
Quote from: Talentz on April 13, 2018, 07:13:45 PM
Also, were missing freighter and combi variants on the Russian metal side... there could be options there as well. Its standard practice for Russian aircraft family to have a minimum of 25 variants™. :laugh:
:laugh: :laugh:
Right on point!
This afternoon I was looking for info about the Il-76. Found so many variants, and plenty of info for all those variants, but always incomplete. I gave up.
I might resume my quest later on, but the Il-76 is not the most important bird for the game.
Gosh, MD-80s will get freighter versions only in the 2010s... A320s in the 2010s, too... a lot of regional jets will take long aswell to get freighter versions and other aircraft will never have one! :(
Either Sami starts to consider a lift on fleetgroup penalties to accomodate a 4th fleet for freighter aircraft, or I'll have to hold on to DC9s till 2030!
@ Wilian
If you really wanna know, there's a guy still flying DC-6 (in GW#2). And yes, he's in green.
Could have been the freighter version :P
I guess it's the same guy whom I leased some Convair 440s not long ago. ;D
But I'm fine with my current fleet, no need to change soon.
Quote from: wilian.souza2 on April 13, 2018, 08:03:26 PM
Gosh, MD-80s will get freighter versions only in the 2010s... A320s in the 2010s, too... a lot of regional jets will take long aswell to get freighter versions and other aircraft will never have one! :(
Either Sami starts to consider a lift on fleetgroup penalties to accomodate a 4th fleet for freighter aircraft, or I'll have to hold on to DC9s till 2030!
Isnt theres a saying 'as the last 737 flies to the scrapper, a dc9 flies the crew out' or something like that? ;D
Bombardier CRJ200F. Could make the CRJ's a bit more valid...
Quote from: TFC1 on April 19, 2018, 08:46:12 AM
Bombardier CRJ200F. Could make the CRJ's a bit more valid...
in RC, CRJ200SF was convertible from june 2014.
Maybe just not on the aircraft list, but I guess we are missing the conversions for the CV-240 family
CV-240 --> CV-600 (Dart engines)
CV-340/440 --> CV-580 (Allison engines)
CV-340/440 --> CV-640 (Dart engines)
Also a thing that would be cool to have, but I'm probably opening a can of worms here, would be some business jets, especially the early ones like the Lockheed JetStar or the (sadly never reaching serial production) McDonnell 220. The later was able to be configured at up to 26 seats and fly 2000NM. Could be an interesting airplane in the late 50s early 60s in this game.
QuoteMaybe just not on the aircraft list, but I guess we are missing the conversions for the CV-240 family
CV-240 --> CV-600 (Dart engines)
CV-340/440 --> CV-580 (Allison engines)
CV-340/440 --> CV-640 (Dart engines)
+1
Couldn't find the A/C thread earlier but posted over on feature requests support for the CV-340/440 --> CV-580 as this would allow these old birds to be put to use later on as cargo only
Link here:https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,76929.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,76929.0.html)
Any idea when (assuming it's in the game) the DC7-F is abaikable as a conversion from the DC7.
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.
Apologies.
Since the DC7-F was available with the DC7B IRL it is technically currently 'missing'
All historical records I've seen suggest the first DC7 freighter (of any variant) was the DC7CF rolled out:
Quote
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
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
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 (https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/md-xx.htm)
Talentz
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
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?
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
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
Quote from: Talentz on August 01, 2018, 12:41:02 AM
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.
something for the "early days" scenarios:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_C102_Jetliner
Quote from: dandan on October 15, 2018, 11:42:50 AM
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 :-\
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
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.
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
With the first A321LR being delivered might we expect it for GW3 at least ;D
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-arkia-becomes-first-customer-to-receive-ai-453624/ (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 (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-indicates-a321xlr-would-have-over-100t-mtow-453590/?cmpid=SOC%7CTwitter%7CFlightglobal%7Csf202285070%7Csf202285070&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf202285070)
I think it could be added as well on a prototype basis:
Quote"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
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on November 14, 2018, 10:17:36 AM
With the first A321LR being delivered might we expect it for GW3 at least ;D
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-arkia-becomes-first-customer-to-receive-ai-453624/ (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
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
The Bombardier CRJ NextGen, are they allready included?
bae146qt https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,79701.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,79701.0.html)
How about something tough like a revamped DC3 Basler BT67?
Video: https://youtu.be/q4qdjjHcadE
https://www.baslerturbo.com/history.html
https://www.baslerturbo.com/specifications.html
https://www.baslerturbo.com/power-and-performance.html
Could be offered in game as a new aircraft (since there wouldn't have any DC3 available for conversion in 1990) and in its own fleetgroup. Offered in pax and cargo versions. 8)
Quote from: wilian.souza2 on January 19, 2019, 02:46:39 AM
Could be offered in game as a new aircraft (since there wouldn't have any DC3 available for conversion in 1990) and in its own fleetgroup. Offered in pax and cargo versions. 8)
you didnt keep your DC3 from 1950 so they could be upgraded to a BT67 in 1990 and you could ruin your company? that was shortsighted! :laugh:
Quote from: dandan on January 19, 2019, 12:56:48 PM
you didnt keep your DC3 from 1950 so they could be upgraded to a BT67 in 1990 and you could ruin your company? that was shortsighted! :laugh:
I stressed that it should be launched as new aircraft because it's impossible to operate (or store) an aircraft for so long here... ::)
I would love to see a 777 Combi:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-sets-1997-date-for-777-combi-24427/ (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-sets-1997-date-for-777-combi-24427/)
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on January 23, 2019, 07:29:17 AM
I would love to see a 777 Combi:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-sets-1997-date-for-777-combi-24427/ (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-sets-1997-date-for-777-combi-24427/)
That would be interesting. With 747, MD-11 and 777 Combi/freighter options... A330/340 looking even worse.
