City based demand
ICEcold:
I would like to point out the city-based demand for Toronto, because I find Toronto's City Center Airport (now renamed to Billy Bishop Toronto City Center Airport) to be GROSSLY underserved and has FAR too low demand. The fact that you can get right downtown using CYTZ is a BIG plus to many travellers going to nearby destinations (Northeastern seaboard) while those who are flying further would obviously fly from CYYZ. Another airport is CYHM, in Hamilton, which is a big draw for people living outside the main Greater Toronto Area. I know that my cousins fly from CYHM, and they live in Stratford. My Grandmother, who lives in Burlington favours CYHM over CYYZ because of the 20 minutes driver versus the 45 minute drive to CYYZ. Those two should really be implemented because of their locations, but the demand to CYYZ should also still remain relatively the same because the amount of people flying through CYTZ and CYHM is not entirely huge, however if airlines increase flights from those airports the demand would for sure increase, which is when the demand in CYYZ would start to fall. It's up to you how you want to model that, Sami. :P
Cheers,
ICEcold
sami:
What do you think about following ...
The airports have the threefold classification in demand today: domestic, longhaul, shorthaul. Should this be kept as a baseline in the future too?
Meaning that you cannot fly longhaul from an airport that has in real life only 100% domestic demand for example? I have done some number crunching and this would reduce the need of calculations (number of possible route pairs) quite heavily. But on the other hand it may limit the whole idea of the free demand too much - when you for example cannot start to fly domestic services to some airport that in real life gets only for example shorthaul intl. traffic.
So perhaps the three-level classification could be expanded somehow to provide a bit of user freedom .. but how to do that maintaining the realism and without needing to manually go through the airport data.
...
(with the present dom/intl/long traffic allocation in place there are about 1 000 000 different airport pair route combination possibilities that techniclly can have some demand)
vitongwangki:
Quote from: sami on March 05, 2012, 12:23:24 AM
What do you think about following ...
The airports have the threefold classification in demand today: domestic, longhaul, shorthaul. Should this be kept as a baseline in the future too?
Meaning that you cannot fly longhaul from an airport that has in real life only 100% domestic demand for example? I have done some number crunching and this would reduce the need of calculations (number of possible route pairs) quite heavily. But on the other hand it may limit the whole idea of the free demand too much - when you for example cannot start to fly domestic services to some airport that in real life gets only for example shorthaul intl. traffic.
...
If this algorithm could make it done, I could support this use the following example.
Tokyo Haneda vs Narita,
New York La Guardia vs JFK,
Sao Paulo Congonhas vs Guarulhos,
Milano Linate vs Malpensa,
Some of the airports are able to take up long haul demand but it doesn't because the authority not allowed. I guess if the algorithm set like this, it is still acceptable.
alexgv1:
Or another idea is to change the pie chart to display the percentage of flights that AWS airlines fly from that airport rather than the real life airlines. Therefore this value changes as new routes are added. e.g. in 1980 Heathrow could be 20% long haul but with the new slots by 2000 it could be 39% long haul as the player has used the slots to open more longhaul.
Hope I've made myself clear.
JumboShrimp:
Quote from: sami on March 05, 2012, 12:23:24 AM
What do you think about following ...
The airports have the threefold classification in demand today: domestic, longhaul, shorthaul. Should this be kept as a baseline in the future too?
Meaning that you cannot fly longhaul from an airport that has in real life only 100% domestic demand for example? I have done some number crunching and this would reduce the need of calculations (number of possible route pairs) quite heavily. But on the other hand it may limit the whole idea of the free demand too much - when you for example cannot start to fly domestic services to some airport that in real life gets only for example shorthaul intl. traffic.
So perhaps the three-level classification could be expanded somehow to provide a bit of user freedom .. but how to do that maintaining the realism and without needing to manually go through the airport data.
...
(with the present dom/intl/long traffic allocation in place there are about 1 000 000 different airport pair route combination possibilities that techniclly can have some demand)
When speaking of airports, airport needs to have some facilities for international flights, such as customs office, passport/visa/immigration control facility. If the airport does not have it, no international flights should be allowed.
As far as international airports not allowed domestic flights - my guess is that there are only handful of those, and could be flagged manually. But it would put some airports at a disadvantage (for example Narita). If a pax wants to fly to a small Japanese city, there would be no way to transfer at NRT (where in real life, a passenger could take a train from NRT to HND).
As far as domestic only airports, if I take one - Savannah, Georgia (SAV), there are no international flights, but the demand square around SAV would have some international demand. So as far as the cominations, there would really be a huge number of combinations from square to square. Instead of that, the square to square demand could be a formula based on some stored parameters of the demand square, and would not have to be coded (or stored) as a set of combinations.
So if a square around SAV has certain demand magnitude, and LHR has a demand magniture, the system would on the fly calculate the SAV-LHR demand.
As far as combinations to consider, the system should perhaps calculate only the ones that are "connected" by scheduled flights.
Navigation