Jump to content

Photo

TU-144S/Concorde


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1
LockheedTristar

LockheedTristar

    Trijets

  • Member
  • 285 posts

User's Awards

3      

Are they worth it? Are they profitable? What are some good routes for them?



#2
Mobeer

Mobeer

    AE Luver

  • Member
  • 325 posts

User's Awards

8       2    2   

Concorde is barely profitable. On any route it flies an ordinary airliner will make more money. TU-144 is worse

 

Basically these planes have 2 problems - the way fuel consumption is calculated works against them and passengers don't care how long a flight takes.



#3
hedgeaf

hedgeaf

    AE Player

  • Member
  • 41 posts
Does speed/flight duration really not factor at all in pax choice?

I figured I might have another go at Concorde F/C + widebody C/Y in the future.

How does the fuel calc work against? Actually, what is fuel flow, per/hour I assume (hence faster but guzzling may win out vs efficient but slow)?

#4
bAnderson

bAnderson

    Timeless

  • Member
  • 2,139 posts

Fuel flow is absolutely massive on Concorde, over 100,000. Fuel flow on a 737-400 is around 17,000. The tu-144 is about double the Concorde, if I remember correctyl, and with less range. Another killer is the range and runway length. There are only a few airports in the range of a Concorde that have good distance for a Concorde.


wgOP4y0.jpg


#5
Airboss777

Airboss777

    Just don't mess with me

  • Member
  • 564 posts
  • Website:http://www.aviationcrap.blogspot.com.au

User's Awards

20    15    9    2   

Yeah, no. Unless you have a lot of money to waste, don't bother.



#6
Tesla

Tesla

    Inactive

  • Member
  • 2,392 posts

Fuel flow is absolutely massive on Concorde, over 100,000. Fuel flow on a 737-400 is around 17,000. The tu-144 is about double the Concorde, if I remember correctyl, and with less range. Another killer is the range and runway length. There are only a few airports in the range of a Concorde that have good distance for a Concorde.

b737-400 is around 17,000. A319-100LR which has identical max seating is 12540 with winglets. Use it instead in a low density 2/3 class config.



#7
Issac1709

Issac1709

    Youtuber and AE Player

  • Member
  • 74 posts

I feel like fast planes for their time should get a bonus to ticket price, so things like the Comet 4C, Concorde and the Tu-144 make abit of sense


i-air (R7)

i-air/i-air connection (S2)


#8
TNT88

TNT88

    Hates Pedo

  • Member
  • 3,461 posts

User's Awards

2    14       71      

Nope, worse aircraft ever.



#9
Max Devo

Max Devo

    Extra spicy memes

  • Member
  • 363 posts

The Concorde is possible, but it's tricky. There are some players who have managed to make a pretty penny off of it in the past. I don't think it's a risk to be taken by anyone making less than $10 million a day. Even if you do manage to profit with it, like the others have said, there's an A319 or a 737 that can fly the route more profitably--hell, even the freakin' Il-62 will make you more money, and that thing is like an airborne Hummer!

 

The Concorde won't really be an ideal choice for routes until there's an implementation where passengers care about flight time--In which case they'd fly on a Concorde instead of a 737, and in a similar way fly on a 737 instead of an L188.

 

The Tu-144, with its more than doubled fuel flow and shorter range, is impossible. Don't even try.


tumblr_nfjii5i0Ky1sorz3uo1_250.jpg


#10
Max Devo

Max Devo

    Extra spicy memes

  • Member
  • 363 posts

I feel like fast planes for their time should get a bonus to ticket price, so things like the Comet 4C, Concorde and the Tu-144 make abit of sense

This.


tumblr_nfjii5i0Ky1sorz3uo1_250.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users