Quintus_Istari

Not really a question of evidence.

Santos Dumond was living in Paris, in the middle of the most air-enthusiast crowd in the world. There is no information about anyone actully denying that he did it years before.

The remaining fact is, that the Wright brothers actually flown a catapulted winged device, that could only fly with favourable winds , which was actually not very different from what you would get with a hot air balloon.

Dumond flew an actual plane, that could take of on its own power.

The only problem with the Brazilian, is that he was not born in north america because if he had, nobody would have ever talk about any Wright brothers.

The funniest demonstration of the flaws of the Wright's model can be seen 100 years later with president Bush presiding the 100 years cerimony.

he was told to leave before the 100% exact replica was demonstrated, because there was a great chance the device would not get airborne.

In fact, the president was saved fron an embarassment.

100 years later, tha replica, did not fly.

The Wright brothers didn't have a plane, they had a much better equipment. They had Hollywood, and that is the greatest dream factory in the world.

And dreams make the world fly.

Actually, nautical miles and feet are commonly used in the western world.

Flight levels are measured in feet (100ft per level) except (as far as I know) in Russia, were metric was used to avoid capitalistic influence from western fascist dogs.

I guess China also uses metric for the same reasons.

Prices though, are expressed in $ instead of € or £ which excludes the Eurozone and britain.

buying the leased planes doesn't help much at the moment, because the problem were probably the 6 months leasing fees  for all the purchased planes. To buy those planes even as you receive them, would imply loosing the six months lease already paid for.

Also, if you have any money available, the best thing would be to use  that money to purchase planes in the second hand market, for those can be put immediatly in routes and start making money.

Being in R0, I have seen your company, but cant say anything about your competitors in your routes, but what I can say is that it seems that for the size  of your airline, you have leased an enormous amount of new planes.

Leasing fees are considered costs. When you lease a plane, you have to immediatelly pay 6 months leasing, which enters in your accounting as costs.

When you purchase a plane, it is not considered a cost.

A large increase in your costs may have caused your drop in the position scale. I bet that when you placed the orders (by leasing) you paid no taxes at all that month ...

I only lease planes in quantity, when I am going to pay a lot of taxes. I check it on the 24th of each months, and lease planes accordingly as to keep my net profits low and pay lower taxes.

All this strategies are logical and make sense, but dont help you to go up in the charts, which, if I can say, are useless for me, because I really care about passengers transported.

Well, I am playing this for some time, altough with a different account. (I changed computer and lost passwords ) and some weeks ago found my spreadsheet and gave it a try, by returning to AE. I have since added more planes (I think they are all in) and am now entering the helicopters.

I have a number of dropdown menus, in order to facilitate things. Since it is a spreadsheet, all figures are in the same columns, in case one wants to make calculations.

I even added an option in one or two markets, to have a cell turn red when planes cant be used in an airport.

Believe me, I have ordered planes sometimes, to understand later  that only two airports in the country could receive then ...

So. I would advise to take in consideration also the runway length, should that be a possible issue to you.

I have an airline in that world to, and probably will be ordering the 707-120, but only in very small numbers. I don't think it can cope with the Bristol Britannia's fuel consumption, although, going back to the KJFK-KLAX example, the B707-120 actually does quite well when compared with other jets.

As follows:

B707-120 = 18 776 lb

B707-220 = 27 690 lb

B707-320B = 15 931 lb (JT3D-1 engine)

B707-320B = 17 741 lb (JT3D-7 engine)

B707-320C = 15 873 lb

The first DC-8's

DC-8-10 = 19 418 lb

DC-8-20 = 27 217 lb

The Bristol Britannia = 10 162 lb

The problem, from an airline customer point of view, would be that the Britannia takes 1177 hours to transport all those people, while the fastest jet would be the B707-320C would do the same job in just 516 hours (including rotation time).

And the issue of confort and speed preference just is not apparently considered.

Important in this issue: The Britannia can use 5.500 ft runways the B707-120 uses 6.200ft and the others go from 7.100 to 9.550.

If one has potential 4000 mile routes connecting one airport with less than 6000 ft, rwy, then the big jets are useless.

The only competitors would be the CL-44 Yukon, the B747-400D (1990), B737-700ER(2006), B777-200 (1994), A319-100LR (2002) and A350-800 (2016).

30 years of peace.

Unless the darn competitors also buy the same plane