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: Newly identified STOL aircraft:  (Read 6572 times)

Offline Sigma

  • Members
  • Posts: 1920
Re: Newly identified STOL aircraft:
« Reply #40 on: October 02, 2010, 01:28:54 AM »
Quote
Sigma,

It is simple illegal in real life to fly many types of planes at LCY.   London is insane for airplane rules.    I DO agree with you about the big planes statement, though.

I know the rules at LCY and that's why I said that I understood from a purists perspective why they would want those rules in place.

Nice try sigma but the reason some people are using unrealistic vla ops into regionals is slot unavailability so how can we be expected to schedule frequent realistic sized aircraft ops into large international hubs when slots are at a premium?

That has absolutely nothing at all to do with what I said.  My comment was in regards to the statement that large planes blow your little planes out of the water and that is patently false in AWS.

Besides, in the situation that you describe regarding slot shortages, you're screwed no matter what the rules are.  If slot availability is already a problem, even with VLA coming into your base, it'll be an exponentially greater problem if they can't fly those planes to those smaller airports.  They'll use up slots even quicker than they do now flying smaller planes to little airports and/or they'll simply use those slots elsewhere and, though there may be available demand on the route to LCY (or whatever) you won't be able to fill it because of lack of slots to the larger hubs.

People always want to compare the AWS world to exactly how our present-day world is and it's not.  Maybe Aberdeen can't handle 747s in real-life, but that's because it's never had to.  I guarantee you that if Aberdeen was in "our" world and was faced with the prospect of flights to LHR that required some moderate facility upgrades to handle large influxes of passengers at once, or the option of not having LHR service at all because there wasn't the slots that could be 'wasted' on little planes, that Aberdeen would do what it took to handle those aircraft.

Legal situations like LCY or regulations or the like are different stories.  Things like facilities, physical plant and infrastructure, that's all subject to the whims of demands and operations, and we do things differently here than real-life we shouldn't be subject to those same limitations and AWS is moving more and more in that direction all the time.  The most obvious example is that production of our aircraft models no longer stop when they did in real-life.  One day, whenever sami gets it working, demand won't mimic real-life demand so we won't be creating copies of the same hub-spoke system throughout the world like all the route demand models today, it will instead move regionally between airports based on service provided.  It's quite likely that, to solve the slot problem, sami will implement some means of increasing slots at airports based on in-game demand rather than real-life figures, a direct example of infrastructure changes that are dynamic based on in-game actions.

Offline MidlandDeltic

  • Members
  • Posts: 225
Re: Newly identified STOL aircraft:
« Reply #41 on: October 02, 2010, 09:06:26 AM »
Maybe I overstated slightly.  However, you operate out of a large airport which is guaranteed a reasonable demand to a large number of destinations.

I joined the game late (my first full world) and had to pick a Cat 4 airport to allow a certain freedom from competition at the start.  As a result, demand for regional non-hub airports from here is low - often 30-50/day.  Therfore I need access to hubs to make sensible profit and allow growth, but my core market cannot support anything larger than a 737, and more often ATR 42/72 sized aircraft.  Therefore, if a large hub operator who can decides to "fill in" with a VLA at rock bottom fares, my higher profit routes are wiped out.

My second base is also a Cat 4, but larger, and I stepped in after an airline went bankrupt, so slots and routes available.  Even at this slightly larger airport, I can operate larger / newer aircraft into hubs and make far more profit.

Anyway, as I stated in my previous post which seems to have upset you, my main wish is that airports with very specific restrictions, such as LCY, have this modelled in the sim.

MD


Offline Sigma

  • Members
  • Posts: 1920
Re: Newly identified STOL aircraft:
« Reply #42 on: October 02, 2010, 10:27:42 PM »
Maybe I overstated slightly.  However, you operate out of a large airport which is guaranteed a reasonable demand to a large number of destinations.

I may operate out of DFW right now, and do most of the time, but there's not a strategy in this game that I haven't tried and dominated at one time or another.  And first and foremost I am probably the pioneer, and certainly the one that refined and extensively used, the small plane kick-your-butt-with-frequency "strategy".

