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: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?  (Read 2034 times)

Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« on: May 31, 2014, 10:00:13 AM »
As many know, many of us used (2-3 game worlds ago) the strategy of SH planes (e.g. 320) to fly LH routes to 1) take up valuable slots, 2) lower aircraft leasing costs on these SH planes and 3) ramp up frequencies to gain on the route's MS and pull the rug from under the competition.

Sami solved this by penalizing those that place SH planes onto LH routes and the route scheduling pages advises us of this with a yellow box.

However, I am beginning to doubt the penalizing points are high enough to deter some of the newer (newly registered) players from adopting this old strategy: case in point the Zurich/Riyadh route (http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/X/LSZH/OERK/). Player A has stuck with the game ethics of LH plane for a LH route and has a 63% MS while Player B has decided to disregard fair play and slap on a SH plane on the route and gain 37% MS.

With Player A having at least double the leasing costs (A300 vs. MD83) and double the CI (so higher marketing spend) than Player B, wouldn't that place Player A at a disadvantage? IIRC, in the previous GW3, those that place SH planes on LH routes got severely penalized to the extent that MS wouldn't pass the 25% mark so it would certainly make a loss and deter such moves; yet with this game giving a 37% MS doesn't seem to be much of a deterrent.

What this also means is that I am back to trying out the SH planes onto LH routes strategy once again (something Sami doesn't want us to get back into). But if the game codes aren't penalizing us severely enough, what is to deter me from trying this out once again in order to remain competitive against Player B?

Offline Infinity

  • Members
  • Posts: 1564
    • Aviation Awareness
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2014, 10:06:42 AM »
The route is
a) not overserved, so it is only natural both will be full
b) hardly long haul, possibly not even showing the miniplane warning.

Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2014, 10:17:25 AM »
a) so routes not underserved are OK to slap on an MD80 at 33% of the leasing cost against the A300? Using this rational, I might as well cancel all my A300 and go for a pure SH fleet and fly the world over.
b) see image below

Offline Mr.HP

  • Members
  • Posts: 2730
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2014, 11:05:31 AM »
b) hardly long haul, possibly not even showing the miniplane warning.

Agree. To OP, there's many level of mini plane penalty, and this route (demand + distance) is kind of at first level. But for a WB to draw > 2x the amount of pax the NB does, I think it's fair enough

Offline Infinity

  • Members
  • Posts: 1564
    • Aviation Awareness
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2014, 11:24:57 AM »
a) so routes not underserved are OK to slap on an MD80 at 33% of the leasing cost against the A300? Using this rational, I might as well cancel all my A300 and go for a pure SH fleet and fly the world over.

So according to you, the MD80 should fly half empty just because it's an MD80, despite the demand being there? The miniplane warning is not there to screw narrow bodies, but to advantage wide bodies. The wide body on this route is not at a disadvantage. Both aircraft are simply full because there is enough demand to fill both in this constellation. Miniplane penalty only comes into play when the demand is overserved. Then, a wide body will do better.

Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2014, 11:55:34 AM »
The wide body on this route is not at a disadvantage. Both aircraft are simply full because there is enough demand to fill both in this constellation. Miniplane penalty only comes into play when the demand is overserved. Then, a wide body will do better.

Testing this theory now on a couple of routes where I placed an A300 with a monthly leasing cost of just under a million against the MD80 with an ave monthly leasing cost of 300K. Let me see how exactly my ROI pans out. If ROI is low, then I guess we can all go back to our old ways of SH planes on LH routes as the topic title has originally stated.

Offline [SC] - King Kong

  • Members
  • Posts: 598
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #6 on: May 31, 2014, 12:49:54 PM »
Dump A300 and use short haul planes with tech stops. It will work. Goodluck

Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #7 on: May 31, 2014, 12:59:50 PM »
Dump A300 and use short haul planes with tech stops. It will work. Goodluck

nah.. I've always seen/experienced tech stops as market share-killers.

Let me see what happens with my current theory test before deciding on an ultimate plan.

Thanks for the input, King Kong.

Regards.

Offline Kadachiman

  • Members
  • Posts: 914
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #8 on: May 31, 2014, 01:34:20 PM »
1. 2,500 Nm is hardly long haul, a lot of countries need that distance just to travel within their own country e.g. Australia (Jetstar exclusively use A320 - 200 domestically)
2. The flight time is not unsatisfactory for pax
3. Fleet commonality costs actually encourage using aircraft to their max range
4. He actually has a narrow body penalty anyway so the game does penalise him already (but a penalty worth having sometimes due to point 3)

Smart move IMO using a MD80 range against an A300 as he does not require the same level of pax income to turn a profit, the all important quest especially early in the game

Hell I even used B707's to ensure that I got some of those EGLL slots before they are all gone, but it does not mean that I will keep them, they were cheap to buy so that I could get slots now.

But basically I don't believe that 2200 Nm is classified as LH anyway
« Last Edit: May 31, 2014, 01:43:28 PM by Kadachiman »

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3068
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #9 on: May 31, 2014, 01:55:16 PM »
At this point in the game the mad dog is probably in the 90-99% appropriate range for the distance and demand of the flight. If you bury the route with a300's you will have a marginal advantage. In another 10-15 game years, the mad dog will be far less appropriate (as it scales with demand and time) thus your airbusses will be slapping him around with a trout.

Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #10 on: May 31, 2014, 02:58:24 PM »
Excellent points from both of you and totally agree that, over time, the LH planes will gain advantage. I guess I am referring to this from the standpoint of short term financial gain and advantage which many of us need to gain the necessary momentum.

Just to clarify:

1. RUH-FCO isn't theoretically LH however, the game does classify it as such (see pic attachment above)

2. The reason I placed the post is to just clarify my standing. About 3 game worlds ago I was based at LHR and went with the strategy of A320's across the atlantic. This caused some rocus in the forum  hence Sami's move to initiate a penalty on SH planes for LH flights. Therefore, by posting in here I am making my stance clear: I am not reinitiating this strategy but simply following someone who did.

Again thanks for the insight all. Appreciate it.

Raith

Offline Kadachiman

  • Members
  • Posts: 914
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #11 on: May 31, 2014, 04:29:28 PM »
Keep in mind that the 'too small' warning is not actually suited to individual planes here as I guess that the coding is too hard and/or too time consuming for any perceived leap in game advantage.

The 767 is a classic example of the above -
767-200ER - too small warning across the pond...what was this plane made for with a range of 6000+ Nm if it wasn't for LH flights?
However when the 767-400ER is released the warning tends to go (maybe not in all cases)....due to a seating capacity increase for the entire range

IMO with the scenario you described...yep the MD is not ideal as a 320-200 may have been a better choice waiting for the 321-200 to increase the fleet type capacity...but the MD is cheap and gets him on the route for minimal cost waiting for RI, CI, profilts etc to go up so that he can replace with a 'better suited' plane later

Is this 'taking an unfair advantage' ....maybe...but I just thought it was good gameplay...which is why I used gas guzzling 707's to get on the EGLL routes before they are gone

PS - but all of my plane knowledge is from this game as I know nothing of planes in RL ...so I just use what the game gives me for each plane and play with that data....no RL expectations of each plane
« Last Edit: May 31, 2014, 04:35:27 PM by Kadachiman »

Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #12 on: May 31, 2014, 04:36:03 PM »
...but the MD is cheap and gets him on the route for minimal cost waiting for RI, CI, profilts etc to go up so that he can replace with a 'better suited' plane later

correction: not him/he but us.. I already jumped on the 'SH planes on LH routes' bandwagon  ;D

Offline Kadachiman

  • Members
  • Posts: 914
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2014, 04:41:55 PM »
Me too

I actually think that some peoples real life plane knowledge can be a disadvantage in this game as they may overlook better suited planes because ...well nobody would use that plane for that route in real life...without looking at the game data

A300-600R ...why isn't this plane used more widely?...great fuel economy, decent range and carries reasonable pax numbers...If I was based at a more suited airport for these birds I would use them.....do they rate well in RL?

BAe ATP ....the most fuel efficient prop in the game? ... good pax numbers, good range etc for a prop, maybe a tad slow?...yet generally overlooked



Offline sleak76

  • Members
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2014, 04:53:19 PM »
I actually think that some peoples real life plane knowledge can be a disadvantage in this game as they may overlook better suited planes

You are right; we do tend to allow our RL experiences to influence our game decision.

Mind you the B757 in the game also has great economics and in past game worlds, it has really proven a great aircraft to start a game with. I think it trumps the A300 (in the game) as the leasing costs are much lower and has a lower fuel consumption, although it does have lower pax carrying capacity than the A300). That'll explain why many players are using the 757 (500 of them flying) rather than the more expensive A300/310 (around 400 flying).

Offline DrMccarthy

  • Members
  • Posts: 24
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2014, 02:01:10 PM »
I think,
I dont see reality in a company lease a lot of a300 (without CI, with too much costs) and make sucess...
I think that this company should go bankrupt, because with a FL% under 50%,  in my concept, a little company couldnt make profit with this kind of plane, initially. The LH couldnt make profit, intially!!   :-\
In my concept, you will need a lot of working capital, that should not be sufficient in the beginning!
I am just seeing ease in grow up with expensives planes and low CI, just taking LH. I think that must be reason for bankruptcy!
Just my thought..

Offline 11Air

  • Members
  • Posts: 433
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2014, 04:44:25 PM »
I think the 'too small' warning tends to come from passenger comfort. Going to standard seating will not only extend the aircrafts range (fuel tanks can carry more) but give passengers a better ride that they pay more for (cost per seat can double).
So those aircraft that can do the range will earn well with better, but fewer seating.

Offline CUR$E - God of AirwaySim

  • Members
  • Posts: 4028
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2014, 07:40:28 PM »
Talking about fair while you use 767, the baby widebody, while real people use A330/A340, 777 and DC-10/MD-11.

;D

Offline meiru

  • Members
  • Posts: 745
Re: Return of the old SH plane to the LH routes?
« Reply #18 on: June 15, 2014, 08:19:34 PM »
I think the 'too small' warning tends to come from passenger comfort. Going to standard seating will not only extend the aircrafts range (fuel tanks can carry more) but give passengers a better ride that they pay more for (cost per seat can double).
So those aircraft that can do the range will earn well with better, but fewer seating.

In real life -> yes ... in AWS not a single point is correct of what you say  ;D

and about the "too small" penalty... it's simply stupid, because (as you sayed) the quality of the seating is the interesting thing for the passenger, not the size of the aircraft... but anyway, that's how AWS is... and by the way, in real life the MD-83 had a range of more than 3500nm ... it could have been ordered with tanks to fly almost 4000 nm ... so ... just something to think about

 

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.