AirwaySim

Miscellaneous => Off-topic forum => Topic started by: Frogiton on August 29, 2011, 11:58:51 PM

Title: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on August 29, 2011, 11:58:51 PM
Why fly on Friday...When you can make your own day to fly!!!!  :P
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on August 30, 2011, 12:18:39 AM
what are you smoking and can I have some?
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: RibeiroR on August 30, 2011, 12:25:27 AM
lol
haha, :P yeah... always has a crazy wherever you go
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on August 30, 2011, 01:31:43 AM
Why fly on Friday...When you can make your own day to fly!!!!  :P

BADLY faked....

Sigma or Eyguy, could either of you put this hoax into Off-Topic forum?! Thanks for keeping our environment clean :)
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on August 30, 2011, 01:41:43 AM
BADLY faked....

Sigma or Eyguy, could either of you put this hoax into Off-Topic forum?! Thanks for keeping our environment clean :)

Umm... it's actually not faked, I'm assuming my browser screwed up the page and I thought it was funny and took a screen shot. Sorry for offending you.

what are you smoking and can I have some?

The good stuff ;D
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: ArcherII on August 30, 2011, 02:32:19 AM
You most certainly won't get a job at Ryanair. Any job at all  :laugh:.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on August 30, 2011, 12:46:32 PM
Umm... it's actually not faked, I'm assuming my browser screwed up the page and I thought it was funny and took a screen shot. Sorry for offending you.

I don't feel offended, it just looks like an majorly failed attempt to fake this for a easy laugh...
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: schro on August 30, 2011, 01:31:56 PM
I don't feel offended, it just looks like an majorly failed attempt to fake this for a easy laugh...

Happens to me all the time.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: T8KE0FF on August 30, 2011, 02:57:11 PM
it just looks like an majorly failed attempt to fake this for a easy laugh...

+1
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: [ATA] - lilius on August 30, 2011, 04:13:11 PM
yay friday off  :D
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on August 30, 2011, 09:32:41 PM
Happens to me all the time.

What? That you fail you attempts?! :P   -just kidding-  ;) -

yay friday off  :D


who doesn't like so, hmm?! :D
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on August 31, 2011, 12:47:37 AM
What? That you fail you attempts?!

I don't feel offended, it just looks like an majorly failed attempt to fake this for a easy laugh...

BADLY faked....

Sigma or Eyguy, could either of you put this hoax into Off-Topic forum?! Thanks for keeping our environment clean :)

Your putting a lot of effort into making sure my little glitch I found with my browser doesn't amuse people. Don't you have an airline to run?  :P
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Danilo .S. on August 31, 2011, 12:53:47 AM
this a joke ?
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on August 31, 2011, 01:37:36 AM
this a joke ?

...No, my broswer screwed up the loading of the scheduling page, I took a screenshot of it, and I posted it with a little humor.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on August 31, 2011, 03:30:22 AM
Your putting a lot of effort into making sure my little glitch I found with my browser doesn't amuse people. Don't you have an airline to run?  :P

Yes, but I spend basically 24/7 online, after half of that I managed all THREE airlines I have, and I do it with success in opposite to some extreme cleverasses on this forums (I think we all know which specific person I mean...)
And There are always a few hours remaining to be on the forums and to comment on some of this random stuff ;D
And besides this business there are even MANY hours remaining for my sleep :)

But I feel like it is needed to say that this is nothing personally against you... I'd have commented on this in the same way if anyone else posted it ;)

cheers,
Jona L.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: alexgv1 on September 01, 2011, 05:39:03 PM
yay friday off  :D


I got that Friday feeling today  :)
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 01, 2011, 05:45:34 PM
I am off tomorrow and am heading to Cedar Point!!! 

http://www.cedarpoint.com/

God I love this place.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Brockster on September 01, 2011, 05:49:52 PM
I love Cedar Point! I used to fly out there every summer for a week. :)
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: RushmoreAir on September 01, 2011, 07:00:59 PM
Cedar Point is SO amazing!!

