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

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Feature requests / Re: Additional achievements
« Last post by LemonButt on Today at 01:32:48 AM »
I'd like to propose ditching achievements completely and using "top airline" lists.  The 1st/2nd/3rd place stuff could be replaced by badges or trophies or something and everything else would just be top lists--most cargo in a single year instead of 10m tons in a single year, most Brazilian aircraft, etc.  I've blown many of the biggest achievements out of the water.  For example, my current airline has approx double the number of very large aircraft for level 3 and I'm doing triple the annual cargo volume of the level 5 yearly cargo.  Then instead of trying to get arbitrary achievements and competing against "the game", players can focus on climbing those top lists as goals against other players.
2
General forum / Re: Problems with demands on a300
« Last post by DanDan on Yesterday at 09:43:55 PM »
In other words: A higher frequency is preferred, but there is a point when there can be a "too high frequency" and bigger jets actually are more efficient.

yes, it is certainly oversimplified. thats why i stated 2x 767 compared to 1x 777 as an example. certainly crew demands have to be considered and may be lower with bigger planes. it also seems there is a minimum that each company gets somehow as a market share as well: i know i had about 18 flights a day, all nicely staggered on a certain route, hour by hour - the competitor had one flight a day and got a ridiculously high market share.

on the contrary, i once tried to undercut a competitor, offering seats at 1$ for a route (yes, there is a way to reduce prices that low - not sure if it still is) - it basically didnt change anything in the market share. to sum it up: the passengers in AWS are not really thinking very much like real life passengers. they dont care about prices, they dont care about flight options, they dont care all that much about timing - what they do care about is, that every company on the route is able to survive.
3
General forum / Re: Problems with demands on a300
« Last post by Andre090904 on Yesterday at 08:51:10 PM »
Now that may have been a bit oversimplified. Yes, frequency wins in many cases, but can have its own dangers. The more planes you fly, the more you pay in staff, fuel, maintenance, airport fees etc. So while you can get a better market share on a given route, it also comes at a cost.

I once flew the route San Diego - Oakland which had a demand of 600. I flew 12x NAMC (50 seats) while a competitor flew 2x 727s with 150 seats each. My competitor got about 50% of all the market share with just 2 daily flights (probably the same plane) where I needed 12 flights and probably 6 planes if I remember correctly. Now, in the US staff was rather expensive. As was fuel for 6 planes (that fly slower, too) vs 1 jet.

In other words: A higher frequency is preferred, but there is a point when there can be a "too high frequency" and bigger jets actually are more efficient.
4
Announcements - The Modern Times / All continents connected
« Last post by Tzal1979 on Yesterday at 05:00:34 PM »
SpeedAir is changing with speed from your best regional commuter to world wide airline. We will now connect all continents, when in two weeks Geneve-Sydney route opens. Welcome to travel the SpeedAir!

Yours sincerely,
Chairman!
5
Announcements - The Age of Flight / ANSA Expands with New Partner in Europe
« Last post by gshepperd on Yesterday at 04:22:44 PM »
The Association of National Shuttle Airlines (ANSA) is pleased to welcome our newest partner, Air Norge.

Based at Oslo Gardermoen, Air Norge, operates from an additional base at Moss Rygge connecting 77 destinations with 455 flights daily across Europe with a fleet of 65 Saab 2000 aircraft.

ANSA connects the United States, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East with 17 airlines serving 842 destinations with more than 9,500 flights daily across the alliance's network.

To learn more about ANSA, its partners and membership, visit the alliance page.
6
General forum / Re: Problems with demands on a300
« Last post by Theemr7677 on Yesterday at 02:30:00 PM »
Ohh ok I see, didn’t look at it that way, thanks for clarifying it for me  :)
7
General forum / Re: Problems with demands on a300
« Last post by DanDan on Yesterday at 02:24:09 PM »
... is the a300 too big?? ...

simple answer: yes, it is too big. in aws, there is a golden rule: "frequency wins".

if someone flies with amazing seat-costs? no probleme, just fly a plane half the size and win by using superior trip-costs. and dont worry: passengers in aws are not price sensitive. so if you lower the price to 50% on the flights with better seat-costs, that wont impact the distribution of passengers much.
so when in real life it is the 777-300ER, airlines in aws prefer two B767-200ER instead. small plans win.
8
General forum / Re: Problems with demands on a300
« Last post by Sami on Yesterday at 02:07:14 PM »
Why are you looking at the load factor to compare them?  It does not tell you anything in this case since the aircraft are not the same sized. You need to compare on how many seats are being sold.

Example, VTBD - VHHK:
TH183, H121, dep. 05.00, last 7 day averge 86 Y seats sold, LF 68%
TH249, A300, dep. 06.00, last 7 day averge 108 Y seats sold, LF 43%

So actually your A300 is selling better (though in this comparison much is probably due to the 0500 dep time of the TH183) and ticket revenue in total is about $4000 more.


Load Factor is just a statistical metric of capacity offered vs capacity sold (to simplify a bit).
9
General forum / Problems with demands on a300
« Last post by Theemr7677 on Yesterday at 02:03:32 PM »
Hi

Now this could obvious mistake but my problem is my airline based in Bangkok in Dawn of Millennium (1980). So I use the a300 on the most crowded routes and I also have a set of smaller tridents who fly some of the same routes. The thing I dont understand is how the a300 usually gets about 30-40% LF and some as low as 20%, while my tridents are up at 80% LF. How so?

I can’t seem to figure out why, the flights aren’t between 00:00 and 05:00, i have 100 route image and good CI. I Cant seem too figure out why. I know the routes might be a litlle overcrowded but why are the tridents doing so well, is the a300 too big??

Does anybody know what could be the reason behind this?

Thanks
10
Makes me think, I'll have to try Ulaan Batoor, once.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

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.