Though, once the 747 Combi data is finalized, Going 747 wont be such a bad move after all.
As for that DC-3 conversion. I have already researched basic data for the BT-67 and Super DC-3S. So the data is there the bigger issue is
feet group. A new fleet group requires alot more detailed data then provided and alot of it is on Sami's side (programing ect). So don't expect it soon :)
FYI: I have submitted over ten new models/fleet groups of data last year.
Talentz
Sami i Think I have asked you this before ...not sure . Why isn't the SANCASE Languedoc in your data base , they made many more then some other models in the data base . About 5 airlines flew them ..not that successful a but decent transition airplane for early century games
Quote from: saetta on January 28, 2019, 04:57:44 AM
SANCASE Languedoc
What is this that I can't find even on Google? ::)
Quote from: wilian.souza2 on January 28, 2019, 11:54:34 AM
What is this that I can't find even on Google? ::)
SNCASE...
Thanks!
A350-900ULR
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350_XWB#A350-900ULR
Yes Zobelle is correct SNCASE.....the mystery airliner used by Air France ,AVIACO, Air Lebanon , LOT and a few others, not that great but better then some other planes we have on the data base for that period. I don't know why but Sami never answers about this
Quote from: saetta on January 29, 2019, 03:55:14 PM
Yes Zobelle is correct SNCASE.....the mystery airliner used by Air France ,AVIACO, Air Lebanon , LOT and a few others, not that great but better then some other planes we have on the data base for that period. I don't know why but Sami never answers about this
oh, yes, and the FW200 Condor as well please!!! :D
Quote from: DiCH on January 28, 2019, 11:47:15 PM
A350-900ULR
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350_XWB#A350-900ULR
And the A321LR
I don't thick the condor was ever used by any carrier after WW 2 ...but very cool plane
Brand new, the Bombardier CRJ550: https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/newsList/details.bca-20180206-bombardier-launches-new-innovative-50-seater-aircra.bombardiercom.html . Sounds cool.
Quote from: Springbal on February 07, 2019, 11:17:49 AM
Brand new, the Bombardier CRJ550: https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/newsList/details.bca-20180206-bombardier-launches-new-innovative-50-seater-aircra.bombardiercom.html . Sounds cool.
I'm honestly not sure there is a market. ERJs don't sell that well, those days.
Quote from: Springbal on February 07, 2019, 11:17:49 AM
Brand new, the Bombardier CRJ550: https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/newsList/details.bca-20180206-bombardier-launches-new-innovative-50-seater-aircra.bombardiercom.html . Sounds cool.
turns out it's just a CRJ700 with 50 seats in three classes. Not really a new model.
So its like a CRJ705? You can already configure it with spacious seating... and haul 1500k CL too.
Talentz
Quote from: Talentz on February 08, 2019, 01:08:52 AM
So its like a CRJ705? You can already configure it with spacious seating... and haul 1500k CL too.
Talentz
maybe the extra handluggage compartment will count for medium cargo ;)
I can see the Boeing 247, 307, 377 and 377F in the database... but no Boeing 314 Clipper yet. Here's proof that it ever existed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_314_Clipper (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_314_Clipper)
According to the source mentioned, the B314 Clipper was produced between 1939 and 1941 in real life, and there were some variants: Model 314, Model 314A, B-314, C-98, and the Model 306 concept (which included a tailless planform, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Model_306 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Model_306)). The last of Boeing 314 Clippers was retired by the year 1948 in real life, according to Wikipedia. So it's a good addition to the database in my opinion :laugh:.
-Emily (age 15)
Quote from: EmilyHampstead on February 24, 2019, 02:04:46 AM
The last of Boeing 314 Clippers was retired by the year 1948 in real life, according to Wikipedia. So it's a good addition to the database in my opinion :laugh:.
-Emily (age 15)
Not if it was dead and buried before game's beginning.
I agree
seaplanes are not managed yet by the game. Considering the era we play, they'd be fringe at best.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on February 24, 2019, 08:33:02 AM
seaplanes are not managed yet by the game. Considering the era we play, they'd be fringe at best.
I'm in love with seaplanes, probably even more than with planes, but still, it makes absolute sense not to integrate them into the game.
Yes, the Double Sunrise route is something someone would dream of in the early days, but it doesn't justify a complete new chapter of the game for something that would be played only 5 years at best (and that if the GW starts in 1950).
BAe 146 QT and QC
I realise there was no specific set data from BAe but surely we can simply use the statistics from one or another known specifications and apply it here so we can enjoy the benefits of this aircraft in AWS.
Haven't I forgotten these civil-use aircraft families?
