Maintenance cost of DC-8-73 and fuel efficiency of Il-96-300

English Boards Community Support
1

- Why DC-8-73CF's maintenance cost is almost triple the maintenance cost of DC-8-72CF when they're at the 24th years? Their only difference is -73 being little longer?

- in game the fuel efficiency of il-96-300 seems to be 25% more than A340-300 over same distance (in route like SEA-ICN) (total fuel consumption, NOT per seat). But data on axlegeeks indicate the difference should be less than 2%. I am not sure what their data source is and I cannot find other datasource but where does the data for the plane's in game fuel burn come from?

  • Why in short routes like VVO-CTS, 747SP burn more fuel than 747-100? (total, not per seat) While it is said to offer 20% fuel saving over 747-200 and beat DC-10’s CASM

- Why fuel burn of CS100 is almost half of that Il-18D when props should be more fuel-saving?

2

The current performance system does not allow to calculate a proper fuel burn for all missions.

Those differences most likely come from imprecise or missing information and/or are a compromise to fit somehow into an overall framework.

3

Your maintenance cost observation is definitely wrong. It should actually be identical.

4

Your maintenance cost observation is definitely wrong. It should actually be identical.

I add both DC-8-72, DC-8-72CF and DC-8-73CF into the evaluation tool in pairs like CTS-SEA and then with same frequency per week on both planes, the displayedmaint cost on the -72 is like 6k while the maint cost on the -73 is like 18k. 24 years old is selected.