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 twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points  (Read 1122 times)

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« on: April 26, 2011, 11:58:18 PM »
I've got a twist to Swiftus' Commonality Points idea, which I think is radical enough to warrant another topic...

To start, let me remind you what the original idea was:
Okay, so I am up EARLY this morning. 

I thought of a way to possibly change the way you look at commonality.  This applies only for Fleet and NOT engine commonality

You get 1 point for your first aircraft fleet type.
You get 1 point if you get another aircraft from the same manufacturer of the same size/type (For instance, adding the 737ng to your 737c fleet)
You get 2 points if you get another aircraft from same manufacturer if  type is different (For instance, adding 757s to your airline of only 737s)
You get 2 points if you get another aircraft from same manufacturer if size is different (For instance, adding the 747 to your airline of 737s)
You get 3 points if you get another aircraft type from a different manufacturer if size is the same (For instance, adding a A320 to the 737s)
You get 4 points if you get another aircraft type from a different manufacturer of a different size (For instance, adding A340s to the 737s)

When you click to view another airline, their total number of points would be public and is displayed there.

The more points that you have, the more your fleet will cost to operate. 

There are many reasons I like this system. 
1.  You get penalized less if you are staying with one plane type (MD80/737)
2.  You get penalized more if you are getting planes from everyone
3.  You get penalized more if your airline is too broad (meaning, flying Pipers through Jumbos).  This will help small airlines who want to fly only small a/c
4.  This will prevent F5 spammers from going after everything as this will severely impact an airline early on.

So my idea:

My idea breaks fleet commonality into 3 types of points: manufacturer, size of plane and # of planes operated

First, you get points for size:
You get 1 point for your first small fleet
You get 2 points for each subsequent small fleet
You get 3 points for your first medium fleet
You get 6 points for each subsequent medium fleet
You get 5 points for your first large fleet
You get 10 points for each subsequent large fleet
You get 7 points for your first very large fleet
You get 14 points for each subsequent very large fleet

You would just multiply the amount of points by a set variable.

Then, you get points for manufacturer:
You get 3 point for your first fleet's manufacturer
You get 6 points for your second fleet's manufacturer
You get 10 points for your third fleet's manufacturer
You get 15 points for your fourth fleet manufacturer
etc.
You get 3 point for each subsequent fleet from a manufacturer which you already have a plane of.

Once again, you would just multiply the amount of points by a set variable.

Finally, you get points for the # of planes you have in each fleet.
You would get 1 point for your first plane of each fleet
You would get .5 points for each additional plane you have

Once again, you would just multiply the amount of points by a set variable.

Some examples of how commonality costs would look if you used this method:

Let's say that the variables are $150,000 per point for size, $200,000 per point for manufacturer, and $250,000 per plane point

First of all, an airline using a fleet of 10 A320s and 10 A340s

This airline would have 12 size points, 6 manufacturer points, and 11 plane points.
Their total fleet commonality cost would be $6,750,000.

For contrast, an airline using a fleet of 5 A320s, 5 MD-80s, 5 B777s, and 5 A340s.

This airline would have 36 size points, 22 manufacturer points, and 12 plane points.
Their total fleet commonality cost would be $13,800,000

That's a pretty drastic difference, and would make it much more profitable to run the first operation than the second.

A similar system could be employed for engine commonality.

Thoughts?
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2011, 12:06:45 AM »
I'm a few beers into my evening so I will comment on this one tomorrow.

0zlw

  • Former member
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2011, 03:20:17 AM »
The first thing that stands out for me is the set cost variable. With game worlds set in different era's and that AirwaySm simulates inflation it would have to be applied to this scenario.

Beside that issue I believe that while there is a grounding here for a better system it is harsh on small airlines. While this system functions effectively on airline operating large planes for regional airlines and the like they pay too much. Using the first scenario of an airline flying 10 A320's and an 10 A340's (As far as I know a large a/c and a very large a/c respectively) and applying it to an airline flying 10 medium a/c and 10 large a/c from the same manufacturer. Unless I am mistaken (correct me if I am) the manufacturer and plane points stay the same and only the size points change moving from 12 to 8 a saving of 600k.