Quote
I joined the game late (my first full world) and had to pick a Cat 4 airport to allow a certain freedom from competition at the start.  As a result, demand for regional non-hub airports from here is low - often 30-50/day.  Therfore I need access to hubs to make sensible profit and allow growth, but my core market cannot support anything larger than a 737, and more often ATR 42/72 sized aircraft.  Therefore, if a large hub operator who can decides to "fill in" with a VLA at rock bottom fares, my higher profit routes are wiped out.

The smallest routes that a VLA can operate on with the 200% rules are routes with demand of about 200/day.  And that's with only a single trip.

That's 4 trips per day with an ATR, and that's with no oversupply on your part.  With 4 trips per day compared to that VLA's 1 trip per day, your planes will be flying easily about 85% full barring any differences in your CI.  Big planes are absolutely, positively NOT going to "blow you out of the water".  It's not only false, it's the complete opposite of reality.

I guarantee it.  I do it every single game-world.  I kick the crap out of huge airlines with little planes and frequency.  I do it over and over and over.  Little routes of 150/day that I fly with 2 x F100s or 3 x Saabs vs a competitors single 737 flight, or flights of 4000/day that I fly with 50 F100s per day vs 12 x A300s flights.  It's all the same.  I can take a route that's already got 400% demand on it supplied by 2 players at their max 200% each with a bunch of 737 and larger planes, throw my F100s on it for another 100% demand for myself, and my F100s will be flying 70%+ full all day long and turning a nice profit on a route that's sitting at 500% supply.  Give me about 3 game-months to earn the RI, and with just 100% of demand supplied I'll grab an easy 2/3rds of the entire traffic, leaving the incumbents with 400% demand fighting over the other 1/3rd and empty medium and large planes.

And that's going against the common 737/A320 narrow-bodies.  VLA are even easier.  Give me a competitor flying wide-bodies and I'll virtually empty their planes by flying Saabs and F100s on their routes.  I can drop the opposing marketshare and LF on a wide-body into the teens in just a few game-months using little planes.

Your main problem in the situation you describe isn't beating the widebody on marketshare.  It's having a competitor that really cares if they lose money on that route or not.   People in AWS are dead-set on flying planes 24/7 even if that plane is losing money on some route.   They may not care that they're losing money on your route, so even if you are blowing them out of the water, which you'll almost certainly be doing unless your airline is grossly mismanaged, they don't do anything about it and stay on the route regardless.

And anyone dumping pricing against you with a VLA is just being stupid and flushing money down the drain.  Passengers are not price-sensitive in AWS.  I've tried flying A300s on routes dominated by smaller planes and I've tried it by giving away the seats for just $5 -- I got virtually no impacts to my LFs at all by lowering the pricing.  I never, ever charge anything less than Standard pricing and I reset my pricing to standard default every couple real-days.

As an example, a route where 3 airlines each serve ~100% of the demand each (give or take a few %)... The guy flying once per day with an A306 has just 5% of the market, a guy flying twice a day with 737 has 17%, and me flying 7 times per day with a Saab has 78%.  The guy who came in with a VLA like the 306 is about as far from blowing me out of the water as you can get.  In fact, as one who is usually the largest A306 operator in a game and very familiar with its costing and competitive ability (or lack thereof in a head-to-head environment) that flight is hemorrhaging cash for him I have no doubt.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2010, 10:43:08 PM by Sigma »

Offline RibeiroR

  • Members
  • Posts: 84
Re: Newly identified STOL aircraft:
« Reply #43 on: October 02, 2010, 10:37:36 PM »
wrong. RJTT to RJCC. 20000 PAX a day in ATB (2018). beats that measly 9000/day on SBSP-SBRJ. ;)

Cheers,
ICEcold

o.O uh
Just that in 2018 (9000 pax), unlikely, since in 2010 has over 11000/day, in eight years will increases more than 20%

 

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.