Quick beta available

[JumboShrimp]

I was in the last test game world which must have just ended, but dont think i got the refund that it said there would be last time and says there will be this time.

Test games provide way more than 2 credits worth of fun.

[JumboShrimp]

Some narrowbodies (e.g. 727) are very fast. So the second point would apply to 737s for example, but not 727s.
IMO the additional 20% penalty for tech stop is appropriate because it is realistic--in real life, pax do not like techstops, especially when there is a nonstop available.

Maybe the 20% penalty should only apply if a competitor is flying nonstop, and not when the techstop is the only option? But there should definitely be a techstop penalty when a competitor is flying nonstop. The techstop player should have to either lower prices significantly, or take a LF hit.

That's one of the reasons why I don't think there should be a penalty for tech stop, and things should only be handled by travel time.  45 minutes tech stop of 727 (ir 737.A320) adds 10 to 15% to route travel time vs. non-stop narrowbody (on a transatlantic route).  Sami could factor this travel time difference whichever way he wants to.  He could make it significant enough to amount to 20% hit on LF...

The passenger allocation based on time will happan only vs. other competitors.  It would not be an across the board penalty.  So if there is no competition, the speed of flight should make no difference on LFs (whether it is just a slower aircraft or tech stopped aircraft).

[ucfknightryan]

I set up some routes to test differences from small price changes.  On RJAA to RKSI I've got Dash8s flying at default, default + 5% and default -5%.  Both the routes above default pricing and the routes below default pricing are attracting less passengers than the route at default pricing, which seems odd.

Also, how seriously should I be being penalized for flying Dash8s on a route with ~2000 demand?  I don't seem to be being hit very hard for it at the moment.

[ucfknightryan]

More substantial price changes, however, seem to be working more as you would expect.

RAJJ-EGLL is seeing at lest 20% less passengers at least with a 25% price hike and at least ~20% more with a 25% price cut.

Edit: of course that route might not be there for all that long as my airline appears to be on the fast track to bankruptcy.  I should have waited until the used market was set to refresh as 747SPs are turning out to have been a really bad idea 

[BryanIAH]

Is the appropriate aircraft size determined by flight length and demand or just demand?

For example, let's say demand is 2000 on IAH-ATL and 2000 on IAH-LHR. If the A330 is appropriate for IAH-LHR, must we fly A330s on IAH-ATL as well or would an A320/A321/737/etc be appropriate?

In real life you wouldn't usually see an A330 or any widebody on such a short domestic route.

[JumboShrimp]

Is the appropriate aircraft size determined by flight length and demand or just demand?

For example, let's say demand is 2000 on IAH-ATL and 2000 on IAH-LHR. If the A330 is appropriate for IAH-LHR, must we fly A330s on IAH-ATL as well or would an A320/A321/737/etc be appropriate?

In real life you wouldn't usually see an A330 or any widebody on such a short domestic route.

There is an appropriate aircraft for a given distance.  A330 may be a it for IAH-LHR.

As far as IAH-ATL, the appropriate aircraft distance-wise, it would be a much smaller aircraft than A330.  But Sami as adding appropriate (or optimal) frequency for the route.  That is a bit of a mystery right now, very little info on that is available and how the mechanism would work.

[Frost33]

I was in the last test game world which must have just ended, but dont think i got the refund that it said there would be last time and says there will be this time.

Really? for the sake of $1?

[Frost33]

Hi sami, could you possibly check my delays, I'm currently at around 35% on time, but have settings all exactly the same as other games where it is 95%. It says it is primarily down to weather & technical.
Regards, Gianni

[freshmore]

I think as a good rule of thumb that seems to be showing up in my airline is that having aircraft on say 350 pax routes that allow 2 frequencies per day and with a little demand left over seems to be working for me. You absolutely don't want to put on a 160-185 route a 160 pax 737 or A320, it seems that it is much better to say take two E-170/175's on the route or similar pax capabilities. Or alternatively you could make drastic reductions in tickets prices, default gives way low LF and I find up to 40% worst case for short haul from default pricing to give good profit and LF, long haul still sorting out but it is looking potentially over 50% reduction in ticket prices at the beginning of route with low RI. Although you find that will 300pax route B772 seems too big, it seems that A332 or B762/763 seem to be better options early on with this. Long haul loss are driving my airline into the ground although I'm trying to find the profitable spot. You should be able to increase them as the RI goes up.

