Started by edidiot, January 05, 2009, 01:48:19 PM
Quote from: Curse on June 15, 2011, 07:14:00 PMDynamic city based demand + connecting pax = ftw
Quote from: LemonButt on June 26, 2011, 12:49:01 PMI think the only missing piece actually is "airport-based demand" where slots expand based on actual utilization. Considering city based demand, the passenger demand for Chicago O'Hare and Chicago Midway should be the same, but O'Hare has 4x the slots. Same goes with LAX, Burbank, Ontario, and Long Beach airports in California. San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose should have the same demand, but San Francisco I'm guessing will magically get all the international traffic. Toronto has a similar problem.So the question is, should smaller airports like Chicago Midway be able to grow to Chicago O'Hare size? Also, since it's city based demand, if there is a 500pax demand to fly from Chicago to New York and you schedule a flight from Midway to JFK, does that mean the airlines at O'Hare will be a direct competitor on the ORD-JFK route or will there in essence be 1000pax demand from Chicago to New York?All of this is starting to make my head hurt...
Quote from: ArcherII on June 27, 2011, 10:33:35 PMI would like to add that airport initial facilities shouldn't be ignored. If a comparable ATB game is opened in the new demand system version, the current airport facilities will restrict the type of airplanes capable of operating in it. For example, if a man who lives in Tokio wants to go to the Los Angeles area, according to the city based demand he can chose at which airport he wants to arrive in LA. But Ontario, or Burbank or any other airport in tha area except LAX don't have the facilities required to receive, say, a B77W. So, there's no other choice than the big LAX, thus making it the most popular international airport in the area.Sure Ontario could expand (I don't know if it's actually able, don't know the place) in order to be a good international choice. But is impossible to build a big airport overnight, let alone the money needed.So, in a ATB or MT game, LAX would still be the only Southern California gateaway.
Quote from: BobTheCactus on June 28, 2011, 12:56:57 AMHmm, I don't now if I agree with you - now that we are moving to games that span "The Early Days" to "Modern Times", I think that airports should all start out relatively similar and "build new runways" and "build new terminals", etc. to add slots as service increases.
Quote from: Samo on July 05, 2011, 02:55:37 PMWhat about airports in other country than city? For example, Bratislava is mainly served by Vienna airport - is there any chance passengers from BTS would use VIE airport even though it's in another country?
Quote from: Curse on July 05, 2011, 05:34:08 PMbetween those cities sami could establish a fictive railway or bus transport system and makes available a defined percentage of demand, for example 80% of people at Bratislava would fly via Vienna or 30% Vienna people would fly via Bratislava. In my dreams this could also be dynamic, so if a huge airline is at Bratislava, maybe 90% out of Vienna would use this and only 10% of people would fly out of Vienna.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on July 08, 2011, 04:31:43 AMAs far as national borders, I hope it will not end up being a show stopper for the entire project. I would he happy enough ignoring national borders (for the purpose of demand squares) in first iterations. It could be fine tuned later on in subsequent revisions....
Quote from: sami on July 08, 2011, 11:27:31 AMI would guess that pax do not prefer any airport; or preference is built by the airport infrastructure size class (= larger = better services?).
QuoteAs if I have two airports to choose from, with both being roughly the same distance from my house, and both have flights to same destination I am not choosing the flight by the airport but by the airline service, price, etc.
Quote from: sami on July 08, 2011, 11:27:31 AMI would guess that pax do not prefer any airport; or preference is built by the airport infrastructure size class (= larger = better services?). But basically it should be dictated by the airlines servicing the airports. Pax will pick the most suitable service regardless of airport.As if I have two airports to choose from, with both being roughly the same distance from my house, and both have flights to same destination I am not choosing the flight by the airport but by the airline service, price, etc.