Next scenario: Europe - America Challenge

[swiftus27]

I don't care.

I play AirwaySim and don't work for an aircraft manufacturer or an airline in real life who is interested in such things.

If you want to have something exactly like in real life, I suggest joining it. In 99 of 100 cases it's directly out of your door. It also has huge multiplayer parts and if you become your own African dictator, you can eventually forbid 757 in your country.

Okay, sorry to again cause you to go the adversarial route.   It was an honest question. 

[Dave4468]

I don't care.

I play AirwaySim and don't work for an aircraft manufacturer or an airline in real life who is interested in such things.


If you want to have something exactly like in real life, I suggest joining it. In 99 of 100 cases it's directly out of your door. It also has huge multiplayer parts and if you become your own African dictator, you can eventually forbid 757 in your country.

Wonderful, Curse doesn't care, then thats fine then...

Let me answer your question of "who is interested". Lets first look at the name of the software we are using, Airwaysim, I draw your attention to the "sim" part. Sim, short for simulation, definition:
(computer science) the technique of representing the real world by a computer program; "a simulation should imitate the internal processes and not merely the results of the thing being simulated"

While the NG737s and 757s may have 180 ETOPS in real life they are not used for crossing the Atlantic in massive numbers. Therefore in a simulation of the airline industry such operations, while fine for some routes should not be commonplace for LHR-JFK and similar routes. B777s, B747s, A330s and A340s should be the dominant force in high demand long haul routes in the same way those fleets shouldn't be seen flying 300NM around Europe.

When I play a simulator I want a true representation of the real world and all processes to be represented and realistic aircraft utilisation should be a part of that. Otherwise I wouldn't pay to play on AWS and would stick to the point and click airline games seen on Facebook. 

[Zombie Slayer]

I could scramble the fuel figures a bit for various fleets (+/- 20%?). But no unrealism complaints then..

I play AWS to enjoy as realistic of a simulation as is available on the market. It is a game and individual people are at the controls of each carrier, therefore whatever works for them will happen in the game. This is NOT a re-creation of Lufthansa, United, BA, and Qantas, it is every players individual creation.

With that said, skewing the fuel figures would change the dynamics of the game, but still leave the same problem in the end...the planes that end up having the better fuel numbers will be ordered by every carrier (even if the "best" plane is an IL-96, IL-62, or a TU-204), the order book will fill up quick creating a 3 year wait for the popular fleet types, and someone will complain that they cant get their hands on a "good" IL-62 to fly LHR-JFK with....

I say leave it how it is. Messing with the numbers will shake it up but not solve any of the "problems" the cry threads point out. Think of it this way. If the TU-204 becomes the best plane in the 150-200 seat segment, but production is not increased from the ~10 a month now, how quick will the order book sell out?

Just my 2 cents...

Don

[Gleipner]

You have a point there Don. Look at RL order books for B737s and A320, they are long to and you just have to wait.

That said I like the idea of running smaller game worlds parallel with the bigger ones. Asia Challenge would be nice for the next. What the heck even the Unless-it's-build-buy-someone-named-Ivan-or-Boris-you-can't-fly-it Challenge would be fun, in that game though I think Sami would need to tweak fuel cost a little because anything over 300 would take out 90% of all airlines.

[yyebo]

I think if we leave the product line of 737 classic, md90 open in mt5 can reduce the backlog quite a bit

[JumboShrimp]

I think if we leave the product line of 737 classic, md90 open in mt5 can reduce the backlog quite a bit

I don't think there are not any backlogs, since some fixes and changes to production lines were introduced in 1.3.

[Sigma]

No it doesn't, it becomes a simulator of airlines basing themselves within those two continents, and only flying between those two.

How is that any more or less valid than the idea of a "simulator of airlines that operate without a 757"?

Which is no less valid than the idea of a "simulator of airlines that can't do anything but fly out and back without connections"  or "simulator of airlines that require hiring 50 ground crew to service a 10-passenger plane".

It's all a question of what sami wants to do.  The decision to put in the 757 or not, or make it more fuel efficient or not, or anything else, is no more or less "realistic" than any of the 1000 other gameplay-related or time/effort-related compromises that have been put into place in AWS already.  There's arguments to be made to not go with swiftus' suggestions, but don't make it sound like the decision whether or not to include a particular plane somehow comprises the 'integrity' of the 'simulation'.

[JumboShrimp]

I could scramble the fuel figures a bit for various fleets (+/- 20%?). But no unrealism complaints then..

-1

[LemonButt]

Since it's called Europe/North America challenge, why not only allow airlines to use aircraft built on their continent.  Boeing/MD/etc in North America, Airbus/Fokker/etc in Europe.  Aircraft built in areas that don't exist are left out of the game (i.e. Brazil isn't part of the gameworld for Embraer so how can they build aircraft?).