Jump to content

The pacific conundrum


Recommended Posts

  • Aerosoft

Phileas and Passepartout did the trip over the Pacific aboard the steamer the General Grant that obviously has more range than almost all of the aircraft available to us simmers. Now I could be hopeful and say the A330 will be ready at that date but .....

 

We got several options:

  • I could try to get a good discount from PMDG for one of their long distance aircraft
  • It's a 22 day period and we could just decide that people have to find their own route as long as they are in San Francisco in time. 
  • We got the F-14 Tomcat that has inflight refueling

 

Any other suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Can ferry tanks be used if they could be in the original vehicle? (taking into account weeight.)

Vote for free crossing of the pacific. Not direct.

Do we have to fly the shortest possible from Calcutta to Singapore or can we go across the hump and down the coast?

The Tompcat can not be used as there are three passengers at least on that leg.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those aare great, but as Turtle pack was not pioneered until the mid 80s is it suitible for historic aircraft,  I think I will have to use these 

Please login to display this image.

and give my copilot some exercise, at least because it is 1870 no environmental nonsene, I can throw them out the back door when they are empty to give more space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guyz,

 

Phileas Fogg made this transpaciifc leg in 22 days ... so we may think to use a northern route in 22 days ... maybe : Yojkohama heading north to kamchatka, then shemya (USA), teh Aleutian islands, Anchorga, then going south to Frisco thru Prince Ripert, Vancouver, Seattle, and Portland ,?? What do you think? It's possible to do that "northern route" in 22 days quite easily I think.... ???

have happy landings

 

Philippe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just putting it out there, the iFly 747-400 is a really nice aircraft and very reasonably priced. It seems to have quite a good depth of system detail as well. Not quite up to the standards of the PMDG 744, but for me at least, it's more than good enough.

 

If time weren't an issue, I'd opt for doing shorter legs across the berring straits, like we did on the RTW tour, except in the opposite direction obviously. But doing this in a 22 day period could prove challenging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Aerosoft
On 04/09/2017 at 11:21 PM, quaxpilot said:

Aloha!

 

Ehm...do we have to follow the "official" Phileas-Fogg-route like here on the map:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Around_the_World_in_Eighty_Days

 

For example: the Calcutta-Hong Kong-route by ship is a much different way than to fly cross-country directly.

 

 

safe landings

Lem

 

I for sure will fly the long route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20-9-2017 at 10:47 PM, Philouplaine said:

Hi guyz,

 

Phileas Fogg made this transpaciifc leg in 22 days ... so we may think to use a northern route in 22 days ... maybe : Yojkohama heading north to kamchatka, then shemya (USA), teh Aleutian islands, Anchorga, then going south to Frisco thru Prince Ripert, Vancouver, Seattle, and Portland ,?? What do you think? It's possible to do that "northern route" in 22 days quite easily I think.... ???

have happy landings

 

Philippe

 

Easy. Here's the route as I'm planning to do it. 8 legs, unless you have a lot of waiting to do for weather to allow landings at the next field in the route, that's quite doable in 3 weeks:

 

RJTT RJCN 538   Tokyo->Nakashibetsu
RJCN UHPP 787   Nakashibetsu->Petropavlovsk
UHPP PASY 577   Petropavlovsk-Shemya
PASY PADU 698   Shemya->Unalaska
PADU PANC 688   Unalaska->Anchorage
PANC PAKT 674   Anchorage->Ketchikan
PAKT KPDX 682   Ketchikan->Portland
KPDX KSFO 479   Portland->San Francisco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question - everybody is debating the northern route (Bering/Alaska) vs. the southern (Hawaii) route.  Of course I could just do a direct in the T7, but what if I wanted to swing even further south? :blink:

 

Say I wanted to throwback a century further and throw some James Cook into the mix with something like RJAA PGUM PKMJ NSTU NTAA SCIP SPJC MMPR KSFO?  Sure it's twice the distance (isn't it supposed to be fun?) but such a route is still easily achievable with even an A320 or B752, or even smaller for some of the sub-segments depending on your appetite for island-hopping.  When else am I going to actually have an excuse to fly 4000 miles out of the way to Easter Island?