Love the Magnum!
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on September 01, 2011, 08:15:13 PM
I flew from Tucson, AZ just to go to Cedar Point!!! That was one of the best weeks of my life. MILLENIUM FORCE FTW!!! I'm glad I'm not the only Cedar Point enthusiast here.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Shleds on September 01, 2011, 08:27:06 PM
I also like Cedar Point, I drive there pretty much every two years from Ottawa, Canada.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Seattle on September 01, 2011, 09:24:22 PM
wow.... everyone seems to know what Cedar point is except me  :(

lol. They have an official ketchup.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 01, 2011, 10:24:42 PM
Its nice living 45 minutes from there.

Magnum is 200 foot tall, millenium is 310, top thrill 420. 

I love roller coasters
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Shleds on September 01, 2011, 11:00:26 PM
Here is a link to Cedar Point

http://www.cedarpoint.com/index.cfm

It is an attraction park, between Detroit and Cleveland. I would say at least 5 of the top 10 roller coasters in the U.S. are there.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: lunchbox on September 01, 2011, 11:15:01 PM
Here is a link to Cedar Point

http://www.cedarpoint.com/index.cfm

It is an attraction park, between Detroit and Cleveland. I would say at least 5 of the top 10 roller coasters in the U.S. are there.

I thought all 10 of the top 10 coasters are there lol ;D
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Brockster on September 01, 2011, 11:26:38 PM
Here is a link to Cedar Point

http://www.cedarpoint.com/index.cfm

It is an attraction park, between Detroit and Cleveland. I would say at least 5 of the top 10 roller coasters in the U.S. are there.

That's according to who you ask. As someone like myself who has been on over 350 different roller coasters I only consider Maverick in my top 10. Millenium Force is up there too but not in my top 10 anymore... :)

Still, for people who like roller coasters, Cedar Point is the place to be! Or Six Flags Magic Mountain on the west coast.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on September 01, 2011, 11:34:26 PM
Still, for people who like roller coasters, Cedar Point is the place to be! Or Six Flags Magic Mountain on the west coast.

I've been to both, luckily. I will say the Cedar Point etches out Magic Mountain, Magic Mountain does have a few roller coasters that stand out like X2 and Viper (highest loop in the world I think). Deja Vu is pretty nifty too. But all of Cedar Point's roller coasters are great. I'm gonna have to put Millenium Force on top of Maverick though personally.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Brockster on September 01, 2011, 11:38:52 PM
I've been to both, luckily. I will say the Cedar Point etches out Magic Mountain, Magic Mountain does have a few roller coasters that stand out like X2 and Viper (highest loop in the world I think). Deja Vu is pretty nifty too. But all of Cedar Point's roller coasters are great. I'm gonna have to put Millenium Force on top of Maverick though personally.

There are so many rides now that are better than Millenium Force. Check out Intimidator 305 at Carowinds. When it opened though, Millenium Force broke quite a few records and was undoubtedly the best coaster in the world but times have changed. The manufacturer who built Millenium Force, Intamin, has since then built smaller versions, in essence, of Millenium Force that are so much more forceful. (You can look up Piraten at Djurs Sommerland as an example.) But having said that it's still a great ride!

I personally feel Magic Mountain has a better collection of roller coasters (Riddler's Revenge, Tatsu, X2, Green Lantern, Superman Escape From Krypton, Revolution) but as an overall experience Cedar Point is so much better.

EDIT: Wow, we are getting off topic! :laugh:
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 01, 2011, 11:47:30 PM
Off topic doesn't apply to this thread.  Who wants to read jonas critique of the humor (or lack thereof) of the op.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Shleds on September 01, 2011, 11:59:52 PM
Wow, what is this? a cross section of people who loves airline simulation and roller coaster?
What are the odds...
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on September 02, 2011, 12:23:53 AM
Off topic doesn't apply to this thread.  Who wants to read jonas critique of the humor (or lack thereof) of the op.

Rather that than your unqualified comments on the game. Also the stuff about roller coasters is a further reason for a move to off topic forum.

cheers,
Jona L.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 02, 2011, 01:03:06 AM
Rather that than your unqualified comments on the game. Also the stuff about roller coasters is a further reason for a move to off topic forum.

cheers,
Jona L.

I learned to not get goaded into a flame war by someone else...

