Normal payloads

[dutch11]

In attempting to accurately recreate propliner flights, I've been trying to figure out how much payload and fuel propliners carried on trans-continental and trans-Atlantic flights. I know for the DC-4, two fueling stops were standard on trans-continental flights but the DC-4 can easily make the trip with only one stop. The DC-6 can easily make it from LA to NY non-stop with full tanks and the default payload, but I know that that wasn't true in normal practice.
What is a realistic figure for weight for an average passenger plus luggage, and how much payload did they carry on top of that, like mail for instance? The DC-7C has a default payload of only 10,000 lbs. but with 99 passengers, assuming 200lbs per passenger, you arrive at a figure nearer 20,000 lbs. Were aircraft in this era normally filled to near capacity like they are now. The main thing I'm getting at is, how much fuel did these aircraft normally take off with that necessitated fuel stops?
I once flew a DC-7C non-stop from Tokyo to LA but I think a stop in Anchorage was standard practice. I know that fuel stops at Gander or Shannon were standard practice on trans-Atlantic flights but most of the propliners can make the flight non-stop with full tanks. Any advice is appreciated.
P. S. I understand about arriving at one's destination at a weight at or below the MLW, so I know that that is a factor too.

[Tom/CalClassic]

Hi,

Almost all long distance propliners allowed you to have a large payload or a large fuel load, but not both. There is a value called the "zero fuel weight" (ZFW) - anything above this weight must consist of fuel. This sets the upper limit of the payload you can carry. The limiting factor on the other end of the scale is the maximum take off weight (MTOW). If you have full fuel, you cannot carry so much payload that you exceed the MTOW. There is also a small set of payload/range values that will be limited by the maximum landing weight (MLW).

All of FSAviator's flight dynamics (and the vast majority of all FD) are designed that with the default payload and full fuel, you will be at the MTOW. This is the "long range" configuration. If you load less fuel, then you can increase your payload. But you cannot exceed the MTOW or the ZFW, and you must be below MLW at landing. This can be a tedious computation, so most people don't change their payload at all.

This will become simpler once there are Notepads for more of the propliners (I"m working on that). It will display the maximum payload you are allowed to load for a given trip, which will keep you under MTOW, ZFW, and MLW. This is already available for the Starliner.

For the passenger DC-7C, the relevant numbers are:

empty weight (typical): 82,000 lbs
MTOW: 143,000 lbs
ZFW: 101,500 lbs
MLW: 111,000 lbs (109,000 lbs earlier)
Max Fuel: 51,000 lbs

All of these can be found within FSAviator's aircraft.cfg file.

Hope this helps,

[tcreed]

until the mid 90s most airlines figured passenger weights as 165lbs for summer and 170lbs
in winter...bags weights about 20lbs each..averaged..they have been raised somewhat
since then...and in the 50s and 60s..most flights operated with available seats..excludes
charters..
rgds
t.creed

[Johan Dees]

I think.. read think, that in the old days it wasnt that important as now. Its economics from birth till death. Long time ago they were more easy on that, and it seems to me, seems to me, that less economic flight were more common than today. Or am I wrong ?

[Tom/CalClassic]

Hi,

Economics did matter some, but in most countries (including the US) it was very tightly regulated. All ticket prices were the same. If you wanted to lower fares, you had to jam in more seats so the total revenue remained the same (AND you had to get permission to do it).

Therefore, the major selling points of an airline back then was the equipment they used, the speed of the trip, the luxury of their interiors and the extravagance of their service.

BTW, FSAviator uses 170 lbs per passenger and 30 lbs for their bags. So it's a total of 200 lbs per passenger.

Hope this helps,

[Johan Dees]

Is that true ? all ticket prices where the same ? looks like a commie state! I mean, free markets and such is a US invention or something..

[Dennis the menace]

I can remember back to the late 1960s and early 1970's my dad calling the airlines on the phone to get prices for flights. As I recall, your price varied as to the time of your flight. We always left on the first flight or so, because these were always the cheapest other than some red eye flight, to which mom would have said no.

The only red eye flight I can remember us taking as a family was a National flight from LAX to HOU to MSY. We left at midnight or so, and got into MSY early in the morning. We took it was because it was one of the first DC-10 flights, and dad wanted to see what a DC-10 flight was like. I can remember on takeoff as re rotated up to climb, it was very steep and dad kept saying..."wow, this thing is just like a rocket, just like a rocket!"

I can remember mom telling dad way back when to pay Delta the extra price to fly on an 880 rather than a DC-8. She was traveling with just me, I was 6 or 7 or something and she liked the 2 seats on the 880. The DC-8 had 3 seats across and she didn't want "some strange man" just sit next to us.