- AASI Jetcruzer family (family of small turboprop aircraft; manufactured by Advanced Aerodynamics and Structures Inc. (AASI); variants are Jetcruzer 450, Jetcruzer 500, Jetcruzer 650 and Stratocruzer 1250; first flight in 1989; introduced in 1994; evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASI_Jetcruzer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASI_Jetcruzer))
- Adam A500/700 family (family of small piston-engine aircraft; manufactured by Adam Aircraft Industries; variants are Adam A500 and the Adam A700 prototype; first flight in 2002; evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A500 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A500) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A700 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A700)
- Yeoman Cropmaster (family of small flat-engine aircraft; manufactured by Yeoman Aviation; first flight and introduction in 1960; evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeoman_Cropmaster (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeoman_Cropmaster))
-Emily (age 15)
Quote from: EmilyHampstead on February 24, 2019, 11:09:30 AM
Haven't I forgotten these civil-use aircraft families?
- AASI Jetcruzer family (family of small turboprop aircraft; manufactured by Advanced Aerodynamics and Structures Inc. (AASI); variants are Jetcruzer 450, Jetcruzer 500, Jetcruzer 650 and Stratocruzer 1250; first flight in 1989; introduced in 1994; evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASI_Jetcruzer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASI_Jetcruzer))
- Adam A500/700 family (family of small piston-engine aircraft; manufactured by Adam Aircraft Industries; variants are Adam A500 and the Adam A700 prototype; first flight in 2002; evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A500 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A500) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A700 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_A700)
- Yeoman Cropmaster (family of small flat-engine aircraft; manufactured by Yeoman Aviation; first flight and introduction in 1960; evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeoman_Cropmaster (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeoman_Cropmaster))
-Emily (age 15)
Sorry but this would just be useless "clutter". Absolutely no chance anyone in their right minds would make any use of these planes. So they get launched, sit awaiting orders --> no orders placed = just another load of clutter nobody needs ! Sorry to be harsh Emily, but be realistic.
Business jets and seaplanes are not part of the simulation.
If we had a free fleet type under "niche" (Biz jets, A380, Concorde) I'd try one out just for fun. I could see some smaller NYC area airports being premium heavy even if low on pax.
Has for sure been brought up before, but still missing even though it is already flying:
Irkut MC-21
The development and certification is further underway than that of the COMAC C919 and that has been in the game for quite a while now... so why discriminate the poor MC-21? ;) More production capacity in this aircraft size is always in high demand, so I think it would be good for the game-play as well, as it gives more of a reason to stay away from the A320/B737 series of aircraft.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irkut_MC-21
Range is supposed to be only 200NM shorter than A320neo/B738MAX and because of its lighter weight the MC-21 might even have a fuel burn advantage, I obviously don't have the exact performance data...
Types currently under development are the (single class, not HD-seating):
150 seat MC-21-200
181 seat MC-21-300
later versions are supposed to be a:
212 seat MC-21-400 and MC-21-400ER
and a super-high range MC-21-200LR
I really believe that this aircraft family would make the last 15 years of the game a lot more interesting and should definitely be added.
Cheers,
Cedric
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on February 12, 2018, 08:16:43 AM
LNC (independant analysist) has posted some articles regarding the CRC929 Series:
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/15/chinese-russian-widebody-project-takes-shape/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/15/chinese-russian-widebody-project-takes-shape/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/18/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-2/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/18/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-2/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/25/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-3/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/25/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-3/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/01/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-4/ (https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/01/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-4/)
https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/12/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-5/#more-26269 (https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/12/chinese-russian-widebody-takes-shape-part-5/#more-26269)
Highlights:
More info on the CR929: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/interview-cr929-boss-details-progress-timeline-456061/?cmpid=SOC|Twitter|Flightglobal|sf208396874|sf208396874&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf208396874 (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/interview-cr929-boss-details-progress-timeline-456061/?cmpid=SOC%7CTwitter%7CFlightglobal%7Csf208396874%7Csf208396874&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf208396874)
The Canadair CL-44, Britannia-derived.
Been talked about already, but couldn't find any info so far on the forum.
Here is some: https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1958/1958-1-%20-%200905.html (https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1958/1958-1-%20-%200905.html)
(check all 4 pages, with specs, performance and graphs).
And possibly here as well: https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/canadair-cl-44-yukon/133 (https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/canadair-cl-44-yukon/133)
Existed both in pax and cargo variant, and then there was a stretched-fuselage one, the 44J.
Quote from: Tha_Ape on March 01, 2019, 03:03:36 PM
The Canadair CL-44, Britannia-derived.
Been talked about already, but couldn't find any info so far on the forum.
Here is some: https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1958/1958-1-%20-%200905.html (https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1958/1958-1-%20-%200905.html)
(check all 4 pages, with specs, performance and graphs).
And possibly here as well: https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/canadair-cl-44-yukon/133 (https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/canadair-cl-44-yukon/133)
Existed both in pax and cargo variant, and then there was a stretched-fuselage one, the 44J.
Researched, 4 models of data submitted. It's a whole new fleet group which means eventually, we'll get it in the game.
Talentz
Quote from: Talentz on March 01, 2019, 06:31:41 PM
Researched, 4 models of data submitted. It's a whole new fleet group which means eventually, we'll get it in the game.
Talentz
4 models? Which one is the 4th one? You include the Conroy Skymonster? ???
And not put into the Britannia fleet group because of different speed? They still seems pretty similar, don't they?
