Changelog and Previews comment thread

[Andre]

Can't wait to try out the cargo feature. The previews are looking awesome. Great job Sami!

Regarding the turnaround time, I think it's already too long as well. SGS turns around a SAS 737-800 in 20 minutes with full load (pax+bags+cargo), and manages to keep Europe's best on time statistics. Current AWS time for that model is approx. 60 minutes for 1% chance of delay. So no need to increase the turnaround time.

[alex_king92]

I agree, times are already long, but look at the game only: if I operate a pax only flight I will earn less than a company which operates pax +cargo and has an "extra" earning. So I think it's a good incentive to pax carriers and offers more strategic possibilities.

[Jona L.]

I agree, times are already long, but look at the game only: if I operate a pax only flight I will earn less than a company which operates pax +cargo and has an "extra" earning. So I think it's a good incentive to pax carriers and offers more strategic possibilities.

Well, if you read the previews, you would've noted, that all planes (except "small") can carry at least some sort of cargo.
-> everyone will at least be able to get the extra revenue, thus no one should be "extra advantaged".

[alex_king92]

Think about low cost carriers which doesn't carry cargo and turn they planes in 20/25 min. No ground handling costs for loading cargo. They really save time and money in this.

[Jona L.]

Think about low cost carriers which doesn't carry cargo and turn they planes in 20/25 min. No ground handling costs for loading cargo. They really save time and money in this.

Since you can't reduce turn times below minimum in AWS, there is no point in this.
Since you can't operate a LCC in AWS, there is no point in this.
Since -as of current information available- cargo will be offered by default, so again, there is no point in this.

[alex_king92]

There is nothing you can't realize. Mine was just a suggestion, you don't understand this or you get satisfaction in gainsaying?

[Andre]

I think your basic idea is a good one alex_king92, but like Jona said these features aren't implemented yet. Whenever variable turnaround times are implemented, the cargo/no cargo option could probably be part of it. It's been discussed before, for example having longer turnaround times for longer flights, or being able to choose ground handling companies like you choose fuel services. The more expensive, the faster turnaround time. Being able to operate a LCC will most likely be possible in the future as well, since we'll get more options regarding in-flight entertainment, catering, seating options and so on making it possible to customize your airline the way you like it. As far as I know, some of these features are under development, others are merely suggestions.

[Jona L.]

There is nothing you can't realize. Mine was just a suggestion, you don't understand this or you get satisfaction in gainsaying?

I am not a naysayer, nor do I get satisfaction from gainsaying.

I have just made a point, and am defending it with arguments, of which you haven't brought many so far.

As of previous postings, I said why I am against your suggestion and I told you why. I understand your reasons for it, but I don't agree with them. Unless you can make a good argument for a change, I am not willing to change my position on this.

No offense, but you don't seem to have much experience with real world procedures. I have seen my fair share of them, and yes it is possible to beat those times, but that is not "business as usual", and sometimes borderline legal depending on where you are, and what you have to do to achieve the times.
And since this is a sim, it will have to bear some relation to reality (e.g. following the procedures).

As far as TATs are concerned, the current setup is all well, and should not and need not be changed.

cheers,
Jona L.

[alex_king92]

We are close to introduce a new feature, so I think this is the right time to make some minor adjustments to make the game more customizable and less static. I'm speaking about increasing strategic possibilities available to players. Each choice should be EQUIVALENT to the others: some advantages at one side, and some disadvantages at the other. So, for example, I would like to be able to carry passengers only and be quicker and spend less to load my plane, when my opponent gets extra income filling unused space in his cargo holds. I'm looking for realism too, but it doesn't make sense if everybody does the same things.

[Jona L.]

This still wouldn't change anything.

The thing that requires TATs to be that long is -for >95% of flights- the passengers. Only in very few cases, where there is excessive amount of baggage to be loaded (where there normally is no more space for cargo anyways),  the ground time is that long for non-PAX reasons.

In a regular turn around, baggage and cargo loading takes a lot less time than passenger loading.

This goes for bulk loading (loading every piece by hand), and a lot more for container loading.

Example:
An A320 full cabin takes ~12-15mins to empty (considering a regular scheduled flight with relatively routined PAX; +50-100% for charter/holiday PAX) and 17-25mins to fill (again, +50-100% for charter/holiday PAX), while off and onloading of containers/pallets on all available spaces takes roughly 15 minutes combined. If you have 2 loading crews with double loading equipment you can cut that time in half.

Example 2:
A B77W full cabin takes 25-40mins for deboarding, depending on number of jetties (again with relatively routined PAX, add time for tourists as above) and 35-60mins for boarding, depending on number of jetties (again more time for unroutined travelers).
Off and onload of all positions, which can only be filled if you have a LOT of cargo (15-40tn, depending on volume:weight ratio) is about 50-60mins (less with double loading crew).

