Changelog and Previews comment thread

[schro]

From my observation, a lot of the operating DC-9s (or MD-90s, etc.) well past 35 years after introduction is more likely due to the financial penalties involved with operating more than 3 fleets than with someone trying to do a fantasy scenario of seeing how they would fare in the modern era.

Once you build up an airline of a few hundred frames of the type, it can be extremely difficult to do a 1-for-1 replacement using just one model. Even in real life - witness American Airlines making deals with both Boeing and Airbus to get some 400+ narrow body aircraft on the property in short order to work down their fleet of MD-80s.

As noted in a previous comment, most of us are going to want to ditch frames that are 20+ years in age - which is logically when a fleet transition should be taking place. Perhaps the following could be implemented in combination:

- 20 years after entry into service: Extra fleet penalty no longer applies to this type.
- 35 years after entry into service: Type is no longer produced.

Gives a nice window to conduct fleet replacement and even operate some aircraft as freighters in their old age (since freight conversions become available later on).

In the real world, aircraft continue to be supported at a reasonable parts cost as long as there's a substantial fleet of them flying. The MD80 is currently getting sacked everywhere because AA decided to park the type quickly and Delta made a "last call" parts order to get its fleet to about 2022 and then discontinued their service contracts for parts. Had Delta maintained their parts contracts, you wouldn't see Allegiant and others dumping the type so quickly.

[fark24]

In the real world, aircraft continue to be supported at a reasonable parts cost as long as there's a substantial fleet of them flying. The MD80 is currently getting sacked everywhere because AA decided to park the type quickly and Delta made a "last call" parts order to get its fleet to about 2022 and then discontinued their service contracts for parts. Had Delta maintained their parts contracts, you wouldn't see Allegiant and others dumping the type so quickly.

And, in this case, Sami is playing the same role that Delta did (making a last call). So airline managers here should naturally react in a similar fashion (call up other manufacturers).

If you are Allegiant-sized, perhaps you can do a 1-for-1 within a few years. If you are American-sized, you're going to have issues with the current implementation. You'll need at least a 2-for-1. Unless the number of fleet types penalty is "aged out".

[schro]

And, in this case, Sami is playing the same role that Delta did (making a last call). So airline managers here should naturally react in a similar fashion (call up other manufacturers).

If you are Allegiant-sized, perhaps you can do a 1-for-1 within a few years. If you are American-sized, you're going to have issues with the current implementation. You'll need at least a 2-for-1. Unless the number of fleet types penalty is "aged out".

Right - the game breaking part of this restriction has more to do with the rate that new planes can be received and the commonality penalties for going to a 4th fleet type in a large airline than it has to do with the actual "last call" concept.

I've made other feature requests, such as this one - https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,77691.0.html - to try to make the game more playable for larger airlines.  The higher used market purchase rate is only helpful when you have a lot of buyers flipping planes to you (which isn't always possible). I've seen other requests related to a method for transition that does not penalize - i.e. a 500 plane fleet moving to a new type over X years does not count, etc.

[Talentz]

A bit late after the change log entry, but... now that I've started a fleet change and seeing my old 30yr routes, I've noticed the bigger then expect change on smaller cargo routes.

So my question is this: What is the minimum threshold for CBD to generate HC demand on a given route? I have 5-9k kg routes that used to have 1-3k kg HC demand, now have none as the change being HC demand is converted to STD and LGT cargo.

Which is excellent news for pax (belly) only airlines as they can compete for all of the potential demand as opposed to just being limited to STD/LHT and shut out from HC.

If that is how smaller routes are supposed to be, what is the point of even using a freighter (LG/VLG) on anything smaller then 12k routes? Cargo airlines can't compete against the frequency of pax airlines because even the smallest LG cargo planes would greatly over supply the route = no benefit.

About 90% of the worlds routes (cargo) only need 1 flight a day to supply all the demand needed for years too come, So I'm puzzled as to the reason behind this.


Talentz

[wilian.souza2]

From my experience, I realize that freighters have a much bigger advantage over pax aircraft to take cargo market share on a route, regardless of it having HC or not.

[JumboShrimp]

A bit late after the change log entry, but... now that I've started a fleet change and seeing my old 30yr routes, I've noticed the bigger then expect change on smaller cargo routes.

So my question is this: What is the minimum threshold for CBD to generate HC demand on a given route? I have 5-9k kg routes that used to have 1-3k kg HC demand, now have none as the change being HC demand is converted to STD and LGT cargo.