Great thing anyway, thanks Albert :)
4 models: CL-44D4, CL-44D4-1, CL-44J and -J freighter. Eco cruise @ 340knts. It used the Tnye engines as per Vangaurd.
I would rather see a new fleet group for the faster speed. 340 vs 310knt over 3000nm is a big difference. Since the main reason ppl would consider this type for LH duty, speed would be a good selling point.
Talentz
Sami, if I give you data for the Irkut MC-21, will you buy me a cupcake?I have no idea how maintenance costs are estimated.
Manufacturer: Irkut
Area of Development: Russia
Projected Monthly Production: 6 per month
Crew: 2 pilots, 3 cabin
Turn time: 40 minutes minimum
Cruise Speed: Mach 0.80/533 knots
Stage 4 Noise Compliant
Project Launched: December 2006
First Deliveries: Uhhh 2021?
Size Class: Large Aircraft
Irkut MC-21-200
Default Configuration: C12 Y120
Max Configuartion: 153Y
List Price: 72.0M USD
Runway Requirement: 1560 m
MTOW: 72,560 kg
Max Payload: 18,900 kg
Cargo Volume: 31.1m^3
Engine Option 1 - Pratt and Whitney PW1428G-JM
SFC: 1990 kg/hr
Range: 3455 nm
Engine Option 2 - United Engine Corporation/Aviadvigatel PD-14A
SFC: 2135 kg/hr
Range: Same as PW? Irkut doesn't break it out.
Irkut MC-21-300
Default Configuration: C16 Y147
Max Configuration: 182Y
List Price: 96.1M USD
Crew: 2 pilots, 4 cabin
Runway Requirement: 1580 m
MTOW: 79,250 kg
Max Payload: 22,600 kg
Cargo Volume: 49m^3
Engine Option 1 - Pratt and Whitney PW1431G-JM
SFC: 2095 kg/hr
Range: 3240 nm
Engine Option 2 - United Engine Corporation/Aviadvigatel PD-14
SFC: 2245 kg/hr
Range: Same as PW? Irkut doesn't break it out.
Fuel consumption is a PITA because official figures aren't published. But we can work backwards towards it. PW suggests a 16% reduction against a CFM-56 benchmark, and Aviadvigatel suggest a 10% reduction against a CFM-56 benchmark.
http://www.avid.ru/en/pd14/
https://www.mtu.de/fileadmin/DE/7_News_Media/2_Media/Broschueren/Engines/PW1000G.pdf
MS-21-200 Fuel Consumption Calculation
- For apples to apples, we will use the average of 737-700 & A319 CFM-56 fuel burn to compare to the MS-21-200, as they are the closest approximations in size.
- 737-700 with CFM-56 average consumption: 2505 kg/hr
- A319 with CFM-56 average consumption: 2235 kg/hr
- Average of A319/737 fuel consumption: 2370 kg/hr
- PW-1400 16% decrease in fuel consumption rounded to nearest 5: 1990 kg/hr
- PD-14 10% decrease in fuel consumption rounded to nearest 5: 2135 kg/hr
MS-21-300 Fuel Consumption Calculation
- For apples to apples, we will use the average of 737-800 & A320 CFM-56 fuel burn to compare to the MS-21-200, as they are the closest approximations in size.
- 737-800 with CFM-56 average consumption: 2545 kg/hr
- A320 with CFM-56 average consumption: 2445 kg/hr
- Average of A320/738 fuel consumption: 2495 kg/hr
- PW-1400 16% decrease in fuel consumption rounded to nearest 5: 2095 kg/hr
- PD-14 10% decrease in fuel consumption rounded to nearest 5: 2245 kg/hr
Both of these figures are consistent with the NEO/Max performance improvements over the standard A320/737 series.
Sources:
http://mc21eng.irkut.com/family/characteristics/?PAGEN_1=1&SIZEN_1=1
https://www.uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/lineup/civil/ms-21/#aircraft-specific
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2017-05-30/russias-irkut-mc-21-300-performs-first-flight
http://newsinflight.com/2018/04/11/russian-mc-21-debut-in-autumn-2018/
https://leehamnews.com/2016/02/08/irkut-mc-21-first-analysis/
https://www.uacrussia.ru/upload/iblock/fc4/fc47f6803bdd052b8f6debc4afa10b4c.pdf
Can we have the Convair conversions and freighter options on the 240/340/440?
Missing are the TP upgrades and freighters
Quote from: jezbanks on April 07, 2019, 07:42:02 AM
Can we have the Convair conversions and freighter options on the 240/340/440?
Missing are the TP upgrades and freighters
I think the data has been provided already. Maybe there's something missing still?
I can't wait for the TP Convairs!
Bombardier CS Series to Airbus A220 Series in early 2017.
Will this be added to the game?
Quote from: Ty on May 29, 2019, 01:23:48 AM
Bombardier CS Series to Airbus A220 Series in early 2017.
Will this be added to the game?
All newer GWs already call it the A220, the update just wasn't applied to existing GWs at the time.