Once we all took a Southern airlines 404 flight from Monroe to New Orleans which left at sunup just to save $5 a person. The breakfast "snack" was a large biscuit on a plate, with a sausage patty on it, and gravy over that.

So I don't know if this was just Delta who priced a ticket by the time of the flight, or all airlines.

Oh, one other thing...once we flew Western from Long Beach to San Francisco for the day, and it was on an Electra. For some reason our tickets put us in the lounge at the rear, but I'm not sure why. Could have been price, or just an overbooking.

Mike

[Tom/CalClassic]

Hi,

There were time of day prices on most US airlines at that time. During "business hours" the flights were more expensive. Night flights were cheaper (which included very early morning flights).

[tcreed]

prior to deregulation in the states..fares were governed by the ..civil aeronautics board..
and airlines had to file/request fare increases thru them..most airlines could make a profit
with ..less than a full aircraft.. the good ole days..haha electras and others had the
lounge in the rear of the airplanes..they were moved forward when the B727s and DC9s
arrived..away from the noise of the engines..
one could sure feel the rudder inputs when sitting in the lounge areas of the electra ..
rgds
t.creed

[Deleted]

For tons of info on routes, baggage, fares, and equipment used go to www.timetableimages.com, and download a few of the timetables they have on file, and study them.

Glad to be back on board.

Rotorpilot

[dutch11]

So using the DC-6 as an example, the default payload uses 50 passengers, with a maximum of 58. If the the aircraft was filled to capacity, that would only require the pilot to dump about 227 gallons of fuel to stay under MTOW. I haven't flown this, but it doesn't seem that that is enough fuel to require a fuel stop, yet I'm pretty sure the DC-6 always did make a fuel stop either way. Again, I don't know how much other freight, like mail that they usually carried, but it doesn't seem that leaving a significant amount of fuel would be required to maintain weight and balance within limits, especially if they weren't flying at full capacity.

[Tom/CalClassic]

While most people (including me) were under the impression that DC-6's (and DC-6B's and L-049's and L-749's) made a stop (usually in Chicago) on US transcons because they needed a fuel stop, it turns out this is not true. Once you realize that these planes were flying across the Atlantic and to Hawaii from the US West Coast, it becomes obvious that they had the range all along to fly the transcon route nonstop (just as Dutch says).

So why didn't they? Two reasons. First, the pilot unions had a rule that they could not be made to fly for longer than 8 hours at a time. These planes took about 10-11 hours to fly the transcon flight. So the airlines would have needed to provide a relief crew onboard, seriously affecting the economics. Long international flights routinely carried a relief crew aboard.

But much more incredibly, the prevailing wisdom of the time was that passengers did not want to spend such a long time cooped up in an airplane, and wanted a break to stretch their legs. This was the assumption even after much longer flights were routinely made on international flights, with no great hue and cry from the passengers. Therefore, the airlines made no attempt to negotiate with the crews for longer flights.

There was a contingent that thought that nonstop flights would be a great thing, but until CR Smith got Douglas to create the DC-7 and announced that he would use them on nonstop flights across the USA in about 8 hours did the other airlines sit up and take notice. TWA quickly negotiated with their pilots for a waiver to operate their brand new L-1049's in nonstop service (in about 9 hours) with great success. Of course, when the AAL DC-7's arrived and flew the route in an hour less, the crowds deserted TWA. They had to wait for their L-1049G's before they could catch up. The nonstop transcon race was on.

Hope this helps,

[dutch11]

That makes a lot of sense Tom, thank-you. I couldn't make sense for the need from an operational standpoint for all these fuel stops, when even the DC-4 can make it all the way with only one stop.
This leads to another question about winds aloft. Am I right in my suspicion that the winds aloft downloaded with real world weather are inaccurate? I have been up at 23,000 with wind speeds of 10-15 kts which seem more like surface wind speeds to me. I don't think that the wind speeds at those kinds of altitudes are ever that low. I am a private pilot and even at the altitudes that I would normally cruise at (7,500-11,500) the wind speeds are usually 20 kts and up. A lot of the time, I just make up my own winds because the winds I get from real world weather are so ridiculous. I don't fly at high altitudes in real life, maybe some of the airline pilots among us or Jesse could give some insight on this. The best part of using your own weather is that you can fly non-stop from LA to Gander in a DC-4 with a 150 kt tailwind ;D

[Willy]

Aug 15, 2008 18:06:38 GMT -5 Dennis the menace said:

Once we all took a Southern airlines 404 flight from Monroe to New Orleans which left at sunup just to save $5 a person. The breakfast "snack" was a large biscuit on a plate, with a sausage patty on it, and gravy over that.

As a true son of the South, I just have to ask...... Was the lunch snack a Moonpie and RC Cola? ;D