Is there any way how to fly with small a/c like Fairchild Metro and make money on that?
Quote from: Samo on December 05, 2009, 09:40:35 AM
Is there any way how to fly with small a/c like Fairchild Metro and make money on that?
Extremly short routes (<80nm) and high usage of the plane with short turn arounds.
Thanks. So flying routes like 600nm with small demand is not good way, right? Because, I'm thinking about them in my fleet, but i'm not sure if it's good idea.
Quote from: Samo on December 05, 2009, 02:35:28 PM
Thanks. So flying routes like 600nm with small demand is not good way, right? Because, I'm thinking about them in my fleet, but i'm not sure if it's good idea.
No, because the ticket prices won't increase in the same amount as the route length does.
For example, you can't take $100 for a 80nm trip and $200 for a 160nm route.
And with such a small amount of paying passengers in the Metro, this won't make up for the other expenses.
OK, so it doesn't make much sense right now. I hope it will be changed after connections will be available..
Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that if you want to make money you should try to use the planes for what they are intended. That is; if the plane has a range of 600 miles and capacity of 20 PAX, then you should use it on a route that is as close to 600 NM as possible as well as having a demand exceeding 20 PAX. That way you maximise the time your planes are flying and spend less time on ground doing the turnarounds.
I furthermore thought the standard price for a route was calculated something like this: Fixed expenses (like landing fees and handling etc.) + distance fees.
This would for example mean that the standard price of a 100nm route would be 120$ (100$ fixed price to cover landing fees etc, and 20$ for the distance). And in this case the price for a 200nm route would be 140$ (100$ fixed price to cover landing fees etc, and 40$ for the distance). I.e. getting $20 per 100nm and having 2 x 600nm routes with only time wasted being 4 x min turnaround time, should be better than flying 8 x 60nm routes with 16 x min turnaround time wasted.
This may however not be how the simulation works...
I was also under the impression that the more routes you have, the more personnel you need. Which in effect would reduce your profit.
Apparently some type of general clarification would be necessary, unless someone already has done some extensive experimenting and know better how it works. (Jimmy Ringsell?)
In my experience (not having been around that long), turboprops should only be used at shorter distances. The smaller the aircraft is, the shorter routes it should fly. I attribute this to the 'bounciness' of the small planes, which make people less inclined to travel with them. Also the seating is generally the tightest kind, and usually you don't want to put the seats further apart, since the number of pax is so low to begin with.
As an experiment I have in one of my games a few Cessnas running (12 pax cattle class, 180 kt, no cabin crew), the longest route I have is 381 nm. This means that the pax are packed in a single-engine plane for 3:50 without any service, toilets etc. Actually this now (two years running) seems to be running a profit - but in the beginning I was really laughing about it, since the gain in passenger numbers was extremely slow. (Thinking about the poor passengers makes me laugh too). If it had been a serious business attempt I would have cancelled it quickly. The Cessna can operate another 100nm...
I generally try not to run turboprops longer than 2 hours or so, the exception (I found so far) being Saab-2000 refitted with better seating, but that aircraft is really a jet in disguise. ::)
A way to use turboprops with profit - in my opinion/experience - is to hop a 25-seater 200nm 6 times a day to a 150pax/day destination. Trying to run it 600nm 2 times a day has put me in the hole before.
That said, I would not run props without first having a few jets with a positive cash flow going for the company as a whole.
My advice: experiment! If you have a good cash flow, play around a bit, the props don't cost that much.
Quote from: TommyC81 on December 06, 2009, 10:46:44 PM
Apparently some type of general clarification would be necessary, unless someone already has done some extensive experimenting and know better how it works. (Jimmy Ringsell?)
Of course I have tried it, and since the standard fees in AWS are so extremly low in comparison with real regional route fees, this won't make
up for the costs of the airline, especially staff. Just because the range is 600 nm, this would actually be the worst alternative to fly such long.
It's more effective to fly short legs, as you'll be able to fly more often with almost the same ticket prices. Especially if you are located and
flying to/from airports with low slot costs.
Quote from: RagFrid on December 07, 2009, 11:21:07 AM
As an experiment I have in one of my games a few Cessnas running (12 pax cattle class, 180 kt, no cabin crew), the longest route I have is 381 nm. This means that the pax are packed in a single-engine plane for 3:50 without any service, toilets etc. Actually this now (two years running) seems to be running a profit - but in the beginning I was really laughing about it, since the gain in passenger numbers was extremely slow. (Thinking about the poor passengers makes me laugh too). If it had been a serious business attempt I would have cancelled it quickly. The Cessna can operate another 100nm...
Of course you can make money of the routes. That's not the problem. Have you calculated all things such as staff, slots, maintenance
that's needed for the Cessnas?
Quote from: Jimmy Ringsell on December 07, 2009, 12:46:35 PM
Of course you can make money of the routes. That's not the problem. Have you calculated all things such as staff, slots, maintenance
that's needed for the Cessnas?
Not until now... My Cessnas eat on average approx $58k/month/plane before the staff is counted. (Just counting together the aircraft profit under 'My Aircraft' and the numbers under 'Fleet commonality'.) One of the planes is very near break-even. That particular one does 6 flights per day, average load of 94%, under 100nm. Still doesn't pay for the staff though...
The worst one - the one flying 3x381nm per day at 83% load - costs me roughly $89k/month.
I own all the a/c and bought them brand new. Insured to 50% value. In Beginners World..
My guesstimate, considering my low ticket prices as well, is that under perfect conditions, with great care taken in the planning, as a part of a very big operation (lots of the same planes and engines) I might get lucky enough to get a Cessna to break-even total, or maybe even give a (tiny) profit even when counting staff...
But, there are bound to be people here that play the game better then I do.