I believe the only GW where it hasn't been changed is GW4
since i got to check the AWS-data of the avro canada jetliner:
crew is 2+1 in AWS. also a flight engineer was on board, so it should be 3+1 probably (which makes sense for a 4-engine aircraft in the 1950ies).
the pax capacity is 36 in high density in AWS; actually, that is correct as the initial passenger capacity according to design specification, and what the first aircraft was using, 9 rows x 4 abreast. the maximum capacity of the jetliner should have been 50. 10 rows x 5 abreast; although, the seat pitch remained the same: the second prototype was already built with a 0,59m longer fuselage. so in my opinion seating should maybe be at 50 hd/40 standard eco.
references on this:
http://www.fliegerweb.com/de/lexicon/Geschichte/A.V.+Roe+Canada+Ltd.+C.102+Jetliner-610 [attention, german]
https://torontoist.com/2013/08/historicist-soaring-into-the-jet-age/
Just had a look at the Fairchild F-27 and FH-227
The Fairchild F-27 seats less people than the Fokker one (40 vs 44). However this wouldn't change much, except offering a 2nd prod line for the same a/c (which to some extent could be pretty interesting, as they would be in the same fleet group). Still, it had a larger tank, which coupled with 4 less pax means more range.
But the real change comes with the FH-227, seating more pax (usually 52, like the Mk500, but with a larger pitch, max seating up tu 56), and coming earlier to the market.
Couldn't find any hard data on these so far, but I'll keep digging.
A new cargo conversion for the Boeing 777-300ER has been announced - which is being called the 777-300ERSF. Story is here: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/gecas-and-iai-launch-777-300er-cargo-conversion-461491/
This page has additional technical details: http://bigtwinfreighter.com/facts-figures/
In terms of gameplay, it looks like the cargo conversion was "announced" October 16, 2019 with first production December 2020 and service entry in late 2022. Reported to have a 4,500nm range with 819m3 of cargo volume and max payload of 101.6 tons. Conversion price estimated at $35m.
For cargo conversions, once the aircraft is flying-ish, it can be converted. So far, their still in the STC phase from what I read. Once the STC is certified, shortly after it becomes the "available" for conversion date.
Which I will be looking forward to once its in the air. It will give Pax 777 users more tools to grow. Might be towards the dead part of a GW though and wont mean much. Generally, a player would have already chosen either the 777F or 748F by then.
Talentz
Quote from: wapp11 on March 04, 2018, 08:20:45 PM
Tecnam P2012
Planned release 2019
Cape Air has 100 ordered for commercial use.
https://www.tecnam.com/us/aircraft/p2012-traveller/
First production aircraft now delivered to Cape Air and entry into service/FAA Cert imminent... yet still not in AirwaySim?
Quote from: pcau on October 21, 2019, 10:44:48 AM
First production aircraft now delivered to Cape Air and entry into service/FAA Cert imminent... yet still not in AirwaySim?
If you have data for the aircraft, please feel free to share it here! 8)
Missing DC-9 Series 30 versions
DC-9-32: Introduced in the first year (1967). Certificated March 1, 1967. Basic MTOW of 108,000 lb (49,000 kg) later increased to 110,000 lb (50,000 kg). A number of cargo versions of the Series 32 were also produced:
32LWF (Light Weight Freight) with modified cabin but no cargo door or reinforced floor, intended for package freighter use.
32CF (Convertible Freighter), with a reinforced floor but retaining passenger facilities
32AF (All Freight), a windowless all-cargo aircraft.
DC-9-33: Following the Series 31 and 32 came the Series 33 for passenger/cargo or all-cargo use. Certificated on April 15, 1968, the aircraft's MTOW was 114,000 lb (52,000 kg), MLW to 102,000 lb (46,000 kg) and MZFW to 95,500 lb (43,300 kg). JT8D-9 or -11 (15,000 lbf (67 kN) thrust) engines were used. Wing incidence was increased 1.25 degrees to reduce cruise drag.[19] Only 22 were built
33CF Convertible Freight (CF)
33RC Rapid Change (RC) aircraft.
DC-9-34: The last variant was the Series 34, intended for longer range with an MTOW of 121,000 lb (55,000 kg), an MLW of 110,000 lb (50,000 kg) and an MZFW of 98,000 lb (44,000 kg). The DC-9-34CF (Convertible Freighter) was certificated April 20, 1976, while the passenger followed on November 3, 1976. The aircraft has the more powerful JT8D-9s with the -15 and -17 engines as an option. It had the wing incidence change introduced on the DC-9-33. Twelve were built, five as convertible freighters.
34CF(Convertible Freighter)
34AF(All Freight) -> see below (conversion)
https://www.airteamimages.com/mcdonnell-douglas-dc-9_5Y-UAE_astral-aviation_185856.html
Series 30 features
The DC-9-30 was offered with a selection of variants of JT8D including the -1, -7, -9, -11, -15. and -17. The most common on the Series 31 is the JT8D-7 (14,000 lbf (62 kN) thrust), although it was also available with the −9 and -17 engines. On the Series 32 the JT8D-9 (14,500 lbf (64 kN) thrust) was standard, with the -11 also offered. The Series 33 was offered with the JT8D-9 or -11 (15,000 lbf (67 kN) thrust) engines and the heavyweight -34 with the JT8D-9, -15 (15,000 lbf (67 kN) thrust) or -17 (16,000 lbf (71 kN) thrust) engines.