This airline would pay $6,150,000 in maintenance cost being extremely unfair (If we apply to the even smaller airlines this idea would become even more unfair)

A possible solution to this is to put more emphasis on differences in fleet size ie:
- Increase the cost of fleet points
- Increase the difference between fleet points making the gap 3 or 4 point or increasing the amount given.

Edit: While I don't remember what was said entirely on the Swiftus's thread on fleet commonality (an improvements on the post quoted here may have been made) I believe that a system that includes points base on the size of an aircraft is an improvement and a step in the right direction.

Edit edit: I have adjusted the fleet size level to read medium as I though sizes went very small, small, large, and very large as opposed to the actual system small, medium, large, very large.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2011, 04:10:06 AM by 0zlw »

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2011, 03:48:11 AM »
I pretty much agree with your post. The amount of points and the actual variables etc. are just there to illustrate how the system would work, and they are up for debate.

As if an airline is operating small aircraft instead of large aircraft, commonality is going to be the last of their worries (they won't be able to pay off the loan, forget everything else)

Inflation to the variable would definitely make sense.

Also, commonality costs are monthly, not weekly (doesn't really matter though)
« Last Edit: April 27, 2011, 03:50:47 AM by BobTheCactus »
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

0zlw

  • Former member
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2011, 04:11:25 AM »
As if an airline is operating small aircraft instead of large aircraft, commonality is going to be the last of their worries (they won't be able to pay off the loan, forget everything else)

I disagree with that point and for any small airline trying to survive it is essential it maintains a strong and tight fleet commonality to ensure it can receive a decent profit. Also an airline operating 20 reasonable sized aircraft (which it is in our case) isn't ridiculously small either it might be operating a smaller aircraft for regional routes while maintaining a fleet of B737's or A320's.

However aside from that maybe adjustments to you system to make it better for small airlines could be made. Instead of a flat point rate for each additional aircraft:

Finally, you get points for the # of planes you have in each fleet.
You would get 1 point for your first plane of each fleet
You would get .5 points for each additional plane you have

Aircraft of different sizes receives a different point level (Used an example the difference probably should be more extreme:
- Small .2
- Medium .4
- Large . 6
- Very Large .8

This would mean players operating smaller aircraft do not need to pay as much as bigger ones. Do you think this would work?

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #5 on: April 27, 2011, 05:20:22 AM »
As far as sizes of aircraft, I am not sure if that needs to be brought into the mix for commonality.  There already is a maintenance cost (ABCD checks) that veries by size (among other variables) and there is a higher cost for pilots flying larger aircraft.

Offline alexgv1

  • Members
  • Posts: 2184
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #6 on: April 27, 2011, 09:44:07 AM »
I'm a few beers into my evening so I will comment on this one tomorrow.

Hehe, yes it's a bit of an eyeful (?) I think I will have to come back to this one later myself.
CEO of South Where Airlines (SWA|WH)

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 1895
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #7 on: April 27, 2011, 01:08:05 PM »
I don't like the manufacturer points.  Reason being is some manufacturers simply don't make the entire range of plane sizes.  If you are building a fleet even with just Boeings, you're probably still going to add a ~70 seat Dash-8 type to your fleet.  Likewise if you are running a smaller regional and want to bring on some bigger aircraft (i.e. you're running all Bombardier Dash-8 or CRJ and want to add a 737 or similar).  I don't think it would be terribly uncommon in the modern game worlds to have someone running A380's, 757s, 737s, and Dash-8s out of the major hubs.  There is also issues with manufacturers simply going out of business due to lack of plane orders.  If you're in a modern scenario and fuel prices are temporarily high, the MD-80 and similar will end up without orders and going out of production, which puts you at the mercy of the used aircraft market to avoid huge commonality costs of adding planes from a different manufacturer.

