Sign In
Create Account
Find content
REPOST
In AE it seems like the A320 family has an extreme advantage over the 737NG family. Let's just start with some simple stats.
The A320 family in AE
A318 - 132 seats with a 2805mi max payload range - landing distance of 3570 feet with lowest thrust engine.
A319-100 - 156 seats with a 3191mi max payload range - landing distance of 4080 feet with the lowest thrust engine
A320-200 - 180 seats with 2625mi max payload range - landing distance of 5015 feet with the lowest thrust engine
A321-100/200 - 220 seats with range of either 2333mi or 2935mi (-100 vs -200). -100 lands at 5355 while -200 lands at 6035.
Prices
A318 - $41 million
A319-100 - $43 million
A320-200 - $49 million
A321-100 - $54.5 million
A321-200 - $55.5 million
Hopefully that's a simple enough breakdown. A320s in AE have high seat counts (for their size) and relatively high ranges.
Now let's look at the A320 in reality.
The A320 Family in our world - Seat count
A318 - 107 seats
A319-100 - 124 seats
A320-200 - 150 seats
A321-100 - 186 seats
A321-200 - 186 seats
Now these seat numbers are typical for US airlines - Euro Airlines typically have a few less seats per aircraft
Right there you can see that there is a huge different between the amount offered in AE vs real world configurations.
Moving on to pricing
A320 Family Pricing in our world
A318 - $67.7 million
A319-100 - $80.7 million
A320-200 - $88.3 million
A321-200 - $103.6 million
Again, a huge difference between the A320 in reality vs AE. At the same time, pricing can be extremely discounted, as we all know that large discounts are common for customers. So let's discount about 15% or so for those aircraft prices.
That gives a pretty small discount but still the prices are at least $10 million higher than AE base prices for these aircraft.
Let's move on to the 737s.
The 737NG Family in AE -
737-600 - 132 with a range of 2758 miles
737-700/700ER - 149 with a range of 2762/4776 miles
737-800 - 189 with a range of 2503 miles
737-900/900ER -189/215 - with a range of 2059/2720 miles
Looking at the NGs you can see that they have less pax then their airbus counterpart (minus the 738) and less range as well.
Going on to pricing
Pricing of 737NGs in AE
737-600 - $46 million
737-700/700ER - $52 million
737-800 - $61 million
737-900/900ER - $65 million/$70.5 million
Looking at those prices you can see the NGs are more expensive then their Airbus counterparts - in AE that is
Now in reality...
The 737NG Family in our world
737-600 - 108 seats
737-700/700ER - 128 seats
737-800 - 160 seats
737-900 - 177 seats
737-900ER - 193 seats
737NG Prices in our world
737-600 - $56.9 million
737-700 - $67-9 million
737-700ER - $75 million
737-800 - $80.8 million
737-900 - $85.8 million
737-900ER - $91 million
Looking at the NGs - just like the A320 family - there is a lower seat count then what is offered in AE. The prices are higher as well.
So, looking at these two breakdowns we can get conclusions that:
The A320s have seat and cost differences between AE and reality, just like the 737NG family does.
At the same time - the seat counts I pulled from my sources are just average seating numbers for airlines in the US, while the seat numbers for AE are from the max. number of seats certified for each aircraft.
So this is not technically incorrect, although I think we all know how a 189 economy seat 738 would not be very common in today's world
Maybe if we were going to offer the max seat count for aircraft (which I'm going to assume manufacturers do [that's a failure on my part I haven't checked]) we should change the hourly cost/fuel flow etc. What I mean - obviously an aircraft with a 189 passenger payload will have to use more fuel to transport those passengers say 1500 miles than an aircraft transporting 150 passengers. The developers have already changed payload to follow this law so maybe we could use that same system on fuel flow or hourly cost.With that said, let's move on to the prices.
The A320 family and the 737NG family both have differences in pricing in game vs reality. Notice I didn't say discrepancies - just differences. What I mean is that
in game the prices for these aircraft (I'm assuming) were taken from their launch prices - i.e. what the aircraft cost when they were FIRST produced and offered to customers.
What that means is that the A320 family skipped out on about 20 years of inflation, while the 737NG skipped out on about 10 years. That means that their prices are going to be very different from what they
are today (and that applies to all aircraft in game - not just the short haulers.) Maybe in game the prices of aircraft should be updated every 10 years or so? Throw out any suggestions if you think they are good!
So let me try to summarize what I've written so far just so we can have it clearly organized:
A320s - in game they are cheaper than what they are today.
737s - in game they are cheaper than what they are today.
Simple right?
Hopefully.
So IMO adding an updating price system to the game would improve it, and changing the costs for aircraft based on their seating would as well - what do you guys think?
I'll try to go back to comparing the aircraft now though, since I really should've posted about half of this in the suggestion forum haha.
So how about Fuel flow?
I'll be using the base models - 737-800 and A320-200 for this comparison - just to simplify it (I know it could be more comprehensive but let's just get the point across)
Now for some stats from real world aircraft performance.
A320
Fuel Capacity: 7,835 US Gallons
Range: 3,050 Nautical Miles
2 Class Pax Capacity: 150
Gallons/Mile: 2.569
Gallons/PassengerMile: .0171
B737-800
Fuel Capacity; 6,875 US Gallons
Range: 3,060 Nautical Miles
2 Class Pax Capacity: 162
Gallons/Mile: 2.246
Gallons/PassengerMile: .01387
Gallons per Pax mile could be seen as skewed here since the 738 holds more pax - so the fuel cost is distributed on a larger base
However, look at the gallons/mile cost. The 737-800 has a higher efficiency than the A320 - not really shown in AE. Part of this comes from the 737 fuselage being lighter than the A320 (thanks to being designed in the 1970s with a smaller fuselage width compared to the A320) while the rest probably comes down to good old aerodynamical statistics that I won't get in to. (and winglets
)This info doesn't really have a directly comparable AE component, but you see my point - 737-800s actually have a lower fuel flow than the A320-200.
A major selling point for Boeing throughout the years has been economics on the 737 - it is lighter, costs less to operate, less to maintain, and has lower fuel costs than the A320.
[Not trying to make an A vs B thread btw haha just making a comparison]
Now to put it simply, in reality that's the difference between the 737 and A320 - costs[NG] vs comfort [A320]
I'll leave it at that for now. Let me know if I've messed up on anything - I'm certainly not an expert so I could have easily missed something although I did do fairly detailed research to find these statistics.
http://aviation.se.e...%20Families.pdf