Quote from: blackswan on November 13, 2019, 05:31:52 PM
Missing DC-9 Series 30 versions
DC-9-32: Introduced in the first year (1967). Certificated March 1, 1967. Basic MTOW of 108,000 lb (49,000 kg) later increased to 110,000 lb (50,000 kg). A number of cargo versions of the Series 32 were also produced:
32LWF (Light Weight Freight) with modified cabin but no cargo door or reinforced floor, intended for package freighter use.
32CF (Convertible Freighter), with a reinforced floor but retaining passenger facilities
32AF (All Freight), a windowless all-cargo aircraft.
DC-9-33: Following the Series 31 and 32 came the Series 33 for passenger/cargo or all-cargo use. Certificated on April 15, 1968, the aircraft's MTOW was 114,000 lb (52,000 kg), MLW to 102,000 lb (46,000 kg) and MZFW to 95,500 lb (43,300 kg). JT8D-9 or -11 (15,000 lbf (67 kN) thrust) engines were used. Wing incidence was increased 1.25 degrees to reduce cruise drag.[19] Only 22 were built
33AF All Freight (AF)
33CF Convertible Freight (CF)
33RC Rapid Change (RC) aircraft.
DC-9-34: The last variant was the Series 34, intended for longer range with an MTOW of 121,000 lb (55,000 kg), an MLW of 110,000 lb (50,000 kg) and an MZFW of 98,000 lb (44,000 kg). The DC-9-34CF (Convertible Freighter) was certificated April 20, 1976, while the passenger followed on November 3, 1976. The aircraft has the more powerful JT8D-9s with the -15 and -17 engines as an option. It had the wing incidence change introduced on the DC-9-33. Twelve were built, five as convertible freighters.
34CF(Convertible Freighter)
34AF(All Freight) -> see below (conversion)
https://www.airteamimages.com/mcdonnell-douglas-dc-9_5Y-UAE_astral-aviation_185856.html
Series 30 features
The DC-9-30 was offered with a selection of variants of JT8D including the -1, -7, -9, -11, -15. and -17. The most common on the Series 31 is the JT8D-7 (14,000 lbf (62 kN) thrust), although it was also available with the −9 and -17 engines. On the Series 32 the JT8D-9 (14,500 lbf (64 kN) thrust) was standard, with the -11 also offered. The Series 33 was offered with the JT8D-9 or -11 (15,000 lbf (67 kN) thrust) engines and the heavyweight -34 with the JT8D-9, -15 (15,000 lbf (67 kN) thrust) or -17 (16,000 lbf (71 kN) thrust) engines.
Hard to tell from your post if you are just referencing missing freighter models or not, however the following already exist ingame:
- DC-9-31
- DC-9-32
- DC-9-33F
- DC-9-34
More freighter options would be great though!
hi,
All except the 33AF are missing. I mistakenly added that one..
Another fleet group as complicated as the DC-8 coming to you, Sami ;)
Strangely enough, it seems it's from the same manufacturer... :laugh:
BAe 146-100QC (convertible passenger/freight)
BAe 146-100QT (freight)
BAe 146-200QC (convertible passenger/freight)
BAe 146-200QT (freight)
BAe 146-300QC (convertible passenger/freight)
BAe 146-300QT (freight)
cheers
not sure its yet implemented, but since we lack future aircraft a bit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777#777-300ER_Special_Freighter_(SF)
increased MTOW version of the A339 is testing now:
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/news/en/2020/02/the-worlds-most-popular-widebody-goes-farther-airbus-new-weight-variant-a330neo-makes-its-first-flight.html (https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/news/en/2020/02/the-worlds-most-popular-widebody-goes-farther-airbus-new-weight-variant-a330neo-makes-its-first-flight.html)
Hi,
just a few remarks on existing "recent" aircraft in the database :
- A350-1000 has at least 2 new weight variant at 316t and 319t. Airbus numbers for 319t (https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a350xwb-family/a350-1000.html): 366pax/8700nm and MZFW=223t, it brings max paylaod to 74t (it was already so for 308t and 311t versions by the way). Also A350 max seating is 440pax.
- 777-8X and 9X specs in the game are above Boeing own marketing (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777x/). 777-9X: 425pax/7285nm and 777-8X: 384pax/8730nm. And if the empty weight of 164t is a bit light but OK for the 777-8X (between 164 and 170t), it is to low for the 777-9X. It's OEW is expected to be between 180t and 186t. Both variant share the same 440 exit limit.
- A350-900 has to much range: the 280t variant should be at 315pax/8100nm (https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a350xwb-family/a350-900.html) and with 58t of max payload. The A350-900 is a bit longer than the 787-9 so you should be able to put 2 or 3 more rows of Y, that is 18 to 27 more seats while in the game they both offer the same volume of seats.
- There should be an A350-900ULR of 280t, able to tank enough fuel to fly 9700nm with around 20t of payload.
- The A220-300 (or 300ER, https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a220-family/a220-300.html) should have a MTOW of 69.9t, an OEW of 37t and a MZFW of 55.8t, giving a max payload of 18.8t. All that for 3350nm of range with around 130 pax.
- The A220-100 (or 100ER, https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a220-family/a220-100.html) should have a MTOW of 63.1t, an OEW of 35t and a MZFW of 50.4t, giving a max payload of 15.4t. All that for 3400nm of range with around 105 pax.
- A350-800 or 787-3 are out of the picture for now.
good day everyone.