It seems the simplest way to penalize people for poor commmonality is using a factoral to scale the costs.  For example, if you have 100 aircraft and only 1 fleet type, your points are 100 = 100 * 1! (1! = 1).  If you have 2 fleet types, your points are 200 = 100 * 2! (2! = 2 * 1).  3 fleet types, your points are 600 = 100 * 3! (3! = 3 * 2 * 1 = 6).  4 fleet types = 2400 points = 100 * 4! (4! = 4 * 3 * 2 *1 = 24).  5 fleet types = 12000 points = 100 * 5! (5! = 5 * 4 * 3 * 2 *1 = 120).

After you get these points for fleet types 1-5 (100, 200, 600, 2400, and 12000) you divide by some number so that people with 5 fleet types and 500 aircraft versus 5 fleet types and 5 aircraft aren't as heavily penalized. 

Offline JumboShrimp

  • Members
  • Posts: 5992
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #8 on: April 27, 2011, 01:58:59 PM »
I am having 2nd thoughts about all of this.  I think where these discussions go off track is that people think penalties, where it really is a discount.

Maintaining (training, administering etc) 1 aircraft costs X (very high).  Cost of maintainint 2nd aircraft of the same fleet type (lets call it Y) is is less X.  Maintaining 3rd aircraft of the same fleet type is (lets call it Z) is less than Y.

Now, getting 2nd fleet type, 1st aircraft the cost is A (again very high).  In real life, A is independent of X.  Cost of the 1st aircraft of any new type is independent of number of existing fleet types.  The only thing is that the first aircraft of any new fleet type is very expensive.

Suppose an airline has 800 aircraft in 8 fleet types, 100 each.  This airline should really have much lower cost (higher discount), and greater commonality benefit than an airline with 1 fleet type of 10 aircraft.

The reason it will not be implemented this way in AWS is because it would kill most of the airlines starting up, if done the right way.  One way to implement it the right way, and not kill all of the new airlines is (for sake of playability) to waive this high start up fee on the first fleet type.

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #9 on: April 27, 2011, 03:06:40 PM »
I don't like the manufacturer points.  Reason being is some manufacturers simply don't make the entire range of plane sizes.  If you are building a fleet even with just Boeings, you're probably still going to add a ~70 seat Dash-8 type to your fleet.  Likewise if you are running a smaller regional and want to bring on some bigger aircraft (i.e. you're running all Bombardier Dash-8 or CRJ and want to add a 737 or similar).  I don't think it would be terribly uncommon in the modern game worlds to have someone running A380's, 757s, 737s, and Dash-8s out of the major hubs.  There is also issues with manufacturers simply going out of business due to lack of plane orders.  If you're in a modern scenario and fuel prices are temporarily high, the MD-80 and similar will end up without orders and going out of production, which puts you at the mercy of the used aircraft market to avoid huge commonality costs of adding planes from a different manufacturer.

It seems the simplest way to penalize people for poor commmonality is using a factoral to scale the costs.  For example, if you have 100 aircraft and only 1 fleet type, your points are 100 = 100 * 1! (1! = 1).  If you have 2 fleet types, your points are 200 = 100 * 2! (2! = 2 * 1).  3 fleet types, your points are 600 = 100 * 3! (3! = 3 * 2 * 1 = 6).  4 fleet types = 2400 points = 100 * 4! (4! = 4 * 3 * 2 *1 = 24).  5 fleet types = 12000 points = 100 * 5! (5! = 5 * 4 * 3 * 2 *1 = 120).

After you get these points for fleet types 1-5 (100, 200, 600, 2400, and 12000) you divide by some number so that people with 5 fleet types and 500 aircraft versus 5 fleet types and 5 aircraft aren't as heavily penalized. 

You're missing the point.

In real life, Alaska Airlines has much lower maintenance costs per plane than American Airlines, because Alaska is completely 1 manufacturer (Boeing), while American has multiple.

That doesn't mean that American is so badly hurt that they go BK because of this, it simply means that they make less profit, because they are spending more.