 

(Heck, for that matter toss Perth or Darwin into the Calcutta-Hong Kong leg to get another continent and truly call it "around the world".)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've taken the southern route in the past, island hopping across the southern Pacific. Need a bloody long range though, as you said.

It's about 2000nm from Easter Island to the nearest airport in Chile, SCIP-SCEL.

1400nm to Easter Island, NTGJ-SCIP.

 

A Cessna 441 Conquest can do it, if you get lucky with the winds. And of course something like a Constellation should have no problems whatsoever with the distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually many of the single engine planes will have a bit of trouble with the Northern Route.   New rules mean must be below 6000 ft if not equiped with dual navigation linked with the autopilot.  Must also carry imersion suits too which add to the weight.  And have HF radios.

Not to mention the weather and the non availability of Avgas in many locations.

Have fun :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

Did not know about those rules. Any link to them?

May be misreading a bit  I have been scanning a lot

http://avstop.com/seaplane/70/

is one source

I am not sure where I read about the one regarding nav requirements below 6000 being changed.

No problem here, we can allways get a virtual get out of jail card.

Just do not land at some of the northern airports on a Sunday or after 4.30.  It could cost you a $1200 opening fee.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehm. I will do island hopping from Tokyo via Henderson Field and Honolulu to San Francisco using the Airbus A318.

Fuel Planner said that with pax and some cargo it will handle the distance. And I always have about 2.5 to 3.5 tons of reserve. Even when I just fly short and med leg in germany/europe.

Perhaps I can do a screenshot this afternoon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4.9.2017 at 11:39 PM, mopperle said:

Voting for option 2: People have to find their way over the Pacific Ocean. Using something like T7 is simply boring. ;)

Hahah weeeeell...that depends mate. I find the T7 a joy and a thrill to fly every time, however, I entirely understand your point. Relatively straight forward flight and flown on AP for most of it...I guess I'm just all about that long haul grace, bout that grace... :D

 

That being said, as much as I love the T7 (specifically the -300ER variant), the A330-300 and the A350 (-all) only JUST win a bigger part of my heart...but only JUST. So if (and I know it's expected sometime early next year which is awesome, but hypothetically IF) the A333 through some early Christmas miracle did spread its wings in time for the 'hop' over the Pacific, then a 'series of unfortunate events' will force us to re-schedule the remainder of the journey with the A333 ;)

 

But if (and quite possibly more than just an if) not, then my vote would probably be cast on Option 1 (hahaha sorry mopperle :D:D )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hmm, looking into this.

The direct route (as Fogg used on a Steamer but with some stops in for manageability) would come to 6090nm.

Please login to display this image.

 

The northern route, to make more stops possible, would for instance take 5070nm.

Please login to display this image.

 

Or 4920 even if the Anchorage "detour" is cut out

Please login to display this image.

 

So it depends on the aircraft flown and pilot preference, I think. All in all, the northern route is shorter than the direct route, but with more legs possible.

 

Going south of the equator doesn't really help. Yokohama/Tokyo is already way high on the northern hemisphere, so making more miles to save them is a paradox.

Regardless, the south pacific is so bereft of airfields that making a route there is nigh impossible. 

 

Then there's the piloting factor, which is a subjective one but worth mentioning: many pilots favor "doing" something on their flights instead of flying over endless waters for 12 hours or more. Given total range between Tokoy and San Fransisco, possibility on number airports to stop at and added challenge of flying in colder climates than normally encountered on this endeavour, I think I'm going for the northern route:

Tokyo - Yelizovo - Unalaska - Ketchikan - San Fransisco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

And for some at least (me included) the southern route is a no-go because of the limited range of our aircraft.

I simply can't fly 1700+nm even in perfect conditions, a thousand or so is about the limit I am willing to trust (with the tip tanks, it can do some more, but I consider that my safety margin).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use