Denis
I wonder if I can come across enough estimated data for the 777-200 Combi... Would be a great addition along with the 773F forthcoming.
Have to look into this A340-300 Combi for the A boys. Can't leave them far behind ;D
Talentz
Quote from: Talentz on March 29, 2020, 01:41:35 AM
I wonder if I can come across enough estimated data for the 777-200 Combi... Would be a great addition along with the 773F forthcoming.
Have to look into this A340-300 Combi for the A boys. Can't leave them far behind ;D
Talentz
Both a B772-C and an A343-C would be very welcome additions!
Finally found this thread again.
Having sworn by the A300/310 in the speedworld, I did some research and found that there are freighter versions of the A310 200 and 300.
This is detailed below in the following links:
https://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/a310-200f/
https://www.airpartner.com/en/aircraft-guide/airbus-a310f/
https://www.aircharter.co.uk/aircraft-guide/cargo/airbuseurope/airbusa310-300f
http://www.fedex.com/us/charters/airbus-a310-200f.html
Further, there was a combi version of the A310 of which only one was made for Martinair PH-MCB
https://www.yesterdaysairlines.com/airline-history-blog/martinair-combi-prins-maurits-the-sole-a310-203c
Hope this is useful
Those aircraft data(s) have been submitted to Sami and await finalization.
... We are all waiting on Sami ;D
Talentz
Boeing 777-300ERSF
The announcement of this aircraft was made yesterday (28th October 2020)
GECAS and IAI will be converting Boeing 777-300ERs into 777-300ERSFs - First aircrasft to be delivered ti Kalitta Air on 27th October 2023
Payload of 100,698kg
Total volume: 819m^3
Range 4,650nm
https://bigtwinfreighter.com/
https://www.iai.co.il/drupal/sites/default/files/2019-12/777-300ERSF%20Brochure.pdf
It is intended to replace Boeing 747-400BCF and MD-11F
For the list (apologies if already incorporated). Not sure how practical, but here some Boeing info on the MD-10, the program to convert D.C.-10s to 2 man glass display cockpits. I think it's mainly used for cargo (I.e., Fedex) but would be a good option to upgrade D.C.-10s to as part of a later freighter conversion option.
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_02/textonly/ps02txt.html
Already included in game with 2-man cockpit crew;
MD-10-10F
MD-10-30F
Cheers!
Mike
I don't believe a 747-200SUD modification is available as of yet?
https://www.airlinereporter.com/tag/boeing-747-200-sud/ (https://www.airlinereporter.com/tag/boeing-747-200-sud/)
Quote from: NovemberCharlie on November 20, 2020, 11:40:33 AM
I don't believe a 747-200SUD modification is available as of yet?
Boeing 747-200B/SUD => conversion, available from 1980-06-01. https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Aircraft/Info/View/681/
Nevermind then! Good work
I'm rather surprised AWS does not seem to have the Antonov AN-2! :) The AN-2 "Annushka" (NATO: 'Colt') was a widely successful, mass-produced, dual-purpose, large biplane of the Soviet era which saw service across a large part of the world in its original form. Today, the upgraded turboprop-powered variants (as well as a few vintage ones) are still operated commercially in developing nations. Specifications below.
(https://i.imgur.com/qwzUAUa.jpg)
In AWS, the AN-2 would be a nice used airplane stock for 1955 starts for both cargo and short-haul passenger airlines, especially with the limited selection of dedicated cargo aircraft in those early game years. In fact, due to its long real-life production run (ended in 2001), the factory line should remain open for New orders even in 1955 starts. For balance, the airplane should have both low acquisition & maintenance costs (which is realistic in both cases). Over the years the option to convert to the AN-3 (1980) and AN-2-100 (2013) turboprop conversions should be given (I'm happy to research more data for these variants if the AN-2 is accepted!)
Some basic specs for the original version:
Available from: 1949 (announced 1947)
Crew: 1-2
Size class: Small
Maximum speed: 250 km/h (135 kts IAS)
Cruise speed: 190 km/h (102 kts IAS, or ~135 KTAS @ 14,000')
Pax version capacity: 12 Y
(https://i.imgur.com/kqKGKlO.png)
Cargo version capacity: 1500 kg (3306 lbs) [suggest Cargo-Light and Cargo-Standard eligible]
Cargo volume: 4.2 x 1.85 x 1.65 m
Cargo max density: 1000 kg/M2 (structural limitation)
Powerplant: Shvetsov ASh-62IR 9-cylinder air-cooled supercharged radial piston engine, 750 kW (1,010 hp)
Fuel capacity: 892 kg (1200 liters or 317 US gal)
Fuel consumption (hourly, cruise flight): 118 kg (158 liters or 42 US gal)
Fuel consumption (hourly, on ground): 45 kg (61 liters or 16 US gal)
Maximum endurance (calculated @ cruise power): 7.55 hours
Normal Range: calculated @ ~1330 km or 718 nm at normal cruise speed, after factoring .5 hr reserve fuel & taxi burn
Maximum Range: 2000 km (1,079 nm) at endurance power [published]
Service ceiling (@ MGW): 4500 m (14,764 ft)
Normal climb rate: 186 m/min (610 ft/min)
Normal descent rate: 120 m/min (394 ft/min)
Basic operating weight: 3350 kg (7,385 lb)
Normal gross weight & max landing weight: 5250 kg (11,575 lbs)
Takeoff distance (no-flaps to 25m altitude): 800m (2625 ft)
Takeoff distance (flaps 30deg to 25m altitude): 540m (1772 ft)
Landing distance (flaps 40deg): 215m (656 ft)
source: USAF Foreign Technology Division - Antonov AN-2 technical document
PDF WARNING: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/746791.pdf (https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/746791.pdf)
AN-2-100 modernized upgrade:
(https://i.imgur.com/a1SRGg7.jpg)
Dear Sami, I have been an avid player of your game for 3 years...I have asked multiple times why you haven't included the SNCASE LANGUEDOC in your data base. As I have said before it was not a great airplane, but much better then many odd A/C in your data base . 100 where produced and at least 4 airlines flew them for 10 to 15 years . Why have you always ignored this question ...I don't get it , is it some kind of weird bias , lack of data, lack of knowledge ...what is it ? Just need a couple of gracious lines from you !!
