Started by edidiot, January 05, 2009, 01:48:19 PM
Quote from: [SC] xyeahtony on December 29, 2013, 02:35:18 PMSo whats the news on demand updates? A simple wikipedia search shows the world's busiest air routes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_busiest_passenger_air_routesMany of these high-density routes are not modeled in AWS at all.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on June 27, 2014, 06:57:18 PMI guess cultural proximity is taken in account? Like Germany & Turkey, or France & Algeria?
Quote from: sami, the boss on June 27, 2014, 07:24:45 PMThat's already modelled in current games, though partly incomplete perhaps.
Quote from: sami, awesome on June 27, 2014, 07:24:45 PMThe pic in previous post is not related to this, it's for local data/demand.
Quote from: sami on June 28, 2014, 02:56:22 PMSo square-to-square complete data would be 49 000 000 lines which is too much to store naturally. If we however eliminate all lines with 0 demand (even 0 via connection) the figure would probably go down quite much, and will work on this shortly to see what ballpark that would be. Since the question is still should the system be simplified to airport level (based on the square data) instead of the square-to-square level that allows a better system; but is it worth it then. It's hasn't been yet decided since I haven't been able to determine the amount of data since the data collection hasn't been ready, but now it's almost done so I can proceed with this path decision.
Quote from: Murphry on August 15, 2014, 07:37:07 AMShouldn't airport infrastructure and service factors be included as a airport preference factor as well?In Tokyo, HND has more runways(and about the same length as) than NRT, but is poorly equipped for LR Intl. flts because its intl. terminal is quite small.In Seoul, GMP has a much smaller terminal, but has runways about the same length as ICN...Shanghai also has a similar issue, so does Osaka.In London, Stansted would be able to accomodate even a B748 pax aircraft, but due to lack of infrastructure, this wouldm't be possible in RW.Also, even though(as stated by sami before) passengers usually choose airlines before airports, airport capacity(or airport runway capacity) large enough to accomodate multiple LR Intl. flights per hour doesn't guarantee that there will be enough number of gates to accomodate that many number of flights, or that there will be appropriate services ready at the airport for such flights, and passengers don't usually like cramped/packed terminal buildings and climbing airstairs in cold/hot weather.If these factors are to be implemented properly, I think airport service/infrastructure factor is a must have function for a city based approach to work properly.Ignoring these factors could lead to wildly inappropriate results...
Quote from: Murphry on August 15, 2014, 11:00:31 AMBUT, in the case of RJAA, what if even after RJAA opened, airlines decided to continue Long Hauls out of RJTT? In that case, RJAA would be rendered completely useless, and become a complete waste of Japanese government funds.