DC-10 v L1011

[ekaneti]

I noticed in game where both the DC-10 and L1011 can be purchased new that players overwhelmingly choose the DC10. Why is this? If youre one of those players why do you choose the DC-10 that might not be available or years instead of an L1011 that can be ready more quickly?

[Curse]

The DC-10 can transport much more pax, has more range, is much more fuel efficient, needs less crew and the "good" variants are available on the used market sometimes.

The TriStar is much faster and due to the fact the production line spits out just five aircraft a month, you get 7 new TriStar while you can have 12 new DC-10.


So why one should choose the TriStar? Maybe it fits due to it's thin design and fast speed exactly what you want - for example all routes out of your HQ are too small for DC-10.


Edit:
Oh, and the good DC-10 variants are available while TriStar has only TriStar 1 and TriStar 100 to offer. So another point for DC-10.

[ArcherII]

And the longer range Tristar is a shrunk version, while the DC-10-30ER keeps its 302-seat shape.

[Zombie Slayer]

I am one of the ones that went with L1011's, and it was basically for two reasons. First and foremost, the smaller design is huge for my base (BOM) where the DC-10 would be too big for at least half of the routes between 2100 and 5200nm (those not reachable with my 732's). Second is the lack of interest from other carriers. I can place an order for a frame and know I will get it in 3 months. With the DC-10, the wait will be longer (I have not recently checked the order backlog, but in previous games in this era, DC-10 backlog has hit 400 or more with 1+ year waits for a first frame).

Oh, and the plane is not THAT much inferior to the DC-10. Similar range models (the L1011-500 vs DC-10-30ER), the L15 burns about 30% more fuel per ASM (.0432 kgs/nm/pax for the L15 vs .0327kgs/nm/pax for the DC10-30ER), but the L15 is $12 million cheaper which translates into a lease price that is $170k a month less. If you do not need the range of the -500, the 2 models are even closer.

Don 

[schro]

I operated a fleet of a couple hundred L1011's in the previous DOTM and found them to be pretty profitable for what I used them for.  On a CASM basis, there's really not a huge difference between them and the DC10, the major difference being the range capabilities on the high end.  I was able to architect nearly all of my routes out of LAX with a stop to anywhere I wanted in the world so the 500's range was only used when the route was thin enough for it. If you can make all of your routes work with an L1011-1/100/200, then it makes a VERY easy transition over to the A306's as a direct replacement later in the game.

[pascaly]

I knew you'd come out of the woodwork for the L10 schro 

[Curse]

Keep in mind tech-stop routes earn less profit and are worse when it comes to competition.

[schro]

Keep in mind tech-stop routes earn less profit and are worse when it comes to competition.

I think I did just fine in the last DOTM with tech stops.

[ArcherII]

Lol, yeah...I used to SCROLL the Boeing's used market down in search of 737 classic. Shame I couldn't sort those 727s out of the search engine.

[DenisG]

No point in discussing: The L1011 is by far much more beautiful than the DC10.
Cheers,
Denis

[Curse]

I think I did just fine in the last DOTM with tech stops.

I saw your airline in the last DotM and without competition and the low fuel prices you could have also used Il-86. Nonetheless you ran a nice airline.

However, your screenshot doesn't change the fact ticket prices for tech-stop flights are lower than for the same route as nonstop and pax prefer nonstop flights because they are nonstop AND don't take this long.

[schro]

Lol, yeah...I used to SCROLL the Boeing's used market down in search of 737 classic. Shame I couldn't sort those 727s out of the search engine.

Sorry about that. I wasn't planning on replacing them but I grew a wild hair in the last couple game years and snagged a couple 757s...

I saw your airline in the last DotM and without competition and the low fuel prices you could have also used Il-86. Nonetheless you ran a nice airline.

However, your screenshot doesn't change the fact ticket prices for tech-stop flights are lower than for the same route as nonstop and pax prefer nonstop flights because they are nonstop AND don't take this long.

Actually, for the first few years I had rather stiff competition against the guy that later ran Donkey Airlines out of ATL. It was a pretty bloody battle, and I was actually still flying the L10's at that time. Also, until the last couple game years there was another guy in the base that built up to a 15-20% share that kept my profits in check - when he bankrupted (boredom I think) it doubled my weekly profit.

I'm not in a game right now, but I'd be curious on whether the "standard" pricing for say, EWR-SNN-CAI is the same as EWR-CAI. Can anyone check that?

