stupid question, but 787 at LCY?

[EKA380]

yesyesyesyesyes I know, it is stupid but on FS 2004 (i can already hear you tutting) i flew a 787-800 out of LCY and i sucessfully did 2 tuch and go's and 2 full stop landings and 3 takeoffs. but i waswondering if they put the 787 800 engines on the 787 300 (because they are more powerful) would it be viable to operate longer flights or would it get wet.

just an idea.

[Charles022]

Is this guy for real or what?!

[ACheck]

My grandpa always said "It's only a stupid question if you already know the answer".

I'm pretty sure you know the answer!

[Curtis Malone]

Is this guy for real or what?!

At least he's not asking why Delta doesn't fly from Jackson, MS non-stop to Novosibirsk-Tolmachevo.

[Leo 747]

Man,I think i've never laughed so hard in my ENTIRE life!

This shows exactely what FS do to the players hahahahaha

[EKA380]

i know, but, do you think the would try.

the 767 200/ER can with about 60% payoad.

[Peter Kesternich]

i know, but, do you think the would try.

the 767 200/ER can with about 60% payoad.

And what profit can an airline make with an aircraft that's only 60% loaded? Most likely none at all... So no further need to practice 787 approaches into London City in FS2004... *lol...

[SAMRPICS]

Maybe the aircraft could get airbourne but it wouldnt be able to carry a profitable payload if any load at all. May i suggest you try putting a full load of fuel, cargo and passengers on FS and then try and takeoff again. Im sure the result will be the aircraft either in the drink or hitting buildings in the surrounding area. Facts are that the A319LR cant operate at LCY hence why BA used the A318's Long range model with a short stop in Ireland.

[EKA380]

yeah, this is how it goes for the following aircraft

A318 or smaller.
yep
authorized
perfectly safe

A320
can takeoff
with hardly any pasengers
can land
not authorized
not profitable

767 200/ER or 787 300
can takeoff
empty
definately not profiable
could maybe land

and as i found out just 10 minutes ago

747 300
landing: i hope the passengers can swim
takeoff: do i have to tell you

i think an A319 could actually operate from LCY if they produced a more powerful engine for it and authorized it for a 30 degree climb out and the 5 degree approach, obviously.

[Charles022]

Maybe the aircraft could get airbourne but it wouldnt be able to carry a profitable payload if any load at all.

Regardless of its ability to get airbourne, how would a 787 backtrack/taxi at LCY and park up in the way the current aircraft do?

[MCM]

Are you using actual takeoff data, or just the fact you can physically get the aircraft into the air on the runway?

There is a lot more to takeoff performance than just being to get the wheels off the runway before they get wet.

If you are actually interested in learning, I suggest you have a look around these forums (and other sources) for information on takeoff performance. And you'll soon find out why you can't do what you are proposing.

Hint - engine out performance.

[SAMRPICS]

Regardless of its ability to get airbourne, how would a 787 backtrack/taxi at LCY and park up in the way the current aircraft do?

Indeed you are quite correct this does create another problem for the 787 at LCY but its one that would never be raised in the first place because unless it was profitable no airline would ever consider taking one to LCY in the first place. Another problem would be stopping the 787 in the event of an emergency during takeoff.
As i said before although it may well be possible for the aircraft to takeoff from City i very much doubt if it could maintain flight. This is because the aircrafts wings would be required to provide lift at the minimum of their lift ability. Combining this with the steeper than normal climb would then cause the wings to stall and the aircraft would then fall from the sky. This is the main problem and others could be caused by other scenarios such as weather.

[Peter Kesternich]

Are you using actual takeoff data, or just the fact you can physically get the aircraft into the air on the runway?

There is a lot more to takeoff performance than just being to get the wheels off the runway before they get wet.

If you are actually interested in learning, I suggest you have a look around these forums (and other sources) for information on takeoff performance. And you'll soon find out why you can't do what you are proposing.

Hint - engine out performance.

Another hint: runway requirements in case of a rejected takeoff...

[Charles022]

Indeed you are quite correct this does create another problem for the 787 at LCY but its one that would never be raised in the first place because unless it was profitable no airline would ever consider taking one to LCY in the first place. Another problem would be stopping the 787 in the event of an emergency during takeoff.
As i said before although it may well be possible for the aircraft to takeoff from City i very much doubt if it could maintain flight. This is because the aircrafts wings would be required to provide lift at the minimum of their lift ability. Combining this with the steeper than normal climb would then cause the wings to stall and the aircraft would then fall from the sky. This is the main problem and others could be caused by other scenarios such as weather.

This whole topic should of never been raised in the first place... and I know how aircraft fly Sam

[SAMRPICS]

Charles im well aware you know how aircraft fly, this wasnt intended for your benefit and whilst the topic is not one that should have been raised, i have decided to explain why the 787 wouldnt be able to operate from LCY rather than insult the person who raised the topic.