[-] Allow ALL combi aircraft to carry CH cargo

[Cornishman]

Dear Sami and team, please would you consider allowing all combi aircraft (not just the "very large aircraft" ones) to carry all 3 cargo categories.  In GW 4 we are at about the year 2033 and I have a major base at Paris CDG, at Paris ORY and also at Gatwick LGW - so I really search around and analyse everything.  With all these bases and this late in a GW, I can still barely find a single route anywhere within the ranges of the "large aircraft" combi range - (so for me that would be my 757-200M but would also include 737-700C) with any viable route anywhere on the globe. Anything I can find might be viable if the combi could take the CH (heavy) cargo but no routes anywhere have sufficient CL and CS demand while at the same time only requiring a small number of pax, to justify the combi. There are plenty of routes where you could justify having either the 757-200 or the 757-PF and some routes could have one from both aircraft.

So in a sad way, this renders these "large aircraft" combis to be completely useless in AWS. Surely it would make sense to have them made useful by allowing them to take CH and therefore making them viable on a good number of routes?

Thanks for considering this
Jack Freeman

[Tha_Ape]

On one hand, it would be realistic, and IRL there are some medium freighters that can handle HC as well, even medium combis able to carry HC: https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,76043.msg446181.html#msg446181

On the other hand, there needs to be certain limitations, in order to keep the game relatively simple (not to make 100 rules and 10000 exceptions).

At some point I was wondering if it wouldn't be interesting to solve this problem by adding a 4th category of cargo. The current 3-sizes system is pretty realistic in itself, but coupled to the a/c size class system, it creates some drawbacks as the one you just pointed, or the uselessness of medium freighters (except in some very very small niches, while IRL they are the system that allows cargo hubs to actually exist.

I didn't have a complete review of this idea, and it my have some other drawbacks as well, but I might have some try at it. We'll see.

[Sami]

No for this - heavy cargo (by design) is meant to be large containers or other special/heavy stuff which will not fit smaller planes. We have smaller combi planes like F27 etc, so this change is not an option.

[Cornishman]

OK, well totally your decision. Just like so many other very valid and good ideas shared on these pages -  It is sad really, it is just this sort of blunt refusal to adapt the game to make certain things have more value (or in this case - any value at all for "large aircraft" combis) that has made up my mind I shall be leaving AWS  at the end of GW4

[ygif]

No for this - heavy cargo (by design) is meant to be large containers or other special/heavy stuff which will not fit smaller planes.

I'm confused here. If the freighter variant of a large aircraft can carry heavy cargo, why not the combi variants? Its not like the fuselage changes that much between them.

[Cornishman]

Totally agree, there is nothing I know IRL to stop a combi 757 from accepting heavy cargo if that's what the operator wants to take. And what exactly defines what shape heavy cargo has to be?  One company wants to transport 10 tonnes of feathers and another wants to carry 10 tonnes of gold.... size alone doesn't come into it really, only how an operator manages the cargo and if they use containers - or not !! 

[Talentz]

Mmm... If I remember correctly, while doing research on the only 757-200M produced, The main deck class was "B". Im pretty sure the 757PF has a higher main deck floor rating then the -200M. So it really couldn't perform the task your asking.


Just food for thought I guess.


Talentz

[Cornishman]

Thanks Talentz, useful input and if correct I wasn't aware of that. Again though, I highlight the need for this game to grow and become more and more interactively fun for more and more gamers and sticking rigidly to only what happens IRL simply isn't always going to be practical - although I fully commend this game having a huge amount of reality to it. But when reality doesn't work for the game, then instead of just a blank refusal, a little stretching of RL facts could make the game that much more enjoyable.  A case in point is the whole advertising campaign system for this game. It is anything but realistic but realism would probably have been impractical to function into the game, therefore we have a gaming adaption, and therefore why not in other areas too?  I just don't get the blunt refusal to adapt. There are literally dozens and dozens of great ideas from so many people for improvements in all these threads on the forum, and barely a single thing seems to be taken up and offered back. Are we all just wasting our time suggesting things? Just blunt statements that IRL it's not so, therefore answer is no. Sorry, I don't mean any offence and appreciate lots of people may differ from my opinion, but I'm tired of that attitude.

[Sami]

All suggestions to improve the sim are always welcome, and I'd say 90% of all improvements and updates are originally user-submitted. But the final decision is still mine on what to include and what not, and the intention is not to include each and every suggestion since that would be impractical and impossible due to time alone. But still, I have a clear development plan on where to focus on my time on the big aspect (instead of jumping onboard immediately with every request posted here). The requests seemed unfeasible are closed and others having potential ("maybe" status) are left open.

Inclusion of Heavy Cargo transportation for all combi aircraft is not going to be included, since it simply makes no sense no matter how it's looked. From both game balance and real-world prespectives. Like mentioned for example a combi-Fokker 27 is fully incapable of transporting heavy cargo. And allowing combi a/c to be more "powerful" would further put the large/very large pure cargo planes into trouble.

Ref. to manual to understand what "Heavy Cargo" should be. It's not about weight, but volume (and weight too..): https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Manual/Routes/Cargo/

[gazzz0x2z]

and then ther's the A148T, able to transport containers...but it's a level of detail that is hard to reach.

[Cornishman]

All suggestions to improve the sim are always welcome, and I'd say 90% of all improvements and updates are originally user-submitted. But the final decision is still mine on what to include and what not, and the intention is not to include each and every suggestion since that would be impractical and impossible due to time alone. But still, I have a clear development plan on where to focus on my time on the big aspect (instead of jumping onboard immediately with every request posted here). The requests seemed unfeasible are closed and others having potential ("maybe" status) are left open.

Inclusion of Heavy Cargo transportation for all combi aircraft is not going to be included, since it simply makes no sense no matter how it's looked. From both game balance and real-world prespectives. Like mentioned for example a combi-Fokker 27 is fully incapable of transporting heavy cargo. And allowing combi a/c to be more "powerful" would further put the large/very large pure cargo planes into trouble.

Ref. to manual to understand what "Heavy Cargo" should be. It's not about weight, but volume (and weight too..): https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Manual/Routes/Cargo/

I appreciate the answer and also your many other answers to other suggestions today - even if we have to close this one and agree to disagree on this specific point   
Thanks Sami.