While "base level" and the corresponding largest aircraft that can be operated from that base level is very straightforward, how do we determine if our "size of operations" is consistent with the base levels we choose?
What factor/s determine an airline's size of operations...total aircraft based? total departures? number of employees? etc.
(I'm just trying to tailor my operations to ensure the size of my operations at each base compliments the base levels i choose.)
Thanks.
Obi-Gun
Quote from: Obi-GunSmokenobi on April 09, 2019, 09:24:27 PM
While "base level" and the corresponding largest aircraft that can be operated from that base level is very straightforward, how do we determine if our "size of operations" is consistent with the base levels we choose?
What factor/s determine an airline's size of operations...total aircraft based? total departures? number of employees? etc.
(I'm just trying to tailor my operations to ensure the size of my operations at each base compliments the base levels i choose.)
Thanks.
Obi-Gun
Base size has the following limitations:
1. only small aircraft allowed
2. up to medium aircraft allowed
3. up to large aircraft allowed
4. all aircraft allowed
You basically want to know: "When does it make sense to have a medium/large/very large base?"
Tough question. Medium bases are rather cheap, while large bases tend to be extremely expensive unless you can schedule tons of large aircraft there. I would say if you don't have demand for about 30 large planes, then don't bother to open a large base.
I'll answer the question from another angle! When choosing to open a base you want to totally dominate a base; JUst as you wanbt to dominate a route so when people look at it, they think oh no, and move on, so it is with a base. You only get so many bases and so many out of HQ aircraft, so need to choose carefully. One that has a few weak competitors is good. The odds are if you move in and start dominating route by route competitors will give up and BK. If there's a big airline already there you wonder whether you can out RJs there and undercut them with frequency.
Simon
You're tracking me somewhat correctly, Andre'.
If 30 based a/c ("size of operation" not size of a/c) is truly indicative/complimenting of a base level of 3, how many based a/c would be consistent with base levels 1 and 2, respectively? The question, for now, assumes the size of operations is based solely on how many a/c are based and compared against each selected base level.
I imagine 30 a/c (regardless of a/c size), operating from a base level of 1, would NOT reflect small operations, hence why level 1 was chosen when the base was selected. Perhaps 3 to 6 a/c would actually be consistent with expected operations for base level 1? 7 to 15 a/c may be consistent with base level 2? 16-40 a/c, perhaps, may be indicative of a base level of 3? and beyond 40 a/c, just for example, base level of 4, because an extremely large volume of air operations is expected?
It seems reasonable that if we're selecting a base level to reflect the "size of operations", there would be some kind of max value, based on SOMETHING, to determine if our actual size of operations (not largest a/c we intend to operate) are indeed consistent with the base level we've selected. And, if not, perhaps there's a penalty that is part of the "airport and route traffic restrictions" delay?
Sami? :)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img921/9255/TQD3wi.png)
There are many factors that play a role here. For example, in current GW2 I have a base in San Jose. I have only 13 Convairs scheduled there (~50 seaters). It's of course a medium base. There are lots of short haul routes where I don't need much bigger planes and I can fly a lot of flights. If you're in crowded areas, medium bases work perfectly. If you need the range, medium won't get you far.
In my opinion there is no clear boundary as it just depends on your style and vision.
Thanks for the feedback, Andre'. Gonna try small and medium birds (37 total) with a base level of 3 at a small level 5 base--just to see what the economics are like...
Quote from: Obi-GunSmokenobi on April 10, 2019, 05:47:44 AM
Thanks for the feedback, Andre'. Gonna try small and medium birds (37 total) with a base level of 3 at a small level 5 base--just to see what the economics are like...
Gonna waste 1 level just to see if you can offset it? ???
Most of what I've learned from AWS has been through "try it and see". Always willing to try it and see...
the difference in terms of costs between level 2 & level 3 is huge. In last GW3, in Algeria, I had 4 medium bases fielding 7 to 10 A148s. And that's all. Even counting the extra staff costs in the HQ, those were doing small money. Lines were loooooong for such mediums, but I had nearly no opposition. In last GW2, I upgraded Wroclaw to level 3, and it cost me 3M$ in profit. Each of the 4 A320s I fielded there was doing 700k$ of apparent profit - which means, in 20th century, 400k$ or 500k$ of real profit. The operation was a net loss. Despite those 4 A320s being absolutely perfectly full at increased ticket prices - which is not often the case.
For level 3, if opposition is manageable, I'd say the bare minimum is 7 cargo planes or 21 pax planes to have some kind of profit. If opposition is intense, 49 pax planes or 21 cargo planes. But if opposition is intense, why go at all?
I'm just goofy that way, gazz. :P
The term 'size of operations' is a complete red-herring and means absolutely nothing.
Base level ONLY directly affects the maximum size of aircraft you can put into a base. If you need large aircraft (and can make profits with them), no matter how many or few (and I'd agree - at least 20 to make it worthwhile), then you need base level 3. If you only need medium aircraft, whether it be 10, 100 or 1000 then you should only be at base level 2. Level 4 is only for Extra-large aircraft so don't do this unless there is substantial demand for those. Only you can decide what 'substantial' means depending on your game plan and the amount of profit you need from the base.
One thing to be aware of is that base profitability is not be as clear to determine as you'd think. For each base you open, the expenses at HQ will increase drastically as many of the costs are charged there. So... a "profitable" base MAY not be making you much money at all. Be careful.
Quote from: knobbygb on April 11, 2019, 03:54:38 AM
(.../...)
One thing to be aware of is that base profitability is not be as clear to determine as you'd think. For each base you open, the expenses at HQ will increase drastically as many of the costs are charged there. So... a "profitable" base MAY not be making you much money at all. Be careful.
This
The small algerian bases I was speaking about had an apparent profit far higher than their real profit. I had to follow the costs accurately to be sure I was not losing money in Algiers more than I was earning in Leila Sebbar, and the call was close.
it would be nice if HQ costs, associated with opening bases and other overhead stuff, was separated out in "income" from normal airline ops at the HQ airport. So in GW3 my HQ is LAX with 6 bases (shaddup knobbygb or I'll buy some Jumbo's) and in the expense section of "income" it's next to impossible to pull out what is LAX flying expenses and what is overhead for the entire HQ op. So a few extra line items to hold overhead/HQ expenses would be good.
Simon
Quote from: groundbum2 on April 11, 2019, 11:18:45 AM
it would be nice if HQ costs, associated with opening bases and other overhead stuff, was separated out in "income" from normal airline ops at the HQ airport. So in GW3 my HQ is LAX with 6 bases (shaddup knobbygb or I'll buy some Jumbo's) and in the expense section of "income" it's next to impossible to pull out what is LAX flying expenses and what is overhead for the entire HQ op. So a few extra line items to hold overhead/HQ expenses would be good.
Simon
Yes!
It would be nice to have 2 options, actually:
1. HQ costs completely separated from the original base
2. HQ overhead allocated to individual bases.
The 3rd option we have, where all of the HQ overhead of bases is allocated to HQ base is the least helpful (misleading).
Quote from: knobbygb on April 11, 2019, 03:54:38 AM
The term 'size of operations' is a complete red-herring and means absolutely nothing.
Gee, Wally...why on earth is it even mentioned??? (rhetorical ;D)