Plane too small.

[Maxair]

I know this has been brought up many times in the past, but ill run this by everybody again. Heres my scenario. Im based in Sa'na. I have a 739 to ORY over 2800NM no issues. I also have the same type to FRA at a tick under 2700NM that is giving me a warning that the aircraft is too small for the route and the customary penalty that goes with it. What am i missing?

[schro]

It depends on the distance AND demand of the route. My guess is fra has more demand than orly.

Yarly.

Nowai

[Maxair]

It does but it's not a huge difference. Avg 140/d to ORY and 200/d to FRA.

[schro]

It does but it's not a huge difference. Avg 140/d to ORY and 200/d to FRA.

So that tells me that the threshold to trigger it is somewhere in between those two demand levels (it's usually in that ballpark about now). Since the trigger's sensitivity increases over time, that tells me your 739 may become too small for orly at some point in the near future as well.

[JumboShrimp]

So that tells me that the threshold to trigger it is somewhere in between those two demand levels (it's usually in that ballpark about now). Since the trigger's sensitivity increases over time, that tells me your 739 may become too small for orly at some point in the near future as well.

And the demand is likely to grow as well.

[Maxair]

Interesting. Cant say that i agree with the mechanics of it though. Im not throwing an A330 on a line with 200/d demand with competition on the it, especially with fuel as high as it is. Ill see what happens at Orly as the demand rises ( if it does ) and try and figure out where exactly the threshold is.

[schro]

Interesting. Cant say that i agree with the mechanics of it though. Im not throwing an A330 on a line with 200/d demand with competition on the it, especially with fuel as high as it is. Ill see what happens at Orly as the demand rises ( if it does ) and try and figure out where exactly the threshold is.

You can get a better feel by flipping through plane groups you don't have in the route editor to see which types trigger the warning.  Keep in mind that the warning keys off the average of the entire type (i.e. for the A330, it's the average of the A332 and A333 max seat counts).

The mechanism was put into place to rein in narrowbody spammers, as 757s have far better economics than widebodies in the game and were being used.... to spam routes heavily making "appropriate" sized aircraft nearly unusable on a large number of so-called appropriate routes.

[gazzz0x2z]

it avoids stupid situations, even in the world of smaller aircraft. I can't spam Detroit-Los Angeles with CRJs either, and that's a good thing. I already have a 1200NM margin of manoeuver with them for USA domestic flights, and it's already really powerful.

So it's far from perfect, and I remember my 737 transatlantic flights(especially from Nantes and Cardiff), once juicy, suddenly getting outdated because of demand increase. Counterintuitive, but makes sense, at the end. The game is better with the limit than without - even ir more readability would be welcome.

[Maxair]

I get why it was implemented and it makes sense. I just dont agree with it in this case because its screwing me lol. Just being honest. However, i would say that there is probably a better solution to that problem but i have no idea what it could be.

[Maxair]

I tried what you said schro and it appears that creating that route with any aircraft not in the Very Large category triggers the warning. I did some checking around of routes with similar lengths and demand and found a lot had 737s on them. Id like to know if the guys running 737s on YVR-YYT are getting a warning? Theres no way of me knowing that.

[schro]

Forgot to mention the additional dependancy on domestic versus international types of routes. So, for example, a 737 is fine on jfk-sea in 2020 but is too small for jfk-yvr at a similar level of demand.

I'm not saying I agree with how it was implemented. Much like many of these gameplay balancing "enhancements", it was not very well thought through prior to implementation.... Thus, we now have unintended consequences like the 757 going from one of the best fleet types in the game to one of the worst.

[Maxair]

Ah yes i hadnt thought of the international vs domestic scenario either. Good point. It is a rather silly method but like i said before, i don't have a solution so i shouldn't be complaining.

[Sami]

I will at some point improve the advisory message that appears on route editor on this matter. Since it's not a strict "on/off" type warning but a sliding scale and in most cases the small plane you are planning for it is still just fine (i.e. minimal negative effects).

[Maxair]

Good to know! It could definitely use some tweaking. I just opened OYSN-EGCC at 3140NM and 200+ demand and i didn't get a warning. Thats what puzzles me. It is further then my lines to AMS and FRA and nearly the same demand but no penalty like the other 2. Im at 35% LF on the 2 lines i mentioned. I actually don't really have an issue with the penalty and understand what its meant to accomplish but id just like to know what the criteria is to trigger it as it seems a tad inconsistent.

[Luperco]

What can be useful, without changing any mechanisms, is to have, instead of a on/off warning, a indication of the percentage of the passengers that disapprove the route. An not only for the plane too small, but also for leaving and arrival time, duration of the flight and frequency.

During the route planning, it would be just an estimation, while when the route is started it could become more precise. You could associate the precision of the estimate with the level of the marketing staff.

Just an idea

[MuzhikRB]

What can be useful, without changing any mechanisms, is to have, instead of a on/off warning, a indication of the percentage of the passengers that disapprove the route. An not only for the plane too small, but also for leaving and arrival time, duration of the flight and frequency.

During the route planning, it would be just an estimation, while when the route is started it could become more precise. You could associate the precision of the estimate with the level of the marketing staff.

Just an idea

good idea