I would say its due to lack of data... You can send him the payload charts and other operational data if you happen to have any from reputable sources, but otherwise it would be difficult for him to add a plane without data ;D
Quote from: saetta on November 26, 2020, 09:08:05 PM
Dear Sami, I have been an avid player of your game for 3 years...I have asked multiple times why you haven't included the SNCASE LANGUEDOC in your data base. As I have said before it was not a great airplane, but much better then many odd A/C in your data base . 100 where produced and at least 4 airlines flew them for 10 to 15 years . Why have you always ignored this question ...I don't get it , is it some kind of weird bias , lack of data, lack of knowledge ...what is it ? Just need a couple of gracious lines from you !!
I believe it is a matter of priorities. A lot needs to be done for the game so it is hard to justify pouring time into researching an odd aircraft with limited player appeal. For this model it's going to be really hard finding all the required data, especially now when aircraft data need to be a lot more accurate than before.
In real life they were only produced between 1945 and 1948 and passengers apparently hated them. The aircraft itself does look cool, though - very WW II.
Mike
I also wondered if the Eviation Alice would ever make it in since it has about 200 orders from commercial airlines. But I understand that since it would arrive very late in gameplay (2022 or so?) and it being all electric (would make it much harder to calculate costs) probably means it isn't worth the effort.
There's plenty of niche planes out there that probably offer diminishing returns in terms of adding them. (though more frame options early is good since production lines can get so clogged)
Mikes , I agree that the Languedoc was not a very popular plane but compared to the Augusta (1 made ) ATL accountant ( none made) Berguet ( very few) etc.etc. it's an incredible success! If you spend the time and energy researching the Augusta and the Accountant you should be able to research a plane, of which 100 where and at least 5 airlines operated them. As far as passenger hating...I actually loved being on it, as a 5 year old !!
In the current game "History and the future" good or even mediocre airplanes like the DC 4 are impossible at this juncture to lease or buy . A Languedoc could come in handy as a better choice then the DC 2/3 or C 46 . The Languedoc is the Rodney Dangerfield of airliners ..it gets no respect...even tough it does not deserve a heck of a lot
Any reason the Convair 580 is missing? I have access to lots of data (including FCOM, Maintenance Manuals, etc) for both freight and passenger versions as I am working with them in real life. Happy to PM the appropriate person.
I think the issue with Convair propliners' turboprop conversion is that their speed increased significantly but AWS's system hardcoded it in a way that same fleet type has the same speed, so a turboprop conversion would probably have to stick with the same miserable speed of the piston pounder counterparts.
With AWS's 35-year limit for planes to be flyable, such conversions arent really worth the effort as well imo. Shame, but its something we have to live with.
Quote from: Alpha on December 16, 2020, 03:33:30 AM
I think the issue with Convair propliners' turboprop conversion is that their speed increased significantly but AWS's system hardcoded it in a way that same fleet type has the same speed, so a turboprop conversion would probably have to stick with the same miserable speed of the piston pounder counterparts.
With AWS's 35-year limit for planes to be flyable, such conversions arent really worth the effort as well imo. Shame, but its something we have to live with.
If it allowed the CV440s to get past chapter 2 noise restrictions and potentially lowered fuel consumption (considering flying slower than its optimal cruise could potentially burn less) it could still be a beneficial option. It does stink that it can't get past Chapter 2 as is while the Viscount, F28 and Martin 404 can. CV440s survived well beyond 1985 IRL.
Quote from: Alpha on December 16, 2020, 03:33:30 AM
I think the issue with Convair propliners' turboprop conversion is that their speed increased significantly but AWS's system hardcoded it in a way that same fleet type has the same speed, so a turboprop conversion would probably have to stick with the same miserable speed of the piston pounder counterparts.
With AWS's 35-year limit for planes to be flyable, such conversions arent really worth the effort as well imo. Shame, but its something we have to live with.
If that's the case, then allowing it as a new order airframe as a different type would be a better compromise than nothing at all, which at least fixes both the speed and 35 year issue. There were around 250 turboprop conversions, and around 100 or so were operating towards the turn of the century. That to me is a gaping hole in the common fleet types that have been used in the real world compared to the Airwaysim aircraft list, when you consider things like the ATL-90 are in there.
777-300ERSF
Last year another user made a post about this aircraft, it would be fantastic to see it added, could be a game changer for some airlines.