And define "unqualified"?  When I do any pseudo scientific tests in this sim, I use many variables to test my hypotheses.  I assume you are referring to my now-hatred of the 777 which many people share.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Frogiton on September 02, 2011, 02:23:48 AM
Rather that than your unqualified comments on the game. Also the stuff about roller coasters is a further reason for a move to off topic forum.

cheers,
Jona L.
I learned to not get goaded into a flame war by someone else...

And define "unqualified"?  When I do any pseudo scientific tests in this sim, I use many variables to test my hypotheses.  I assume you are referring to my now-hatred of the 777 which many people share.

Come on guys... not here. Just play the game and love each other. <3

There are so many rides now that are better than Millenium Force. Check out Intimidator 305 at Carowinds. When it opened though, Millenium Force broke quite a few records and was undoubtedly the best coaster in the world but times have changed. The manufacturer who built Millenium Force, Intamin, has since then built smaller versions, in essence, of Millenium Force that are so much more forceful. (You can look up Piraten at Djurs Sommerland as an example.) But having said that it's still a great ride!

I personally feel Magic Mountain has a better collection of roller coasters (Riddler's Revenge, Tatsu, X2, Green Lantern, Superman Escape From Krypton, Revolution) but as an overall experience Cedar Point is so much better.

EDIT: Wow, we are getting off topic! :laugh:

It's been a while (I feel bad saying that when I'm only 16) since I've gone to MM so I forgot about Tatsu and Riddler's Revenge, those are both great rides, revolutionary and top in their classes. Superman is definently topped by TTD at Cedar Point I think. Revolution is PAINFUL! That ride is too old. I haven't been keeping up much but I know Bizarro at one of the Six Flags was voted best metal roller coaster (also made by Intamin and a very close relative to Millenium Force). This whole thing is really making me want to go to an amusement park now!
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Brockster on September 02, 2011, 02:32:20 AM
It's been a while (I feel bad saying that when I'm only 16) since I've gone to MM so I forgot about Tatsu and Riddler's Revenge, those are both great rides, revolutionary and top in their classes. Superman is definently topped by TTD at Cedar Point I think. Revolution is PAINFUL! That ride is too old. I haven't been keeping up much but I know Bizarro at one of the Six Flags was voted best metal roller coaster (also made by Intamin and a very close relative to Millenium Force). This whole thing is really making me want to go to an amusement park now!

Actually, they have turned the cars around and sped it back up to the speed it went when it opened, so Superman has a completely new experience. They are also building a drop tower on the Superman structure, which will be the tallest in the world, which will surely further enhance the experience. But having said that nothing beats the launch of Top Thrill Dragster or Kingda Ka. :)

The Bizarro you are talking about is at Six Flags New England, and it is an incredible ride! There is also ride in Germany called Expedition GeForce which is also amazing! Now I want to go to an amusement park too. :laugh:
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Dave4468 on September 02, 2011, 08:20:14 AM
Alton Towers. Thats what the real roller coasters are!  :P
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on September 02, 2011, 09:19:04 AM
I learned to not get goaded into a flame war by someone else...

And define "unqualified"?  When I do any pseudo scientific tests in this sim, I use many variables to test my hypotheses.  I assume you are referring to my now-hatred of the 777 which many people share.

Well, my point behind this is simply, that you always reply everywhere (which is no crime) saying you know it better and try to tell everyone how things should be done but you actually never made it to be a) big or b) succeed with the things you test. That is how I define unqualified.

Come on guys... not here. Just play the game and love each other. <3

Sure thing, Frog, this was my last.

cheers
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 02, 2011, 10:41:45 AM
On my end, I test the sims capability in each game.  It is very easy to make a 737/320 airline with a 767/330 for lh.  I try something different each game.  Mt5 was long haul only where it was easily proved that the 757 was king (for transatlantic) and the 777 is as good as the crj1 at bankrupting an airline.    In previous games, I tested small a/c for their viability.  I go in with a plan of what I want to get out of it.  Sorry that I don't want to make a billion dollar airline every time.  In aws, there is no 'win'.   Sadly, more than a few of those players were using 'cheats' to get to where they are.