Which is excellent news for pax (belly) only airlines as they can compete for all of the potential demand as opposed to just being limited to STD/LHT and shut out from HC.

If that is how smaller routes are supposed to be, what is the point of even using a freighter (LG/VLG) on anything smaller then 12k routes? Cargo airlines can't compete against the frequency of pax airlines because even the smallest LG cargo planes would greatly over supply the route = no benefit.

About 90% of the worlds routes (cargo) only need 1 flight a day to supply all the demand needed for years too come, So I'm puzzled as to the reason behind this.


Talentz

Curiously, the latest set of changes / fine tuning had almost no effect on 2 of my cargo heavy airlines in GW1 and GW3.  Neither positive nor negative.

As far as heavy cargo, I see a lot of routes with total demand between 4k and 10k that do have HC.  Most of the routes below 4k don't have heavy cargo.

[Wreck]

GW#2: year 2010, AW650 & Bristol Britannia still in production. So, that's about the reason for the change.


edit: I've changed it to 35 yrs which allows the semi-modern models to run till 2035. The idea is that there has to be some end of production, at some point, and that will stay there (= not possible to do DC-3 in 2035). There will be also some changes to maintenance / operating cost models (at some point, maybe) to better model the inefficiency of running old designs (even though newly built) in modern times.

Actually its a symptom of getting a little bored with elements of the game & repeating the same old stuff every game world. It was just a personal challenge based in a country which frequently has no airlines in place later in the game. It's also forcing me to find out more about the game mechanics. So much for enjoyment....

[Wreck]

yeah, the guy is doing an experiment(which is beginning to fail badly, by the way) in Vietnam, a place noone flies. I don't see the harm he's doing. He's having fun at the expense of noone.

Thanks! That's all it is, a bit of fun. Yes, it's unravelling at the moment but I'm working on ways to get to 2035 & if (big if) I make it that far I'll consider it a success. But once is enough, not to be repeated even if it wasn't banned.

[Tha_Ape]

In my opinion, the changes on the slot system acquisition are very well thought and balanced - thanks Sami

[spiff23]

Just catching up on these most of which seem good.

Sami, can you clarify your airport scenarios?  I think this applies to the Milan example, but I'm not following the logic.  If I switch the example to Tokyo, when Narita opens, Haneda goes domestic and some regional international routes.  all the long hauls go to Narita.  So does this mean haneda would keep the same demand profile for international?...or is this a sub case when all routes outside a certIn radius transfer equal demand to the new airport at Narita (I.e. NRT-LHR, NRT-JFK, etc.).  Then would seem that the domestic demand in this example never transfers one-to-one to NRT.  For example, Haneda-Osaka has the massive 15,000-20000 seat demand but NRT is going to only have maybe 1000 demand for "connecting" international demand as the average Domestic commuter isn't going to go out to Narita for a domestic flight.  Same type of thing with the Osaka airports.  These plus the Seoul switch have always seemed the most problematic whether based there or just flying routes to Japan...so any insight how this works on these would help.  OVerall I give 2 thumbs up for the overall improvements as I always seem to have weird demand issues in these airport new openings.

Can someone just confirm the logic on the plane changes, otherwise my question is can there be a FAQ page with general closing dates for the major plane type production lines...but if this logic is correct not necessary...taking the D.C.-8 that someone mentioned closed in 1972.  Assuming that's true, so we can potentially still order D.C.-8s until 2007 (+35 years) then if so inclined you can run the last one until the game ends if you were truly nuts?  If this is the case then no need for a FAQ.  I know this is extreme but more realistically, based on the last few long games with these slow production rates and the masses flocking to certain planes types...it's a very real possibility that you order a D.C.-8-63 and you are taking your delivery in 1975-1980 based on actual game play.  I want to make sure there is not a hard close in 1972...-as otherwise I think it needs to be something like actual close date + 10 Years so you don't have those constantly online freezing others out of production slots.   And as others have mentioned if there can be some relaxation of the 4th fleet type for phase outs, that would help...although I would also note it is possible to live through the (un)controlled chaos of changing over large fleets of the pre-1980s planes to ones fit for the 2000s...my record is 8 fleet types and still surviving it...although admittedly, not for the faint of heart 

Ps sorry I'm late to posting party given the earlier notes in September.

[Talentz]

Sami - Do you have a timetable for adding more aircraft?

Aside from finishing the 747 combi update, we lack some late 80s, early 90s combi/cargo aircraft that would open up some fleets to be used beyond there pax life.