I ran at "standard" price with no discounts on my airline. The beauty of the L1011 is that it cruises so much faster than other planes, on a 6000nm+ trip with a stop, that speed difference puts it within a pretty close margin of a DC10 or other widebody with no stop other than the 747. I'm sure my 100 CI helped the loads, but overall, competition on long haul wasn't much of an issue even with stops.

My main disadvantage was being based at LAX where there's pretty much no short haul demand. ATL and ORD are much easier cities to play from.

[Curse]

I have no Newark based airline, but here are the prices for Tokyo Narita to London Heathrow (on DC-10 );

[attachment expired]

[schro]

Interesting. It appears that standard pricing is 5% lower, though, that might mean that if all other factors are equal then passenger preference is a wash given the lower price?

The other thing to consider is that flying a plane with a 20% lower cost with a stop more than makes up for the revenue shortfall....

[type45]

schro you are the special case you can just keep on sending planes and flood the route with tech stop flights (tons of 727/757......). I remember I have to use A310 to fight with my NRT-LAX route and you are the second largest slot owner at NRT

[Jona L.]

schro you are the special case you can just keep on sending planes and flood the route with tech stop flights (tons of 727/757......). I remember I have to use A310 to fight with my NRT-LAX route and you are the second largest slot owner at NRT

He hogged my sweet LHR slots last DotM by flying several B727 via Iqaluit... instead of flying the one or the other B74X/77X/A33X/34X...


Jona L.

[schro]

schro you are the special case you can just keep on sending planes and flood the route with tech stop flights (tons of 727/757......). I remember I have to use A310 to fight with my NRT-LAX route and you are the second largest slot owner at NRT

LAX-NRT is quite lucrative. I flew it with what I had available. I think I upgaged everything to A306's before the game ended, but you were gone by then. You seemed to have a ton of fleet types as well....

He hogged my sweet LHR slots last DotM by flying several B727 via Iqaluit... instead of flying the one or the other B74X/77X/A33X/34X...


Jona L.

Its all about fleet commonality. I would have loved a subfleet of A330/340's at the end of the last game, but it would have cost me $80M+ per week in fleet commonality charges as I already had the 727 (only 10 flying at the end of the game), 757 and A306.  I also didn't want to plunk down hundreds of millions of dollars to wait in line for my turn to get 2 of them. The other issue I had with the LHR routes was that I originally scheduled the 727s at 5x weekly which basically gave them no wiggle room on the weekly schedule. This made it fairly impossible to convert them over to other planes with higher turn types, thus, its why I used A310's instead (nonstop made up the time difference).

Either way, until ABCBA routes come back, I will use the tar out of tech stops to keep a more common fleet.

[type45]

I moved to MT4 at that time already......I've the plan to replace all my DC-10/L1011/A300/743 with owned 744 and A330/340, but it never completed as I don'y have that time

I agree it's lucrative......at lease I can still make profit even with my A310 (5 weekly per planes*7 planes)

[lilius]

L

Either way, until ABCBA routes come back, I will use the tar out of tech stops to keep a more common fleet.

Lets be honest, as long as you fly plenty of something it will make money no matter what. What I dont understand is why you chose 3 fleets that are all so similar if you want to keep commonality costs low. You could easily have removed one of them and picked up 747-400 and made alot more money.

[schro]

Lets be honest, as long as you fly plenty of something it will make money no matter what. What I dont understand is why you chose 3 fleets that are all so similar if you want to keep commonality costs low. You could easily have removed one of them and picked up 747-400 and made alot more money.

I simply ran out of time/years in the game in order to do that.

My original fleet plan was 727-200Advs and L1011's. I was going to stick with them til the end of the game, but got a bit ambitious about it. Those two are very different planes and due to the runway requirement of the L1011, its not suited for a number of airports within the US.

Then I was feeling a bit crazy, and decided I'd onboard the A300's to replace the L1011's and select 727 routes where the additional capacity was needed. This transition took about 4-5 game years since I had 200+ planes to replace, during which time I had 3 fleet types. Once that was done, I decided I'd try to replace as many 727s with 757s by the end of the game. I was nearly successful, but had 10 727s left in service at the end. Since I had over 300 of those to start with, it was a bit of a task.

Basically, what I'm trying to say, is when you have already amassed a significant fleet, it takes a while to transition to a new fleet type and that my fleet choices were not similar.

With regards to 747's, no matter what variety, they are a very high risk plane and they do not suit LAX very well due to their size. They have a very high acquisition cost, drink fuel like its free and make a poor showing in a frequency battle. I was anticipating a much higher fuel level than we ultimately saw in the game (peaking around $400ish in 1990-1991), thus I avoided them. Had I known it was going to bottom out and stay low, it could have been a consideration.