Basically (I think) you don't want biggest is best and supply the demand, you actually want to supply frequency in flights aswell, this it seems is an very important factor in LF especially early on it seems. The update seems to be encouraging players to undersupply the demand which I think will be better for competion between airlines or spend fortunes on getting RI up high for the start of the route.

Anybody got any other additions?!

[markj23]

I really like the changes to the workings of the RI & LFs

It seems more "normal" to have a brand new airline slowly build up its LF instead of jumping on a new route and getting up into the 70/80s

Out of interest, does anyone else have a big spike in passenger numbers on the 25/02?

[JumboShrimp]

I really like the changes to the workings of the RI & LFs

It seems more "normal" to have a brand new airline slowly build up its LF instead of jumping on a new route and getting up into the 70/80s

Out of interest, does anyone else have a big spike in passenger numbers on the 25/02?

I did not notice one, but when I see one, it is when one of several flights to the same destination is not flying (because of cancellation or a check, other flights go up proportionally...

[markj23]

I did not notice one, but when I see one, it is when one of several flights to the same destination is not flying (because of cancellation or a check, other flights go up proportionally...

Ok im silly - i missed a flight when i was checking and can see the cancellation of an earlier flight now. I had seen small bumps before but this was a pretty big one

[Glob-Al]

I really like the changes to the workings of the RI & LFs

It seems more "normal" to have a brand new airline slowly build up its LF instead of jumping on a new route and getting up into the 70/80s

Out of interest, does anyone else have a big spike in passenger numbers on the 25/02?

On this, it certainly seems like RI is acting almost like a proxy for the percentage of the number of people wanting to fly the route who know about your service. For me:

On my PVG > HKG route (where I'm supplying ~50% of demand) RI is 28 and LFs are around 72%
On my PVG > DUB route (where I'm supplying almost precisely 100% of demand) RI is 28 and LFs are around 40%

I'm going to experiment now with what a deep price cut does to this.

[JumboShrimp]

On this, it certainly seems like RI is acting almost like a proxy for the percentage of the number of people wanting to fly the route who know about your service. For me:

On my PVG > HKG route (where I'm supplying ~50% of demand) RI is 28 and LFs are around 72%
On my PVG > DUB route (where I'm supplying almost precisely 100% of demand) RI is 28 and LFs are around 40%

I'm going to experiment now with what a deep price cut does to this.

I am seeing the same results.  I think I like this change as well...

[brique]

IMHO I'm getting weird oversupply warnings. For example BIKF-BIAR - it shows between 60-80 pax/day and I supply 116 (2 flights). Two warnings already. Are real pax figures really below 58?

check your return flight demand, I've noticed it can be a bit less, maybe enough to trigger the warning

[AndiD]

I'm running a mixed fleet (B733 and A310) on the CYVR-KSEA route (short hop, single supplier, 4 flights/day, demand is 60% of my supply). Interestingly, the pax are equally distributed across the four routes, which in turn leads to load factors of 60% (733) and 30% (A310). Again, this would benefit smaller planes over larger ones, wouldn't it?

On the other hand I get immediate 97%+ load (20 C pax!) being the sole supplier on the CYVR-CYYZ route (280 supply/2800 demand), even with a single-digit (!) CI and RI.

Working as intended?

[Meicci]

I wish this wasn't a bug, but it has to be

[Sami]

I was in the last test game world which must have just ended, but dont think i got the refund that it said there would be last time and says there will be this time.

You did if you were a member of that world still when it ended.

[Pukeko]

Just started flying some long haul routes with A340-300x. For those routes which were not being flown (eg. KJFK - VHHH)- LF is straight away up in to 80-90s. However where competition is already flying the route, (eg. KJFK - LFPG) LFs are in their 20s. My CI is 12. Currently only flying each route 4 days a week.

[romeozulu]

Hi,

LF are acting strangly.


LF figure

You can see that suddenly the LF in Y/CL dropped down, then the business increased. There is no competition on the route, only 2 flights a day with 738 (5/180). The only thing I changed on may 10th is the ticket price.


Pax demand

Is it a normal situation or bug ?

regards