Quick beta available

[JumboShrimp]

1) url bug fixed

Something about the quick opening to the new tab does not work correctly.  Ctrl Click or Mouse Wheel Click, that normally open a new tab, instead consider the click to be a regular click (hence, we stay in the same tab).

However, explicit way of doing it (Right click on the icon, and selecting Open Link in new tab) does work.

[JumboShrimp]

Immediately after creating a route, links such as:

Leg 1: KLAX - CYFB - LIRF
Leg 2: LIRF - KLAX

don't open the details of the individual legs.

However, when I open a route by clicking on the schedule, viewing one of the routes in a new tab, the above links do work.

[JumboShrimp]

Creating route A-T-B-A, I end up with A-T-B-A (good)
Creating route A-B-T-A, I end up with A-T-B-A (bad)

Works now.  And passenger limits for A-T-B-A vs. A-B-T-A also work correctly here, in 1.31 (fixed from 1.3).

I can't re-test the IE8 issues until later...

[JumboShrimp]

New issue I came across:

In 1.3, a tech stop route shows the tech stop on the map that is part of the demand graph pop up.  The tech stop(s) don't appear on the new 1.31.

[chiveicrook]

After choosing both techstops when you click either "change selection" a new "add technical stopover" appears for both techstops instead of only one for the modified leg.

EDIT:
Mistake, it happens when you have opened possible airport lists for both techstops without choosing one.

[Ilyushin]

Yesterday there were like 200 737 classics still available. Today, they've all been scrapped except about 10.

Very realistic! And most of them weren't even 15 years old.

[JumboShrimp]

Yesterday there were like 200 737 classics still available. Today, they've all been scrapped except about 10.

Very realistic! And most of them weren't even 15 years old.

All you need is 1 if you are really testing the new interface...

[Ilyushin]

All you need is 1 if you are really testing the new interface...

Ok.

And now?

:')

[JumboShrimp]

I re-tried the IE8 confirm issue, and it is ok now.

[JumboShrimp]

Something about the quick opening to the new tab does not work correctly.  Ctrl Click or Mouse Wheel Click, that normally open a new tab, instead consider the click to be a regular click (hence, we stay in the same tab).

However, explicit way of doing it (Right click on the icon, and selecting Open Link in new tab) does work.

New issue I came across:

In 1.3, a tech stop route shows the tech stop on the map that is part of the demand graph pop up.  The tech stop(s) don't appear on the new 1.31.

This is the only 2 issues I am aware of at this point.

[nice1two]

currently trying to open route, using google chrome is searching for europe fine but when i select a destination just says loading constantly

[MA831]

Not a bug in the new version per se, but in the past 24 hours I had reserved a 717 with just over an year remaining until D check and it disappeared while I was fiddling with loans and configurations (even though I don't think I spent 3 minutes doing that). Today the was back, D check having been done, and at a price that is 10% less what it was prior to the D check. The lessor would probably want to recoup the outlay for the check. The global statistics page still shows "In use - 4" and "Scrapped - 14" for a total produced of 18, will have to see what happens when the 717 is delivered.

Also, in the native symbian s.60 browser on my E66 the game menu text is displayed in white on pale blue background and the individual aircraft pages are virtually unreadable because of misaligned columns. I realize that this is a problem with the browser and not with the tested version (and that the easiest solution by far is to simply use Opera mini or some other browser), but since I wasn't able to test the new version properly in the last few days because of this, I put it here.

[ARASKA]

currently trying to open route, using google chrome is searching for europe fine but when i select a destination just says loading constantly

same thing happened to me with chrome

[chiveicrook]

Looks like there is fuel cost calculation error somewhere.
I'm flying (single) Tu-204-100 from EGSS to RJAA in 4 different ways, utilizing it almost fully (9 hours doing nothing + 5 hours A check, rest of the week is inflight):
1.
Leg 1: EGSS - UWGG - UNKL - RJAA => fuel cost ~60k (according to route info charts)
Leg 2: RJAA - PACD - CYFB - EGSS => fuel cost ~90k
2.
Leg 1: EGSS - UWGG - UNKL - RJAA => fuel cost ~65k
Leg 2: RJAA - UNKL - UWGG - EGSS => fuel cost ~65k
3.
Leg 1: EGSS - UOOO - RJAA => fuel cost ~70k
Leg 2: RJAA - UOOO - EGSS => fuel cost ~70k
4.
Leg 1: EGSS - CYFB - PACD - RJAA => fuel cost ~95k
Leg 2: RJAA - UNKL - UWGG - EGSS => fuel cost ~60k

Total weekly fuel cost estimate (according to aircraft page): ~300k

I am flying another tu204 to KEWR via CYYT, with almost full 24h break during the week.
Fuel cost per leg: ~40k
Total weekly fuel cost estimate: ~500k

500k for fuel to KEWR but only 300k to RJAA doing 'around the globe' trips? Something doesn't add up.

[alexgv1]

Are you saying that the fuel is calculated by origin and destination airports (and ignoring actual routes taken through tech stops)?

If it is just the difference in figures for outward and return journey then consider prevailing winds and various payloads change the fuel needed per trip.

[Sami]

There is random factor too, I can take a closer look on the actual figures later on.

[chiveicrook]

Are you saying that the fuel is calculated by origin and destination airports (and ignoring actual routes taken through tech stops)?

If it is just the difference in figures for outward and return journey then consider prevailing winds and various payloads change the fuel needed per trip.

I'm saying that the cost of fuel to fly 3000nm route with 1 tech stop seems higher than the cost of fuel to fly 5000+ nm route with 2 tech stops (not only longer but more takeoffs) ;-). In my case outward and return journey are in some cases completely different, so differences are expected.
Could be that it's only the estimate from "my aircraft" that is wrong though - it predicts 300k weekly fuel cost, but manually adding the costs yields 600k+ (just one leg is 100k in one case!).
However, it seems more or less correct for my EGSS-KEWR route and my weekly losses from EGSS-RJAA route are consistent with estimates.

[jkotinis]

Trying to open a route with technical stop

then trying to increase the time for the default turnaround

when the time comes to create  (copy) the route for the same or the next day then you have to adjust the turnaround time again and again (turnaround time resets to default on each copy)

This issue doesn't appear when you copy flights to routes without technical stops

------------------------------
at this time not even the creation of a route tih technical stop doesn't work correctly
I create the route with tech stop but on scheduling the route appears to have a shorter time
Possibly something is worked on right now (by sami?)

[Sami]

Step by step example on that please

[jkotinis]

trying to create the root EGGL (LHR)  at 22:50 to Melbourne, YMML (MEL) with a tech stop at VYMD with A340

turnaround time set to 7:10 hours

1.  when I schedule the plane  then on scheduler the flight seem to be shorter than the normal one ( I have 2 same flights on the same plane ex WWWA in case you can see my flights)[/s]
(yesterday though this was working properly- I created similar flights)

the problem reproduced to both chrome and firefox

It seems there is a miscalculation in the code  and instead of having a flight of 2+ days in total , the system looses one whole day (so it leaves you more time in scheduler to plan a new flight lol)

2. Also when I try to create a copy of the flight for the next day or even the same day then each time I need to readjust the turnaround time to 7:10 since on each copy of the flight the turnaround time resets to default of the plane. Tried that without tech stop and it works. With tech stop you have to adjust the turnaround time on each copy