I don't say that I know it better.  It may appear that I purport that I do.  For that, I apologize.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on September 02, 2011, 12:54:01 PM
On my end, I test the sims capability in each game.  It is very easy to make a 737/320 airline with a 767/330 for lh.  I try something different each game.  Mt5 was long haul only where it was easily proved that the 757 was king (for transatlantic) and the 777 is as good as the crj1 at bankrupting an airline.    In previous games, I tested small a/c for their viability.  I go in with a plan of what I want to get out of it.  Sorry that I don't want to make a billion dollar airline every time.  In aws, there is no 'win'.   Sadly, more than a few of those players were using 'cheats' to get to where they are.

I don't say that I know it better.  It may appear that I purport that I do.  For that, I apologize.

I must reject the accusation of cheats with all force! I do neither use programs to refresh a page automatically, nor do I use bots to catch aircraft or anything else that had been in the discussions a bit earlier (I don't wanna revive that btw.).

For me A333/343/346 and B772/ER/3/ER work just fine (as I proved in the other topic where you stopped answering after you knew you were wrong (again)).

I can understand that you don't want to run a huge airline all the time, I myslef know the load of work to be done for that. But even as a small airline there is something to reach and if it is only to survive until the end of the game world. I do think that there is no real "win" as well, but there definitely is a lose, namely if you don't make it to survive a full game.

Maybe it is just a thing of misunderstanding but often enough it sounds pretty arrogant when you write a reply sometimes. (not meant as an offense)

cheers,
Jona L.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 02, 2011, 12:56:13 PM
1. Wasn't accusing you of cheating.
2.  You didn't provide the necessary information on that 777 thread for me to deem it scientific.
3.  I have to go get on millenium force right now.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on September 02, 2011, 01:07:17 PM
1. Wasn't accusing you of cheating.
2.  You didn't provide the necessary information on that 777 thread for me to deem it scientific.
3.  I have to go get on millenium force right now.

1st sounded like, so I just though I clear it up before another discussion starts about that.

2nd I provided as much info as I feel like being safe for my company's operations, and thus don't give all I have and the point is, that I make money on B777 and A33X/4X and you seem not to have made it. I do not need to tell you which routes I fly, because that simply doesn't matter. Every person with a sense of business know that a B777 is to fly over the Atlantic or further (or in the other direction to DXB and further) My aircraft fly all routes between 3000 and 7000NM in a decent mix and some 500NM gap fillers. The main trick is called fleet usage, that I don't let my planes stand around over 20hrs/day a 7-day-schedule helps a lot with that.

cheers,
Jona L.

P.S. I just felt like giving an example for the "unqualified comments" I named in an earlier post:
Widebodies are broken for transatlantic flying
That was the full post, with no proof and no reasoning. And you dare to call my examples "not scientific"?!

P.P.S. have fun in the fun park.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 02, 2011, 01:34:18 PM
I will dare say that.  Here is why.  When I ran my experiments, I ran standard seating and premium seating.  I ran them on 4000nm up to 7000nm routes.  I changed pricing around.  In the end, 80% of the planes were losing money weekly.   I hade more than 6 777s with 70% or higher lf but losing over 300,000 to 800,000 per week.

I also dare say it because you didn't release all of your data.  You can not just publish results from two examples and declare it a success.  

In every experiment there will always be outliers.  Your examples were just those.

Got about 10 more minutes in the millenium line now.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Peanutoil on September 02, 2011, 01:48:27 PM
I will dare say that.  Here is why.  When I ran my experiments, I ran standard seating and premium seating.  I ran them on 4000nm up to 7000nm routes.  I changed pricing around.  In the end, 80% of the planes were losing money weekly.   I hade more than 6 777s with 70% or higher lf but losing over 300,000 to 800,000 per week.

I also dare say it because you didn't release all of your data.  You can not just publish results from two examples and declare it a success.  

In every experiment there will always be outliers.  Your examples were just those.

Got about 10 more minutes in the millenium line now.