Talentz

[schro]

Just catching up on these most of which seem good.

Sami, can you clarify your airport scenarios?  I think this applies to the Milan example, but I'm not following the logic.  If I switch the example to Tokyo, when Narita opens, Haneda goes domestic and some regional international routes.  all the long hauls go to Narita.  So does this mean haneda would keep the same demand profile for international?...or is this a sub case when all routes outside a certIn radius transfer equal demand to the new airport at Narita (I.e. NRT-LHR, NRT-JFK, etc.).  Then would seem that the domestic demand in this example never transfers one-to-one to NRT.  For example, Haneda-Osaka has the massive 15,000-20000 seat demand but NRT is going to only have maybe 1000 demand for "connecting" international demand as the average Domestic commuter isn't going to go out to Narita for a domestic flight.  Same type of thing with the Osaka airports.  These plus the Seoul switch have always seemed the most problematic whether based there or just flying routes to Japan...so any insight how this works on these would help.  OVerall I give 2 thumbs up for the overall improvements as I always seem to have weird demand issues in these airport new openings.

Can someone just confirm the logic on the plane changes, otherwise my question is can there be a FAQ page with general closing dates for the major plane type production lines...but if this logic is correct not necessary...taking the D.C.-8 that someone mentioned closed in 1972.  Assuming that's true, so we can potentially still order D.C.-8s until 2007 (+35 years) then if so inclined you can run the last one until the game ends if you were truly nuts?  If this is the case then no need for a FAQ.  I know this is extreme but more realistically, based on the last few long games with these slow production rates and the masses flocking to certain planes types...it's a very real possibility that you order a D.C.-8-63 and you are taking your delivery in 1975-1980 based on actual game play.  I want to make sure there is not a hard close in 1972...-as otherwise I think it needs to be something like actual close date + 10 Years so you don't have those constantly online freezing others out of production slots.   And as others have mentioned if there can be some relaxation of the 4th fleet type for phase outs, that would help...although I would also note it is possible to live through the (un)controlled chaos of changing over large fleets of the pre-1980s planes to ones fit for the 2000s...my record is 8 fleet types and still surviving it...although admittedly, not for the faint of heart 

Ps sorry I'm late to posting party given the earlier notes in September.

I'm not Sami, but I'm occasionally useful.

My understanding is that some airports will have attribute flags assigned to them to adjust behavior of passengers (this is NOT active yet). For example, when NRT opens, HND may get flagged with domestic and short haul international flights only, so there will be no long haul demand form it. Even then, when NRT opens, you've got 2 decent sized airports with similar catchment areas - upon the move, it looks like the demand will be copied from one to the other, and then it will start moving based upon catchment area, traffic and infrastructure. What I would suspect would happen with domestic passengers is that they would become equally split between HND and NRT due to the overlap.

You're correct on your assumptions - the DC8 line will hard close in 2007, which is 1972+35 years. The DC8 is an interesting historical example as the line wasn't necessarily closed due to a lack of orders, but rather to encourage DC10 sales.

[groundbum2]

italics on aircraft nicknames/scheduling - very nice!

;-) S

[Kof]

I think the release this evening broke the mouse over on the Scheduler page.
The pop up window is now stuck to top of the main window now.

[Sami]

Reload the page once

[Hillians]

Reload the page once

the reload function works but once you remove a single flight from a schedule to move it to another one (manually).. the page reloads back to page one.
This isn't helpful at all.

[Kof]

I did, same. Restarted bowser, same. I restarted machine, same.

When I turned on this:
"Additional information at Scheduling page" in settings, it stopped. Now even if I turn that off, it still works - strange. But I'm not experiencing the issue any more so all good.

Might be helpful if someone else has the same issue. I'm gonna keep the additional info on BTW, that's handy.

Thanks for the reply anyway Sami.

I should add, that I had tried this "Additional information at Scheduling page" feature earlier and turned it off, as it was interrupting the mouse over window, making it disappear, this isn't happening any more. Because this is turned on by default, shouldn't affect many people.

[spiff23]

I really like the airport codes in schedule pages!

[Turbine]

Just noticed the new update, and I'm liking it. Thanks Sami!

[kcm31]

I'm generally enjoying the new changes, but, some of the maps seem to have an issue now with their loading. This seems to be focused around the International Date line and will only load routes or destination markers on one side of it. Airports like HNL that are close to the line, or airlines with route maps straddling this seem particularly affected. Has anyone else experienced something similar?