Additionally at some airports fuelling is not allowed while PAX are boarding/deboarding, baggage/cargo loading is still allowed however. So you can add some time for fuelling between the PAX times as well. On a B777 uplift is about 2000kgs/min -> ~4mins of fuelling per each hour of flight, on the A320 you have an uplift of 800-1200kgs/min -> ~3mins per each hour of flight.

I assume you see where this is going?!


Of course these examples are void, if you have 20 PAX and 15 tons of cargo, but those flights are not the day to day operations.

And don't bring up RYR as an example, they try to have as little baggage as possible (by charging extra), and treat GH staff life workhorses, and push things quite far in terms of legality concerning work-safety, airport regulations and other restrictions.

cheers,
Jona L.

[alex_king92]

It seems you've lost the point of my suggestion, please, read again my previous post. I'm not against current turnaround times, and as I can see, you are agree with me when you speak about doubling loading crew. I have written enough about this thread.

Cheers
Alex

[Jona L.]

It seems you've lost the point of my suggestion, please, read again my previous post. I'm not against current turnaround times, and as I can see, you are agree with me when you speak about doubling loading crew. I have written enough about this thread.

Cheers
Alex

It is actually you who is missing the point.

You said you wanted airlines without cargo to be able to reduce turn times.
The matter of fact is, that cargo is not the problem with turn times, passengers are.

Cargo is a nice to have add on, available to all airlines (given they have a license, but most do IRL), and they can take it without disrupting regular schedules, even if they are at minimum turn times.

The whole point of my arguments has been to show you that shorter turn time are not possible.

[Springbok]

I'm looking forward to run cargo, as somebody who normally operates in the more remote areas of the game worlds, that could give it a nice twist.

For the turn arounds, I concur with the "walk-on" cargo being the most time consuming, and you also have to consider that delays ripple through the day and if you are late for your slot, you may end up in the holding pattern for another few minutes, all adding up over the day.

If you ever had the pleasure of waiting for an afternoon flight in North America, you'll understand, "due to late arrival of the aircraft, etc.".

It for sure would make the sim more realistic but also way too complicated to run through a browser interface. There's a reason for those special little programs and dedicated personnel the airlines have and if we reduce turnarounds in the game, we need to have a counter-mechanism through slot allocation. LHR is a wonderful example of most flights circling around as they missed their slots. Or if you fly into MAN on a flight after 9 pm, they have their baggage handlers down to a single team, etc.

As with the latest changes to the alliance score calculation, the game is heading to a more realistic experience. Reducing turn around time in real life increases the risk exposure of delay (and so those it in the game). Just cutting the time doesn't increase realism, you'll need to have the drawbacks in as well to do so.

Noriker

[Sami]

Turnaround times won't change due to cargo. However a 'variable turnaround' system has been suggested already a longlong(long) time ago and is something that will be considered for the future. This would mean that the turnaround is relative to flight duration / required ground services (= allowing shorter hops with larger planes with reasonable ground time). But that's not related to the present developments.

[pdxpilot06]

I noticed that the orientation of the values for daily supply and demand on the Estimated daily passenger demand (passengers / day) chart has been changed from the normal horizontal format. The new format is extremely hard to read and one has to twist their neck to read the number above each bar on the chart.

Any chance the format can be changed back to improve readability?

[Jona L.]

I noticed that the orientation of the values for daily supply and demand on the Estimated daily passenger demand (passengers / day) chart has been changed from the normal horizontal format. The new format is extremely hard to read and one has to twist their neck to read the number above each bar on the chart.

Any chance the format can be changed back to improve readability?

Format has been changed to accommodate the longer numbers for cargo demands. Change was intentional. Likely not to be reverted.

[pdxpilot06]

Format has been changed to accommodate the longer numbers for cargo demands. Change was intentional. Likely not to be reverted.

If cargo demand will be displayed on the same chart as passenger demand won't that skew the scale? If maximum passenger demand on any day of the week is 2,000 and minumum cargo demand is 10,000 lbs, the Y axis would have a minimum of 10,000 making the passenger figures appear close to zero.

I suggest displaying cargo demand in abbreviated format do both cargo and passenger demand can be read easily. An abbreviated format would be 10k for 10,000 lbs (or whatever unit is used for cargo demand).

Suggestion #2 is to have a separate chart for cargo demand or at least a way to exclude cargo-only demand from the chart. No need to have exyra space for larger nunbers if those numbers are hidden.

Suggestion #3 is to have a purely numerical display of passenger and cargo supply and demand either by day or by week.

Thank you for consideration of my comments and suggestions.

[Jona L.]

Cargo is already displayed in a separate chart, below the PAX figures.

[TranceAvia]

Sami - Will the achievements be back dated in existing Game Worlds. i.e. current airline? only i have achieved a few of these based on my current airline but the achievements are still showing as unachieved?

[Sami]

Yes, it takes a few game weeks to process.