You seemed know all the truth in AWS! It will be a pity for SCIENCE for you claiming Jona's examples were outliers without looking into his data.
I did not operate B777 in this world, I have nothing to tell indeed. My belief is 777-300 and 777-300ER are those excellent planes among all available in AWS. They are as great as A333, A346s even taking the leasing cost into account.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 02, 2011, 02:48:02 PM
I did look at the data.  He purposely held back some information.  And yes, I do understand why he wouldn't want to divulge any secrets.    Personally I tested the 777 in all its forms across many flight ranges and found them to be underperforming. 
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on September 02, 2011, 07:33:49 PM
I did look at the data.  He purposely held back some information.  And yes, I do understand why he wouldn't want to divulge any secrets.    Personally I tested the 777 in all its forms across many flight ranges and found them to be underperforming.  

Well, if you look at my airline, you can see very well, that I only operate A33X/34X and B77X, despite a very recently started group of EMB 17X/19X aircraft, and have very good financial results. Thus these aircraft cannot be that bad... So either something was different about your airline, or you just didn't do it right. (as I said in the other topic, a thing of knowing how to play or not)

As Peanutoil is in my alliance I did share some more info with him about my aircraft so he can confirm that my aircraft produce decent results. And I am not eager to give you more data than I gave out publicly because I know I do not have to justify myself infront of you.

I will dare say that.  Here is why.  When I ran my experiments, I ran standard seating and premium seating.  I ran them on 4000nm up to 7000nm routes.  I changed pricing around.  In the end, 80% of the planes were losing money weekly.   I hade more than 6 777s with 70% or higher lf but losing over 300,000 to 800,000 per week.

I also dare say it because you didn't release all of your data.  You can not just publish results from two examples and declare it a success.  

In every experiment there will always be outliers.  Your examples were just those.

My B777 run in all standard configs (as you could see from the other topic) and fly routes between 3000NM (e.g. LHR-JFK) and 6600NM (LHR-HNL) and they almost all make great profits (some only make few but a number around the 0 makes losses)

You say your problem yourself: you had 6 of them, which is either seriously stupid or just completely random. You can't do a 7-day-rotation which is the ONLY way of operating profitable over 3500NM and thus you cannot fly all day giving you a serious impact in LFs. Also your fleet is very small which drives commonality cost up MASSIVELY when I got rid of my 2x B733 in the beginning of MT#5 I halved my commonality cost from 22.5M/mth to just 11.5M/mth.
So what killed you was a bad scheduling method and a crappy fleet management in regard to fleet types, and before you say you wanted to check the new commonality system (or the tweaks made), I don't believe you. Same as I didn't believe DanDantes when he quit DotM#1 because of "real life commitments" while he was just too lazy to reschedule 200 30yr old DC-9.

Anyhow, your liability shall not be out topic, neither shall be DanDantes. I just repeat that somehow my aircraft make profit, while yours don't (or didn't). So either of us used the wrong strategies and I am surely not the one...
And if with 70% LFs you lost money, you just failed seriously, because some of my aircraft with 55% make more than 500k/week!

cheers,
Jona L.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: swiftus27 on September 02, 2011, 09:22:58 PM
you misread one thing I was saying, I had 6 of them that had 70% LFs or greater that lost more than 300k...  That wasn't my whole fleet of them.... In my fleet I had almost 30 before I pulled the plug...     They were all flying almost non stop (except the 2:45 break they needed).  Some flew ULH, some flew transatlantic.     Ill give you a great example.  I was trying to fly EWR to Narita with zero competition and still couldn't make profits with a 772 or 773... one ULH plane at 80% LF was losing 600k per week. 

You are in the minority making profits that way.  There are far more players losing their butt on the plane. 

I do know how to schedule planes.  I wasn't checking the commonality system.  My only goal in MT5 was to fly LH only.  I only ran LH using 777 and 757 (two types don't get penalized much).  I had about 60-65 planes when I bankrupted out (the other player and I killed ourselves). 

I know someone said it in another thread... airports like LHR produce much more C & Y which will skew the numbers a bit. 

No one is asking you to justify a thing.  I am just saying that I can not compare your results with the rest of my data using the limited output given.  I am always testing the sim in most major games except when I am an alliance officer. 

One other item you may not be considering is that even though a plane shows a gross profit, they are not helping your bottom line at all.  Each of those massive planes need to make a ton before they cover their fixed costs. 

