Seating Configuration

[NicholasB]

I have noticed from looking at the used aircraft market, That most of the biggest and most successful airlines have an all "high-density" seating arrangement in all three classes of service. Obviously in terms of "Bums on Seats" this makes the most sense for acheiving higher load factors and profits. Nevertheless, in the real world and judging from all the polls recently in the forum, consumers base their descision to choose an airline based on many other factors aside from the price. I personally choose the airlines I fly with based on comfort factor  and alliance affiliation above all other considerations, and if that extra comfort is a difference of between $50-$100 and perhaps even more regardless of the class of service, I wont hesitate to pay a little more.

A typical example in my case would be as follows:

I am an Australian living in Japan and everyear I return home to see the family etc., From last year in Decemeber Jetstar of Australia introduced direct services from Tokyo Narita to Brisbane, and by all means offer the lowest fare. Nevertheless, passengers are cramed in like sardines and from all reports that i have heard from friends and family etc., say their experience was a hell-ride and would never use Jetstar again. I always use Singapore Airlines, the timetable is very convenient, service, comfort and entertainment are all above standard and I arrive in Australia at basically the same time. Furthermore, it allows me an option of a few days holiday in beautiful Singapore and I would never get tired of a couple of hours strolling around Changi Airport too.

I will pay a little more to use Singapore airlines compared with Jetstar and pay less on Singapore Airlines compared to Qantas and Japan Airlines. Japan Airlines crams you in like a sardine too and Qantas, well ive never been much of a fan. However, in our game, it seems that high density seating is the recipe for success. This seems fine for short haul, but once you go long haul, the importance of onborad comfort jumps tenfold. i dont feel this is reflected very well in the game. Again, according to the polls our fellow players are choosing their favorite airlines primarliy based on comfort and alliance, and on another poll we were asked to choose what we feel would be the makeup of an ideal AWS game/airlines. The result of that poll was an overwhelming desire for "realism" amongst those who repsonded.

I hope that in the next game, their can be some tweaking of this formula to reflect reality a little better. I for real would not want to fly long haul in an Airbus A340-200 with Y class-342 high density seating, C class 32 high density seating and F class 14 high desnity seating totaling 388 seats on an Airbus A340-200. In fact, I think anyone would find it tough to find an A340-200 in the real world with this configuration.

I am not taking a jab at those players who have this configuration. Instead I have now realized that within the reality and parameters of this game as it is now, that they have found the formula that works best and I feel I have wasted alot of money configuring my planes.

In summary, it is obvious that I am a fan of Singapore Airlines. Yet for some reason Singapore Airlines has been the most profitable airline in the world for more years than I can remember and I beleive this is beacuase amongst other factors have set the standard for comfort and service.

Anyway, I hope we can all debate about this and perhaps have some changes implimented for future games that will improve the realism. We all know Sami is very busy and has given us a great game as it is, but I am sure he has the skills improve things as we go along.

Cheers to all,

NicholasB

[toyotaboy95]

I understand what you mean , it would make a big difference and add much needed realism to the game.

[Filippo]

I join in the Singapore Airlines fan club.

I agree with the configuration story. It makes perfetly sense and it would add realism.

[Sigma]

Sami's already said that the formula needs some tweaking.  In his defense it's not at all easy to create a formula for something in which there are no statistics to back up aside from people "preferring" comfort -- but at what point is there diminishing returns with value?  It's not at all an easy thing to do, creating an algorithm that won't yield an 'all or nothing' response.

The passenger 'choice' formula has some problems, one factor in particular of which is a far bigger problem than this one but I won't get into because I believe it's almost exploitative of the system (I've already told sami about it).  Hopefully it'll get tweaked soon.

[Kontio]

Anyway, I hope we can all debate about this and perhaps have some changes implimented for future games that will improve the realism. We all know Sami is very busy and has given us a great game as it is, but I am sure he has the skills improve things as we go along.

I really don't think there is anything to debate about. I have been running a couple of fairly succesful airlines with all high density seating but would be the first to welcome a load factor formula that would take passenger comfort into consideration. I suppose sami just introduced the seat configuration option into the game with the idea of the configuration actually making a difference and got distracted by more important things to develop before fully implementing the concept.

[JonesyUK]

I generally use standard for F & C and HD for Y, just s that my comfort rating stays in fair and doesn't drop to poor. I used to use standard for Y, but half way through the atest game realised it made next to no difference and I could pack in an extra 10%+ pax for very little penalty