L-1011 TriStar 1 Range Question:

[mikethepilot]

I was wondering if the L-1011 TriStar 1 models (the ones delivered to Eastern Air Lines and TWA) do have the sufficient range to complete a flight from LAX (Los Angeles International) to HNL (Honolulu Hawaii)?

Thanks for any help on this matter...

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

I never performed a full range capability check, but, prior to HJG launching the L1011, I did perform a NY/MIA flight .... adjusting the fuel load (only) in order to set the simulation at the L1011-1's certified MGTOW.

As I recall ....

Flying at FL310 and at around MACH 0.82 .... I arrived at MIA with "plenty of virtual fuel" to spare and I could, probably, have flown the same route at least another 1 and a half times without refueling .... SO .... on that basis alone .... one "should" be able to fly LAX/HLU direct without any problems.

HA operated some L1011-1's .... and flew these to the US mainland from HLU .... so .... it obviously was done as a matter of real world operations and without penalizing the aircraft PAX/freight capacity.

You'd probably be better to use the L1011-50 version though, on a route such as this, since, as I recall, it carries a bit more fuel than the L1011-1 version hence its sligtly higher weight.

When the LOADING for each of the L1011 versions was calculated it was fuel capacity (mostly) that was manipulated in order to achieve the correct aircraft weights.

If you're thinking in terms of your V-EAL operations .... then I think some EAL L1011's were later upgraded to the heavier aircraft specifications, so, any of the EAL textures currently provided by HJG can be used with any of the other L1011 aircraft base packs .... should one wish to do that.

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[Deleted]

Yo Mike,

If you are so concerned about making to Hawaii from KLAX, have you heard of economic cruising speed that can result into substantial fuel savings?? You will be surprised how much fuel you save if you use economic cruising speed:)

Regards,

Aharon

[almguy1]

Flew Sacramento, CA to Honolulu on Rich Intl L-1011 direct which is even further back in 1996

[Dan K. Hansen]

I'll take a look in my reference books to check typical ranges between each model.

It was only the -250 that was able to fly transatlantic though, and it was only Delta that used those conversion. Obviously the -500 took care of that on the great general afterwards.

[Dan K. Hansen]

Standard conditions, Max PAX+lugg. Not including the in-betweeners and conversions like: -50, -150 & -250

L1011-1= 2,680 NM
L1011-100= 3,180 NM
L1011-200= 3,600 NM
L1011-500= 5,345 NM

[Dan K. Hansen]

Flight distance between LAX and HNL is 2,556 NM according to www.travelmath.com/flying-distance/from/LAX/to/HNL, so actually the base model could cover the distance, with even a bit to spare .... but of course; tailwinds, home-sickness, down-hill flying etc. would help a lot !

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

Mike ....

"IF" you're insistent upon using the L1011-1 configuration as opposed to my L1011-50 "suggestion" .... the other way one can ensure greater range (other than flying reduced cruising MACH airspeed and at higher altitudes) is through careful payload management.

My recomended fuel adjustments for each L1011 type (per my "Basic Flying Guides") are simply intended to ensure maximum PAX/freight loadings whilst also meeting the certified MGTOW for each aircraft type.

In the case of some real world operations .... it's not uncomon to reduce PAX/freight load in order to increase fuel load in order to extend range .... OR .... reduce fuel load in order to increase PAX/freight load, but, for a slight range penalty.

Either of these philospophies work very well in FS.

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[mikethepilot]

Hello to all,

Thanks for your insight on the topic and the question I believe has been answered satisfactorily. I asked the question because, I thought the L-1011-1 models did not had the sufficient range to complete the flight from LAX to HNL. I knew that Delta had later and more range extended variants of L-1011 since Lockheed had made improvements to it in order to better compete with the Douglas DC-10-30 variant.

Again, thanks for your information and insights!

[Tony Madge - HJG]

Dan and Mark are right, the 1 could be used if the pax load was reduced so the range is extended. I know at BHX where I work we had the AA 767-200 which was restricted due to the runway length and often pax got bumped off if the wind or temp were not favourable, that was sorted on the 767-300's they then introduced, although larger it was more powerful and could get off the 8,000 ft runway for the direct BHX to O'Hare route.

[garryrussell]

Laker used DC 10-10 across the Atlantic and Air Canada used to fly Boeing 767-200 to France as well as American on lighter routes where they couldn't quite fill the aircraft and so they could use the lighter short range aircraft with the reduced loads as Tony mentions.

No worse that when 707-120 and Comets flew across the pond.

[Deleted]

Garry,

Air Canada also used L-1011s for Canada to Heathrow routes. I should know since I was there as a kid and saw those planes in Heathrow.

Aharon

[garryrussell]

Air Canada TriStars used across the Atlantic that I remember were the longer range versions.