I was looking at what aircraft I would invest in for Long Haul after I have enough aircraft. (As I was on aspern before I looked at some older aircraft like A340 and 747-400 about 10 years old) and I see that on aircraft ape evaluation the Boeing 777 has turned profitable quite nicely. (around 40%) the 777-200ER on PEK to LAX,LHR,YVR,DXB. and around 20% on the short haul routes to BKK,SIN,KUL.
The Boeing 777-300ER is quite profitable on flights over 8000KM which is good as I can have more capacity.
The A340 looks OK but can't be new if there are no used aircraft,
Before the Boeing 777 was unprofitable but now looks quite advertising. Especially as I can have 250 seats or 400 seats. (Dreamliner 250 or 290)
I do not like Quimby pricing model so I hope that never.
Couldnt agree more. I always use first and business seats on my aircraft. And the price gap between these three classes (with economy) is not that far. Mostly the business is not even twice the economy. And sometimes the first is not even three times economy. This kind of pricing did not happen in real life, in my opinion.
I wish other server pricing model will be applied to Quimby or Ellinikon.
Depends on the distance ... on a flight Buenos Aires - Madrid the standard prices are: 811AS$ Economy, 2135AS$ Business and 5218AS$ First. That's more than twice or thrice the economy
Depends on the distance ... on a flight Buenos Aires - Madrid the standard prices are: 811AS$ Economy, 2135AS$ Business and 5218AS$ First. That's more than twice or thrice the economy
That's right, but you are looking on First class. which in this case is 5x Economy. But business class is not even 2.5x Economy, and it is a huge distance. I do not think Business price (on Quimby and Ellinikon) should be that low (unless the new game model includes increased demand in F class).
In any case, real life:
MAD-EZE (RT):
Y: 884 (in October on Delta) ...1500-something on Lufthansa
C: 2960 on Alitalia ....4750 on Lufthansa (3x economy)
Depends on the distance ... on a flight Buenos Aires - Madrid the standard prices are: 811AS$ Economy, 2135AS$ Business and 5218AS$ First. That's more than twice or thrice the economy
The matter is, I fly First class on short routes. So this kind of pricing model is kinda frustrating.
AirlineSim always has to be a mix of gameplay and realism. In these functions the gameplay is a bit more ahead. But First on short-haul is also not very common in real life aviation.
AirlineSim always has to be a mix of gameplay and realism. In these functions the gameplay is a bit more ahead. But First on short-haul is also not very common in real life aviation.
Yup, you're right. First on short-haul is not very common in real life aviation.
But another matter is ..... AS create a demand for this. And i can't stand myself to not take this opportunity to fill my plane.
I mean, I can get first class passenger on a 100 km route.
Of course, maybe, this first shourt route made to fill the connection to long-haul routes. But still... there is a demand for that.
Nothing was changed regarding the 777 or 787. We're simply talking about the effects of the new pricing formulas here, which lead to more long-haul profitability in general.
In real life, the 777-300ER is more profitable than what is being shown in game. It is somewhat inaccurate in that no one runs the 77W in game even though it is one of the most popular aircraft in the world right now. Wide-body economics in game need an overhaul... otherwise we will see lots of 737's flying around with some 787's and that's it.
I currently run a 77E (777-200ER) and a 77W (777-300ER) on my ULH route YYZ-HKG and it only makes money because I got them on good lease deals and high price on the route. Otherwise... no good.
In real life, the 777-300ER is more profitable than what is being shown in game. It is somewhat inaccurate in that no one runs the 77W in game even though it is one of the most popular aircraft in the world right now. Wide-body economics in game need an overhaul... otherwise we will see lots of 737's flying around with some 787's and that's it.
I currently run a 77E (777-200ER) and a 77W (777-300ER) on my ULH route YYZ-HKG and it only makes money because I got them on good lease deals and high price on the route. Otherwise... no good.
well the widebody thing has been criticized for so long and they are working on new model. CX, in real life, runs a widebody only fleet. So there must be some advantage for using widebody not reflected in the game. Anyway, they are working on new model, new model ......
Why run a 777-200ER when a 787-9 (or -10 when it comes out) gives better economics and 2 787-8 give even better economics and better connection times?
Well it is because I got them on good lease deals. The difference in price between leasing a 787-8/787-9 and my 77E/77W means that I have more profit. I also also very heavily slot constrained on this route. Need the biggest plane that I can get as the other airport has very limited slots available. I'm contemplating switching to a 787-9 but so far none available on the open market for good price so I wait.
well the widebody thing has been criticized for so long and they are working on new model. CX, in real life, runs a widebody only fleet. So there must be some advantage for using widebody not reflected in the game. Anyway, they are working on new model, new model ......
I hope so! As it is running wide body aircraft other than the 787 family is very expensive and hard to make profit on.
77W in AS is pretty lame. I just keep it in my fleet, even raising maintenance costs, because I love this aircraft. But I don’t have any economic reason to keep it, as I said, they are lame in profitability.