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: Hotswap Functionality  (Read 587 times)

Offline Jupiter

  • Members
  • Posts: 4

The 3 people who like this post:
Hotswap Functionality
« on: March 04, 2022, 10:56:05 PM »
I think a good feature would be if much like a hard drive in an array, you could trigger a plane to be a hot swap for any planes (of its same kind) that are in for maintenance. Ideally B, C, or D but even just C or D would be super valuable. When the primary plane is out of maintenance, the routes move back to the original plane and the hot swap plane is once again free to take on the routes of any upcoming plane in maintenance.

Just my two cents. Not sure if anyone else would find this useful.

Offline Jake

  • Members
  • Posts: 474
Re: Hotswap Functionality
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2022, 03:15:07 PM »
Going to plug the answer last given by @gazzz0x2z last time this was requested:

There are several misconceptions in this proposal.

misconception 1 : it is mandatory to cover the holes. Most players don't. When you reach 1000 or 1500 aircraft of company size, it just does not make sense to loe precious time for doing that.

misconception 2 : it would be actually a good idea on a financial point of view. If you do the maths on a realistic company, spare planes would spend most of their time grounded. Which would be costlier than not flying the route at all.


--This has been requested numerous times already, so just going to post one of the rules of this thread here...
Please first browse through the forum and/or use search to see that the same topic has not been discussed / requested already!  (the policy is to keep a single open thread per requested feature / item; if you have additions to an existing request please reply to that respective thread.)

Offline Continental Sky

  • Members
  • Posts: 81

The 3 people who like this post:
Re: Hotswap Functionality
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2022, 09:00:15 PM »
While it would be a good idea, I'm not sure it could work - what does mean "of its same kind"? It's not enough planes to be of the same sub-type, they need to have the same MTOW, otherwise some of them could not fit well into routes of other planes. As example from the fleet I have, B762, they have range somewhere from 2,300 to 6,900 nm, so the first one is unusable to swap this second one. But even if you go into sub-fleet, say 762 ER, even there are differences that make automatic hot swap impossible - range varies from 4,800 to 6,900 nm, so again not all the planes would be automatically compatible.

The same applies to another fleet I have where I use "spare" plane, MD80--90, ranges vary from 2,000 to 2,600 nm.

I have to do it manually, I have 2-3 free planes of longest range; if they replace the plane of the same MTOW/range, I simply swap the registrations and I don't swap them back, no need for that, doesn't matter which particular plane continues as "swap" plane since they are the same; but if plane that goes to maintenance has lower MTOW/range, I have to swap them back after maintenance is done.

When I saw title of your post, though, I hoped it was another idea: when you want to swap schedules of two planes, A and B, not for these maintenance reasons but otherwise, as far as I know, you have to clear schedule of plane A, move schedule from plane B to plane A, then re-schedule those cleared routes to plane B. Here I would find useful the option to swap two planes directly, without such a gymnastics. That's what I would suggest.

Offline gazzz0x2z

  • Members
  • Posts: 4630

The person who likes this post:
Re: Hotswap Functionality
« Reply #3 on: March 07, 2022, 07:06:34 AM »
Thanks Jake. I didn't remember having one day having written something intelligent, I feel better this morning thanks to you.

Offline Rigerman

  • Members
  • Posts: 15

The person who likes this post:
Re: Hotswap Functionality
« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2022, 07:32:35 AM »
.......  When I saw title of your post, though, I hoped it was another idea: when you want to swap schedules of two planes, A and B, not for these maintenance reasons but otherwise, as far as I know, you have to clear schedule of plane A, move schedule from plane B to plane A, then re-schedule those cleared routes to plane B. Here I would find useful the option to swap two planes directly, without such a gymnastics. That's what I would suggest. ....

This is exactly what I thought too when I saw the header and I agree 100% that this would be very useful.  It is essentially a "Manual Hot Swap".

Online Flying_ace65

  • Members
  • Posts: 353

The 2 people who like this post:
Re: Hotswap Functionality
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2022, 07:59:17 PM »
Going to plug the answer last given by @gazzz0x2z last time this was requested:

There are several misconceptions in this proposal.

misconception 1 : it is mandatory to cover the holes. Most players don't. When you reach 1000 or 1500 aircraft of company size, it just does not make sense to loe precious time for doing that.

misconception 2 : it would be actually a good idea on a financial point of view. If you do the maths on a realistic company, spare planes would spend most of their time grounded. Which would be costlier than not flying the route at all.


--This has been requested numerous times already, so just going to post one of the rules of this thread here...
Please first browse through the forum and/or use search to see that the same topic has not been discussed / requested already!  (the policy is to keep a single open thread per requested feature / item; if you have additions to an existing request please reply to that respective thread.)

Well while I somewhat agree with the first misconception most players don't cover holes and this is due to the amount of time/work it takes to do specially when an airline gets big enough, hence the need for a system to do it automatically, so even thought it is a misconception, it actually proves why a system is needed.

The second point I totally disagree, most airlines will have spare aircraft, depending on how they behave and their type of aircraft this will be between 1-5% of their actual fleet, now there are many reasons for this, such as covering for delays and possible cancelations, differences in schedule thru the year for high and low season which I don't think need to be covered in this game, airlines do have planning departments for maintenance (an integral part of any airline) which sole main purpose is to time down-time of aircraft and their replacements because no major airline would have scheduled flight cancelations for B, C and specially not D maintenance checks in their schedule, because no one could plan around this (Really have a think about it, what airline cancels a flight or a set of flights for 80 days, because a spare plane was not schedule to cover the D check in the mean time) and the notion that the airplanes would seat on the ground for longer than flying is simply wrong, if your C checks take lets say 14 days, every 26th aircraft you get one more, and that additional one would fly all year round just covering for the rest, it is the planning department job to space the checks so that the can be covered like this and because life gets in the way of perfect plans you realistically will have one extra aircraft for around every 20 that you have to cover the year. Money wise if you have an aircraft that makes ~500k a week and a leased aircraft (not ideal) to cover the holes leased at ~500k a month even if that "cover aircraft" only flies half the year, it will still make lots of money, on an airline of 1000 aircraft with an additional 50 "cover aircraft" it is actually a lot of money to loose.

So a system is needed for all maintenance checks to be coverable, but at a minimum C and D checks should be coverable.       

Offline seafax

  • Members
  • Posts: 103
Re: Hotswap Functionality
« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2022, 08:13:27 PM »
Flying ace is correct; spare aircraft are common in the airline industry.  IRL, entire departments of staff are tasked with the daily routing of aircraft in accordance with MX planning (especially Heavy checks), and this could be simulated in AWS simply with a sort of "aircraft reserve" system as suggested.

Of course, just like fuel hedging, engaging with such a system does not make sense for small airlines early in the game since it would be cheaper to cancel a few flights.  But as a company grows its fleet and a spare can be utilized often, the cost-benefit is realized and exceeded at a certain point.  I think such a game mechanic should be considered!

One additional thought:  introducing an aircraft reserve system could provide an opportunity to rethink or enhance the meaningful impact of maintenance cancellations on RI and CI...  (large companies are generally expected to have high reliability, and controllable cancellations due to MX are magnified in their cases.. making reserve aircraft even more logical to preserve public opinion).
« Last Edit: June 12, 2022, 08:23:02 PM by seafax »

 

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.