AirwaySim
Online Airline Management Simulation
Login
Username
Password
 
or login using:
 
My Account
Username:
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Author Topic: [ok] Allow Med Combi types to carry STD cargo; SM freighters to carry STD cargo  (Read 1997 times)

Offline jamier

  • Members
  • Posts: 441
Excellent idea, I’d like to see it implemented from the current jet age game as it’s still young enough.

Others are a bit developed to make a change like this.

Offline Talentz

  • Members
  • Posts: 1129

The person who likes this post:
Sami, when can we see a change log update and also, will you be adding new models as well?  :laugh:


Talentz
« Last Edit: April 26, 2020, 10:32:27 PM by Talentz »
Co-founder and Managing member of: The Star Alliance Group™ - A beta era, multi-brand alliance.

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 17281
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
System changed so far only to allow medium-combi planes to carry standard cargo.

After investigation I feel that small class freighters (Beechcraft 1900, Cessna 208, Fairchild SA227, Let L-410, Short Skyvan) are so small that they do not fit to the definition of what the Standard Cargo is ...

Offline LemonButt

  • Members
  • Posts: 2226
System changed so far only to allow medium-combi planes to carry standard cargo.

After investigation I feel that small class freighters (Beechcraft 1900, Cessna 208, Fairchild SA227, Let L-410, Short Skyvan) are so small that they do not fit to the definition of what the Standard Cargo is ...

Can you provide some more color on this?  Here is what is in the manual:

Light Cargo - Small bulk packages like mail.
Standard Cargo - Heavier and larger cargo, usually in containers.
Heavy Cargo - Special and oversized cargo.

The Cessna 208 Super Cargomaster has a max payload of 1672kg but cargo is based on volume since only light cargo is allowed maxing it out at 1250kg--that means 25% of the aircraft's payload is impossible to use.  Same thing for the Beechcraft 1900 with 2676kg max payload and volume limited to 1895kg.

Light/Standard/Heavy cargo densities are 100/250/500kg per cubic meter based on the math.  The definition of standard cargo is "heavier and larger" and the definition of heavy cargo is "special and oversized", but based on the fact this is dense cargo the limit isn't volume, but weight.  Right now a Cessna 208 can carry 1 ton of feathers, but it can't carry 1 ton of lead.  I realize cargo gets very complicated very quick and there are tens, if not hundreds of classes of cargo IRL, but not all heavy cargo is volumetric and not all volumetric cargo is heavy.

A can of tomato soup has a density of 625kg per cubic meter which means if you had 2.7 cubic meters of tomato soup in a Cessna you'd be hitting the max payload with it being 80% empty on a volume basis.  This is an extreme example as tomato soup is denser than heavy cargo, but the point is that these aircraft are far more capable of carrying more than just light cargo based on payload alone.

The cargo classifications are not volume classifications, but density and it seems that the aircraft limitations are being determined based on volume instead of density--i.e. you can't have a pallet of tomato soup--it must be the size of a car and therefore can't fit in a Cessna.  In terms of heavy cargo being "special and oversized cargo"--this seems to really just mean oversized cargo which means big AND dense instead of just dense.

The only reason aircraft like the C208 and B1900 exist in the game is to serve low volume destinations.  If you have a route with 10 pax that can't be served by mainline aircraft, you can serve it because the demand is continuous versus discrete.  Right now in the cargo game, it is impossible to serve a route with 1000kg of daily standard or heavy cargo--the smallest capable of heavy I believe is the Tu204 which does 27 tons of cargo and the smallest for standard cargo is going to be in the 6000kg range.

Considering the massive delta between a 27 ton Tu204 and a 6 ton medium aircraft and the fact a can of tomato soup is heavy cargo, I think it's more than reasonable in terms of game mechanics to allow small freighters to carry standard cargo and medium freighters to carry heavy.  However, I do believe there is a class of cargo that only large/very large aircraft should able to carry and that is the specialty oversized cargo--but it will never be 30% of the total cargo demand like it is today.  So I think it makes sense to not only make the small/medium freighters more capable, but also add a fourth cargo class that is truly the "special and oversized cargo" because right now that doesn't appear to be what heavy cargo actually is.  I think this fourth class could be 1000kg per cubic meter--aluminum isn't a heavy metal and weighs 2700kg per cubic meter as a point of reference--and would be something like 10% of total demand on the biggest routes that would have it.

Alternatively, in order to preserve the current system and reduce complexity, I would suggest making the small/medium aircraft capable of carrying standard cargo and changing the actual cargo demand from the 30/40/30 splits on most routes to making heavy cargo much more exotic with something like a 40/50/10 split.  This would make the heavy cargo the "special and oversized cargo" as intended.  This would also harmonize small/medium freighters serving low volume routes in the same way small/medium pax aircraft can serve pax demand now (you can't add first class seats, but you can do business class--likewise first class isn't on every route and when it does show up, is still low volume *note: before someone says small aircraft can only have Y class and no business class as a counterpoint to only having light cargo and not standard, most corporate small aircraft are configured to something better than business or first class--you can't do it in the game, in part, to prevent "magic carpets").  I think it would also give cargo routes/airlines a sanity check--right now freighters are printing money due to the relatively large amount of heavy cargo available and limited competition from smaller aircraft.

I think changing the ratios to have less heavy cargo is the best solution IMO.  I recently BK'd my airline in HaF, but I was able to "game" the system to shift demand based on the current heavy cargo setup.  I found that in shifting cargo from ORD/MDW to GYY (Chicago) I was able to shift demand away from the London area at a CL/CS/CH ratio of approximately 25/30/35%.  That means if I put 1 ton of supply on the route I'd get 250/300/350kg.  Guess what? That heavy cargo has such a big premium and there is so much of it (with less competition--the pax belly cargo is what pushed down the light/standard ratios), I was better off shifting ALL of my capacity to be heavy cargo.  There are diminishing returns here, but assuming I added so much capacity that my 35% ratio got pushed down to 25%, I was still coming out way ahead as flying 25% load factor with 100% heavy cargo is far more profitable than flying 25% load factor with 100% light cargo, which is the opportunity cost.  If the cargo splits with 300 tons of daily demand were 120/150/30 instead of 90/120/90, there is no way I could have done this--my ratios would have been so low that the opportunity cost would have been flying 10% LF with heavy or 50% LF with standard (or similar).

I googled it and the rich snippet on Google stated that the average density of all cargo is 161kg per cubic meter.  This would translate to a something closer to a 50/40/10 split of cargo where cargo on average is light-standard.  This makes sense as I have talked to people who have shipped military tanks across the Atlantic that have said heavy/dense cargo is surprisingly cheap to transport via cargo ship because they use the heavy cargo as ballast.  So to end my long ranting post, I think an overall improvement would be to make small/medium capable of light+standard cargo and changing the splits from 30/40/30 to nerf the heavy cargo to 40/50/10 (or 50/40/10) on the big routes.  The net effect on this might require a small tweak/reduction of the airport cargo handling fees, but hopefully all of the above makes sense :)

 

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.

If you are using the latest version please turn OFF the compatibility mode.