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
ok, i got it, so its a slightly different thing, since you are basically proposing the traffic between two basis with stops in non-base-airports in the middle. so yes, the ABCBA with bases in A and C can be quite useful for the perfect timing of flights, like if someone would imagine an airline with bases in A LAX and C JFK and making a destination in B STL, so one can time the aircraft better.

Or like LH did it for a while, to not have longhaul aircraft based in DUS for additional costs, they flew the plane from MUC to JFK to DUS and from DUS back to JFK and MUC. (Which will get into an issue with aircraft size basing limits maybe).
2
Im inclined to agree here. Itís a serious pain to get FRA slots due to these unfair practices.

Without referring to the Tulip v/s Schro topic here, I would like to disagree with this comment in isolation.

It is indeed a pain to get FRA slots, I check it many times a day without any success either. But as long as both these players are getting the slots whilst staying within the rules Sami has devised at this point, then this complaint of us is exactly what the incumbent FRA airlines intended, isn't it? Namely, to not let any other player into FRA and thus establish a duopoly whereby both benefit as nearly all routes out of FRA are basically regulated by them and they can price them suitably high.

It may look unfair to other airlines wishing to supply FRA more, but again, as long as the two airlines are abiding by the rules in force at the time of writing; then we should just look at this as another way to play. And if Tulip & Schro can use the situation to their advantage, then more power to them.
3
General forum / Re: D Check penalties
« Last post by Talentz on Today at 03:42:20 AM »
I've been hit with about 30+ ramp checks over the months between 3 GWs. The biggest problem is the hit towards CI. The sharp drop hurts for a few months, but recoverable if you have stocks of cash.

You shouldn't have issues with ramp checks unless your extremely lazy like I am. Otherwise, just keep auto-D check "checked" and you'll have no problem.



Talentz
4
I'm not sure what's unclear about the substantial evidence that I posted?
Im inclined to agree here. Itís a serious pain to get FRA slots due to these unfair practices.

Take what you need, not what you donít want others to have.
5
do not presume to tell the Phoenix alliance how to run there alliance (perhaps best to keep your own house in order first) filing a law suit is not winning a law suit, we will stand by all our members unless we have substantial evidence to the contrary and then WE will weigh that evidence and may or may not take any action,as it stands at the moment you have made your point and our member has responded and we see no reason to accept your views over his at this time.

The Phoenix alliance will not be drawn into this clearly personal war and will post no further comment on it

I'm not sure what's unclear about the substantial evidence that I posted?
6
TOKYO -- John Kato, the station manager for Pan American Luxury Transport's Tokyo hub, was spotted walking into the office of the Kowloon Pacific station manager this morning.

According to reports, Mr. Kato told his counterpart: "Listen, I know you're our competitor, but I've worked this station with you for a few years now, and I've always respected you. So I came to give you a message for to pass on to your senior management: Kowloon Pacific's recently announced plan to order Boeing 757s for leasing purposes is ill advised. Pan Lux tried the same thing a few months back, and while 737s and 767s are leaseable, the Used Market for 757s is currently flooded, with pricing too low to be worth your time. Take a look at the market yourself--just be careful not to spit out your coffee when the information loads! Good luck."

Debbie Huckabee, a spokeswoman for Pan Lux, refused to confirm or deny the reports, but criticized "fake news" reporters for leaking a private conversation. She commented: "The leaks are real, but the news is fake!"
7
Quote
we promptly part ways with them. It would behoove any other alliance to do the same.

do not presume to tell the Phoenix alliance how to run there alliance (perhaps best to keep your own house in order first) filing a law suit is not winning a law suit, we will stand by all our members unless we have substantial evidence to the contrary and then WE will weigh that evidence and may or may not take any action,as it stands at the moment you have made your point and our member has responded and we see no reason to accept your views over his at this time.

The Phoenix alliance will not be drawn into this clearly personal war and will post no further comment on it
8
Announcements - 1980s Challenge / Kowloon Pacific to enter leasing market
« Last post by Mort on Yesterday at 09:36:06 PM »
After a further quarter of increasingly positive results, Kowloon Pacific are pleased to announce their entry into the leasing market.

The airline has ordered 40 Boeing 737-300 series and 20 Boeing 757-200 series aircraft in a bid to promote growth amongst the newer airlines around the world.

CEO Mort mentioned they are keen to establish long term partnerships, and hinted at lower than market deals to be had for bulk agreements.

"With deliveries starting in 2 months, be sure to reach out to us if you're looking to secure a deal on these new aircraft!"
9
I would NOT allow any passengers/cargo to be transported from B to C or C to B, only the payload from A to B/C or from B/C destined for A should be carried. that would remove the possibility of creating "shadow hubs"

the techstops generally should be considered in the flight-time, maybe add a slight penalty, but certainly nothing in the dimensions of what it is now. like for ABCBA, there should be no penalty at all for B, since for them, the flight to A is a nonstop flight. for ABCA, both B and C have one techstop to reach/to be reached from A, so half a penalty. etc. etc.

The concept for ABCBA routing I propose doesn't consider B as a techstop, but the destination itself. It's an alternative to 2 route pairs: ABCBA <=> ABA + BCB. Hence, it wouldn't be considered a flight able to carry passengers from A to C and C to A.

And the possibility of shadow-hubbing is eliminated by the fact that, as A and C must be the airline's bases, all legs in the flight connect a base to the destination airport.

The ABCA routing like I propose consists of this equivalency: ABCA <=> AB - BA + BC - CB + CA - AC. In this case, A and B must be airline's bases also to prevent shadow-hubbing.

Please note that in any of these cases, B is considered an intermediate stop either.

Maybe it is just me, but the gains from this are extremely low and complexity is extremely high.

An airline with 1000+ aircraft, 5+ bases and high profit margins won't care much about some inefficiencies, but for an airline with 200- aircraft operating in a country with lots of curfewed airports and a domestic market not too strong (like Mexico), these inefficiencies can become a trouble. So these special routings can help them gain slightly more profit margin.

10
General forum / Re: Airport slot costs
« Last post by schro on Yesterday at 12:41:22 PM »
What "budget" are they bring deducted from?
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.