Crap, now what do I do with a plane that is too large for runway.

[swiftus27]

So, I ordered a lease of a 747sp. 

I fly out of KCLE with its 2743m runway.
The plane says that it needs a 3160m runway/

Did I just screw myself?  Will this plane NOT be able to take off from KCLE? 
If so, this will completely cripple my airlines because I can't cancel a lease without ENORMOUS costs and I don't want this thing to sit on the ground either.

Sure, I should have checked all of this up front, but I figured that it would have been programmed into the game to stop this from happening.

No what?

[Talentz]

Well.. it will fly, just not very far with alot of pax.


I suggest you keep it on very short flights with high demand. Something in the < 500nm range. More pax = more money. It wont be a cash cow, but it wont completely lose money.

When the lease is almost up.. 3-4 months til, get rid of it.


Though, right now, I would suggest not adding anymore fleet types. The more fleet types, the higher the cost of your fleet commonality. So, just order aircraft that you already operate. After you drop the 747, then you can add 762 or 757s for those types of routes. Just make sure and dont order anymore 747s 

Good luck


Talentz

[blumage]

So unlucky of you. Runway requirements should always be checked. In my experiences the opposite thing happened. I could take off but couldn't land at my wished airport so i was forced to either use another plane or to deploy the plane with such enormous RWY requirements on another airport. As far as i know the only thing you can do is to cancel the lease at a 50% cost. It's basically your fault for not checking the rwy requirements for your plane. I might have a solution but im not sure that it will work. You can reconfigure your plane so it has diffenret RWY requirements(At least it works for landings and ranging) not sure for take off though. When reconfiguring you should try to decrease the MTOW.

[swiftus27]

So, JATO pods are out of the question?

[Talentz]

That feature is currently being considered by Sami... though.. it has about the same chance as adding combat aircraft into the game 



Talentz

[swiftus27]

Well, I guess that I can send it to cities like Baltimore, Philly, Chicago... 

It won't get me great rewards, but will do okay.

Also, I have seen MANY 747s in Cle.  I live 15 minutes from the airport.

[Talentz]

Yea, I know... I've see many of 742s 743s and 747SP take off at KSAT. (Hometown airport and worked there for almost 5 years)


They fly payload restricted due to runway requirements. Still though.. max power take offs shake the whole airport when these giants blast out of SAT. Fun fun!




Talentz

[swiftus27]

Here is another thought then....

Go to Baltimore then go overseas, then back to baltimore, then to Cleveland.

[Talentz]

Go to Baltimore then go overseas, then back to baltimore, then to Cleveland.

Thats using your head 


Talentz

[peanutt]

Its what I do with my A300, I fly EGBB-EINN-KJFK. I use the EINN stop purely as a tech stop which allows me to leave EGBB with no pax limits. You can also use it on Triangle routes so long as your first stop is fairly close to base

[swiftus27]

But, as a tech stop it doesn't pick up passengers.... how was it full in the first place?

[Echoco]

Ahhhhhh JATO I'd love to get some of those, might reduce my delays a bit.

[dazz81]

But, as a tech stop it doesn't pick up passengers.... how was it full in the first place?

less fuel required for the first hop, less weight = less runway required = full load of passengers possible

[swiftus27]

I have that 747 flying from Cleveland to Las Vegas and again to Fort Lauderdale.  I am getting 90% capacity loads.  It must be due to the lesser weight of the fuel required.

If that's the case, BRAVO SAMI for calculating all of that crap out.

[CX717]

pick a airport which close to you with a long runway,make a fuel stop there and fly to your destination.
KLM do so when they fly to TNCM,on the return leg,they hop on TNCC and back to AMS.