Manufacturer commonality isn't there to drive an airline out of business if they add another manufacturer or two, rather it is there to encourage airlines to try to stick with a single manufactuer when possible. In AWS, with Boeing/Airbus and even Tupolev (I think), it's possible to span all profitable sizes with a single manufacturer, or at most 2
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2011, 03:11:35 PM »
I am having 2nd thoughts about all of this.  I think where these discussions go off track is that people think penalties, where it really is a discount.

Maintaining (training, administering etc) 1 aircraft costs X (very high).  Cost of maintainint 2nd aircraft of the same fleet type (lets call it Y) is is less X.  Maintaining 3rd aircraft of the same fleet type is (lets call it Z) is less than Y.

Now, getting 2nd fleet type, 1st aircraft the cost is A (again very high).  In real life, A is independent of X.  Cost of the 1st aircraft of any new type is independent of number of existing fleet types.  The only thing is that the first aircraft of any new fleet type is very expensive.

Suppose an airline has 800 aircraft in 8 fleet types, 100 each.  This airline should really have much lower cost (higher discount), and greater commonality benefit than an airline with 1 fleet type of 10 aircraft.

The reason it will not be implemented this way in AWS is because it would kill most of the airlines starting up, if done the right way.  One way to implement it the right way, and not kill all of the new airlines is (for sake of playability) to waive this high start up fee on the first fleet type.

Exactly.

It can't be implemented exactly as it is in real life, so we have to use this type of method.

While it isn't perfect, I think it is a definite step in the right direction for gameplay.

I also disagree with your analysis of the plan.

It contains both penalties AND discounts.

When you get a plane from a new manufacturer, or a new size, in a new fleet, it penalizes you, but that is simply an attempt to simulate the enormous fleet commonality costs that would hit you in real life for the first plane.

The subsequent planes only add a partial point, which causes fleet commonality to get cheaper per plane, simulating the discount of operating more of a single fleet group and it's efficiencies.
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2011, 03:13:44 PM »
As far as sizes of aircraft, I am not sure if that needs to be brought into the mix for commonality.  There already is a maintenance cost (ABCD checks) that veries by size (among other variables) and there is a higher cost for pilots flying larger aircraft.

The reason I used sizes is not to encourage people to operate smaller planes, rather it is to make people choose 1 fleet per size and stick with it. It is there to add an additional disincentive for people who want A320/B737/MD80 or A340/B757/B767/B777 fleets all at the same time
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2011, 03:14:31 PM »
Aircraft of different sizes receives a different point level (Used an example the difference probably should be more extreme:
- Small .2
- Medium .4
- Large . 6
- Very Large .8

This would mean players operating smaller aircraft do not need to pay as much as bigger ones. Do you think this would work?

Not a bad idea
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

Offline BobTheCactus

  • Members
  • Posts: 1244
    • AeroBlogger.com
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2011, 02:05:32 PM »
If nobody else has comments/concerns left, I now request Sami's opinion.
Editor of AeroBlogger
If you're interested in blogging on aviation 3x/month or more:
http://AeroBlogger.com/Write

Offline alexgv1

  • Members
  • Posts: 2184
Re: A twist on Swiftus' Commonality Points
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2011, 02:26:11 PM »
Finally, you get points for the # of planes you have in each fleet.
You would get 1 point for your first plane of each fleet
You would get .5 points for each additional plane of each fleet

Aircraft of different sizes receives a different point level (Used an example the difference probably should be more extreme:
- Small .2
- Medium .4
- Large . 6
- Very Large .8

This would mean players operating smaller aircraft do not need to pay as much as bigger ones. Do you think this would work?

I like this, and to build on it, I think the number should get even smaller every certain number of planes subsequently added to the fleet (e.g. every ten it goes down by another 0.03 for Large A/C). Or possibly an exponential decay, where the first plane is the most costly at 1.0 points and then the points for the next decreases, so that by the time you reach a fixed number of aircraft (say 20) the cost per aircraft is pretty much fixed (say at 0.1).
CEO of South Where Airlines (SWA|WH)

 

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.