Airframe lifetime

You are missing something, or have a cool idea for us ? Tell us here !

Moderator: FSAirlines Staff

Post Reply
User avatar
avalonceo
Flight Attendant
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 11:02 pm
Location: St. John's, NL
Contact:

Airframe lifetime

Post by avalonceo » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:27 pm

I was thinking to my self today and i said "self.....wouldn't it be awesome if the aircraft in flynet had a lifespan?" So this is what i came up with. We have the percentage of what condition the aircraft is in now, but we also have a dynamic modifier that changes as the aircraft gathers hours. For example: As of right now every flight an aircraft takes loweres its condition percentage a little, so over time this percentage increases ever so slightly and continues to do so until a complete check is made. After that complete check is made, the percentage will reset to almost the depreciation rate of new but slightly higher to emulate airframe age. After a long period of time, for example , the aircraft will be loosing 10%/flight making it economically unviable to operate and send it off to the scrap! I have no idea if this is already simulated or not, and im also aware that the system was upgraded recently. In addition, i think there should be a base market in mind (not published) for old aircraft. For example: New airline A requests a B-707 and there are already more than enough in service, simply say there are none available anymore.
Image

User avatar
joefremont
FSAirlines Developer
Posts: 3694
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
Location: KSFO

Post by joefremont » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:39 pm

That would really kill those of us who are trying to run 'classic' airlines made up of older aircraft. I agree that there are lots of limitations using older aircraft that make uneconomic or unusable for regular passenger service that flynet does not reproduce and therefore there prices should be higher. I would think that when older aircraft are sold in aircraft they should be considered to have been fully restored with new or rebuilt engines, hush kits, updated avionics, ect,,. And as such should never cost less that 1/2 the cost of an equivalent new aircraft. Also there repair costs should not be linked to the market value. There is no way that the cost to maintain a 727-200 Adv is less than 10% the cost to maintain a 737-700, if anything it should be more.
Image
I've sworn an oath of solitude until the pestilence is purged from the lands.

IslandBum
Captain
Posts: 417
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:36 am
Location: The middle of a bloody desert - surrounded by bright lights, long legged women and Paupers
Contact:

Post by IslandBum » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:08 am

Joe

Just a small item - The company that I work for IRL operates MD80s which are ten to fifteen years old
the going rate is approx 5 mill a copy - the going rate for a new 737-700/A320 is a round 45 Mill
Parts are readily available for the Maddog and are priced a little cheaper than parts for the 737/Airbus
A7P Mechanics cost about the same no matter what acft they work on.

The biggest cost difference is Fuel :!: The 737/A320 arre far more fuel effiecient , However as long as the
number of aircraft hulls and parts are available it is actually more economic to go with the MD80s - it carries
the same number of passengers the same difference in the same time - the average passenger has NO idea
what the outisde of his or her particular piece of Aluminum tubing and cares even less - so long as the ticket is cheap,
the aircraft runs on time and they get their $5 martini on the way On this you can trust me

Its why the company I work for has gone from 3 to 30 aircraft in a little over 4 years serves 60 odd destinations
in the US and is buying 20 more MD80s - instead of buying 4 new shiny b737-700s or A320s for the same price


Cheers

Leif
Ho'olu komo la kaua
Leif Harding
Chief Cook and Bottle Washer
Venture Hawaii PLC

Post Reply