AirwaySim
Online Airline Management Simulation
Login
Username
Password
 
or login using:
 
My Account
Username:
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Author Topic: A question about technical fuel stops ...  (Read 879 times)

Offline CVACEO

  • Members
  • Posts: 601
A question about technical fuel stops ...
« on: June 08, 2010, 05:42:31 PM »
If I have demand on a route A-B and demand on a route A-C and I fly A-B-C with B as a technical fuel stop, do I benefit from any of the A-B demand?  In other words, I know I can't load pax from B and take them to C but can I load/unload pax on the A-B and A-C portions of this flight?  Or, does no pax movement take place at all at my refueling stop B?

I understand the reason for implementing the techincal fuel stop rule in connection with the new hub feature (to stop route sniping) but it seems that you should be able to benefit from any pax demand the exists on any leg of a direct flight to/from your base or hub.

Offline DHillMSP

  • Members
  • Posts: 1201
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2010, 05:58:45 PM »
I think the answer is "no".  IIRC, you're not securing a slot at "B" as part of the changes, so you'd never get to a gate to load/unload pax there.  I think of it more as A-x-B.

And the difference between "route sniping" and "benefitting from demand on any leg of a direct flight" is only one of perspective....  ;)

Offline CVACEO

  • Members
  • Posts: 601
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2010, 06:08:57 PM »
I haven't ever utilized the technical stop before so I'm not exactly clear on what you said ... are you saying that technical stops don't require a slot?

By "sniping" I mean flying seats on demand between airports that you are not based at on either end.  It seems to me that any flight that begins or ends at your base should be a viable route to satisfy demand on.

Offline CVACEO

  • Members
  • Posts: 601
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2010, 06:19:47 PM »
I answered my own question by setting up such a route just to see about the slot thing - you are right, no slot so no gate.  Darn.

Offline DHillMSP

  • Members
  • Posts: 1201
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2010, 07:01:57 PM »
I haven't ever utilized the technical stop before so I'm not exactly clear on what you said ... are you saying that technical stops don't require a slot?

By "sniping" I mean flying seats on demand between airports that you are not based at on either end.  It seems to me that any flight that begins or ends at your base should be a viable route to satisfy demand on.

Yes, that's my understanding - someone may want to check my homework.  :)

I understand what you're talking about, but that takes us back to where we were in 1.11.  If I understand industry jargon, that's above "fifth freedom" (cabotage and such), which I think Sami's working on having seen some of the other threads on the topic.  I could see that making sense if passengers "stayed with the plane" between "B" and "C", but I don't think we're there yet.  It would be nice - would certainly change the dynamics of the game towards more realism.

Offline CVACEO

  • Members
  • Posts: 601
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2010, 07:23:01 PM »
Yes, that's my understanding - someone may want to check my homework.  :)

I understand what you're talking about, but that takes us back to where we were in 1.11.  If I understand industry jargon, that's above "fifth freedom" (cabotage and such), which I think Sami's working on having seen some of the other threads on the topic.  I could see that making sense if passengers "stayed with the plane" between "B" and "C", but I don't think we're there yet.  It would be nice - would certainly change the dynamics of the game towards more realism.

Yeah, that's what I mean - pax going on to C stay with the plane ... pax for the route A-B deplane at B but no new pax board for B-C since that would be "sniping" (by my definition).  On the return flight no pax deplane at B but pax going B-A could board.  Makes sense to me and I'm sure Sami will eventually implement it.  Just wish it was in play now 'cuz I could make a viable one-stop internantional route if so.  Oh well, hopefully in the nearer future.  :)

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14544
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2010, 08:41:17 PM »
Such routing would of course be only availabe on domestic sectors or inside EU openskies (or other similar). So not AMS-BKK-SYD for example.

Offline CVACEO

  • Members
  • Posts: 601
Re: A question about technical fuel stops ...
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2010, 09:08:00 PM »
Such routing would of course be only availabe on domestic sectors or inside EU openskies (or other similar). So not AMS-BKK-SYD for example.

Is that because of regulations?

The route I had in mind, as an example, was Toluca, Mexico (A) to Mexicali, Mexico (B) to LAX (C).  This way, as long as the aircraft is already 1200 miles from home and only a short distance from LAX I could make that last hop and justify the flight to LAX (for vanity reasons).  ;D

 

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.

If you are using the latest version please turn OFF the compatibility mode.