More food for thought:  There are only 20 active 777s in Europe/NA and only 6 on order.   There are 291 767s and 542 757s.   I think that speaks for itself. 

I am sure there are more people who were/are in the same situation but they don't always speak up.
Title: Re: My planes don't need to fly on Friday
Post by: Jona L. on September 02, 2011, 10:55:35 PM
you misread one thing I was saying, I had 6 of them that had 70% LFs or greater that lost more than 300k...  That wasn't my whole fleet of them.... In my fleet I had almost 30 before I pulled the plug...     They were all flying almost non stop (except the 2:45 break they needed).  Some flew ULH, some flew transatlantic.     Ill give you a great example.  I was trying to fly EWR to Narita with zero competition and still couldn't make profits with a 772 or 773... one ULH plane at 80% LF was losing 600k per week. 

You are in the minority making profits that way.  There are far more players losing their butt on the plane. 

I do know how to schedule planes.  I wasn't checking the commonality system.  My only goal in MT5 was to fly LH only.  I only ran LH using 777 and 757 (two types don't get penalized much).  I had about 60-65 planes when I bankrupted out (the other player and I killed ourselves). 

I know someone said it in another thread... airports like LHR produce much more C & Y which will skew the numbers a bit. 

No one is asking you to justify a thing.  I am just saying that I can not compare your results with the rest of my data using the limited output given.  I am always testing the sim in most major games except when I am an alliance officer. 

One other item you may not be considering is that even though a plane shows a gross profit, they are not helping your bottom line at all.  Each of those massive planes need to make a ton before they cover their fixed costs. 

More food for thought:  There are only 20 active 777s in Europe/NA and only 6 on order.   There are 291 767s and 542 757s.   I think that speaks for itself. 

I am sure there are more people who were/are in the same situation but they don't always speak up.

Sorry for my mistake about the 6 aircraft. Well, I never disagreed about the ultra-longhaul (>6000NM) my point was your transatlantic comment ("heavies are broke for transatlantic flying" or so) Over 6000NM it is hard and over 8000NM nearly impossible to make cash. I never said anything else. The trick for me to get them all running (and throwing out 30-35M/week) is the decent mix between 2 routes >5000NM (such as LHR/FRA to Asia or SA) and 3x 3-4000NM (LHR/FRA to NA/middle east) and usually 1 flight around 400-700NM to fill the remaining gap.

I do also agree that A333 is better than B772, also here: I never said anything different. But with what I just said about the "trick" is a way how both aircraft types run well. And this is also what I meant about knowing how to schedule a plane. I know you know how to do 7-day-schedules, and I know as well that you know how to fly on a tight schedule, the point is just the ideal mix of routes of different distances.

I know that LHR has more C and F demands but (as I said in the other topic):
*IIRC C and F pricing on LongHaul has been cut by about 30% which is completely unfair in relation to real world. In the end this is a simulation and not a game. As someone (can't remember who, sorry) said: the point of a simulation is not to recreate the result but recreate the realistic ways of gaining the goal, which may be a different from reality, as that is highly influenced by other characteristics [such as free fuel for the USSR Aeroflot and nowadays for Emirates] So if regional airlines FAIL in AWS this is not a result of wrong reproduction of reality but more of different outer factors. Many (if not most) regional carriers are run by big airlines or work under a contract for them to provide regional service for bigger airlines and would operate at a loss without such contracts. (as an example Augsburg Airways or Contact Air are contract airlines for Lufthansa and not even de facto subsidiaries.)
So in the end I am of the opinion that we should have kept it the way it was or at least do not have such big tweaks.

Europe/NA challenge has just recently started, and most players don't yet have enough money for these planes, or don't want to start a new fleet group. 767 and 757 are way more used in AWS than IRL I think also due to the (still about 1000% too high IMO) frequency bonus. If route shares were only calculated by the available seats people would start to think more slot(-cost) efiicient and fly an A321 instead of 3 DHC8 or a B773 instead of 3 B757...

I chose for the startup on regional routes in that game with an option to expand into longhaul whenever I want to.

cheers,
Jona L.