(I apologize if this has been covered -- I DID search. I even remember reading about it.)
I would like the ability to schedule C-Checks ahead of time so I can "spread the love." I know I can do this manually, but if I could do it on a schedule, it would make cash-flow much more predictable.
I saw that something SIMILAR to this was proposed, but I wanted to be very clear.
I propose that https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Aircraft/Maint/xxx/ OR https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Aircraft/My/?sort=Reg&view=tech&sort2=up&page=1 (or both) have a field or link added that says "Schedule C-Check" so that we can set the date of the next check.
Just had the same conclusion.
With a large number of aircraft, this becomes untenable to manage, as one by one it requires near full time attention to the game to try to spread them out. Thus one is subject to the randomness of how the c-checks cluster, which can play havoc with your cash flow.
Definitely could use the ability to schedule these ahead of the default time limit they come to the airline with to give them proper spacing.
If you take a step back, you will realize how ridiculous this is.
Instead of paying for C-checks when they are due, you want to pay for them before they need to be paid for, which actually hurts your cash flow at the macro level because you're paying for unnecessary maintenance.
Statistically, the frequency of C-checks is a Poisson distribution and subject to the central limit theorem. Which basically means that those "clusters" of C-checks will start to converge on the theoretical mean. Or in less technical terms, the more aircraft you add to your fleet the less variation you will experience in weekly cash flow due to C-checks.
So as it stands today, the problem is only a problem if you have a small fleet, and if you have a small fleet you should be able to use the existing features to "space out" your C-checks, which is still a losing proposition because you're giving up free cash flow today to pay for unnecessary maintenance versus using future cash flow to pay for required maintenance. If you add in the time-value of money, it becomes even more of a no-brainer. If you're really worried about these short term fluctuations, the solution is to always have $1 million in cash on hand and treat that as your $0 level so there is always a reserve for C-check expenses.
IRL I'm certain this probably happens as the main constraint is aircraft mechanic labor and you don't want them working 80 hours one week and 20 the next because you had a cluster of C-checks, however AWS does not require this level of micromanaging (thankfully).
Quote from: LemonButt on September 18, 2013, 07:01:59 PM
If you take a step back, you will realize how ridiculous this is.
Instead of paying for C-checks when they are due, you want to pay for them before they need to be paid for, which actually hurts your cash flow at the macro level because you're paying for unnecessary maintenance.
Statistically, the frequency of C-checks is a Poisson distribution and subject to the central limit theorem. Which basically means that those "clusters" of C-checks will start to converge on the theoretical mean. Or in less technical terms, the more aircraft you add to your fleet the less variation you will experience in weekly cash flow due to C-checks.
So as it stands today, the problem is only a problem if you have a small fleet, and if you have a small fleet you should be able to use the existing features to "space out" your C-checks, which is still a losing proposition because you're giving up free cash flow today to pay for unnecessary maintenance versus using future cash flow to pay for required maintenance. If you add in the time-value of money, it becomes even more of a no-brainer. If you're really worried about these short term fluctuations, the solution is to always have $1 million in cash on hand and treat that as your $0 level so there is always a reserve for C-check expenses.
IRL I'm certain this probably happens as the main constraint is aircraft mechanic labor and you don't want them working 80 hours one week and 20 the next because you had a cluster of C-checks, however AWS does not require this level of micromanaging (thankfully).
Come on...why use such a tone? :-\
Probability does not equal actual instance...that scientific Poisson Distribution nicely piled much of my c-checks into one part of the year (long tails anyone?). :P
I fully understand what you say about the extra cost to doing so. Yes, there is the time value of money related to doing maintenance earlier than technically necessary.
Your suggestion of reserving $1M has an opportunity cost as well, btw. I think that matters more.
That $1M means approx one a/c and two to three routes (ymmv for other airlines/airports/aircraft). That's
a recurring weekly profit stream of, minimally, $20K+/- (less whatever allocation of costs that don't show up on my aircraft page)
vs a one time cost of $2K per each week of shifted C-check (C-check cost/50 weeks - again, ymmv by a/c), plus whatever the time value calculation of that one time charge would be. In high growth mode, that is a pretty important distinction.
So yes, because of an artificial constraint, the bottom line choice is either slowing down my growth a bit and sitting on a pile of cash, or using that cash, but risk missing an opportunity to conduct a transaction because I cannot schedule my time around the game's time.
I tried to "correct" the imbalance by attempting to smooth out the checks, but I found that it merely doubles down on issue of scheduling around the game, as it has to be done in "real time". I've moved several of the worst occurrences so it is better now, but it is far from ideal.
This is by far my overriding consideration for this request - the ability to fit this aspect of the game better to my schedule as a player. To me, that is worth something, even if it means my airline is hit with the extra cost in the one time transition.
Not trying to be a p***, but it is ridiculous. I'm not sure if you know this, but C-checks will be performed if you are in the red, as long as your not DEEP in the red, so you could easily operate your airline (assuming it is profitable) with a $0 cash balance and still have all the checks performed.
At the end of the day, you want to spend money before you have, which is fine, but hurts you more than it helps you. And yes, that Poisson distribution has tails on both ends and it will happen where you have an exceptional number of C-checks at one time, but as your fleet size increases all of that gets smoothed out. It's for all these reasons it makes no sense to spend money you don't have to on maintenance you don't need yet.
Quote from: LemonButt on September 18, 2013, 11:13:51 PM
... ridiculous....not sure if you know this, but...
Aw man! ???
I'm left guessing what your intent is, so will assume you really don't intend to mean anything derogatory by it (not sure what p*** means which may be a clue that we are getting our signals crossed). ;D
Quote from: LemonButt on September 18, 2013, 11:13:51 PM
...C-checks will be performed if you are in the red, as long as your not DEEP in the red, so you could easily operate your airline (assuming it is profitable) with a $0 cash balance and still have all the checks performed....spend money you don't have to on maintenance you don't need yet.
I know that maintenance generally still occurs in minor red status, thanks.
The issue is not about being able to afford C-checks and being in the red.
The airline is profitable and covers the c-checks just fine. If not so, I would not be looking to pay them earlier than I have to.
Quote from: LemonButt on September 18, 2013, 11:13:51 PM
At the end of the day, you want to spend money before you have, which is fine, but hurts you more than it helps you.
Spend money on c-checks before I technically have to, yes. But not because I want to.
It is because given the choice of sitting permanently on $1M, as you suggest, or using it, I chose to use it (available cash) to invest to generate revenue (reflecting my greater priority on growth).
However, that choice means that I must time my IRL interaction with the game because of the timing of POSITIVE cash balances which occur towards the latter part of a game week and varies from week to week.
Where c-checks come into play is that they can create an impediment to that timing. If they could be smoother, I could keep an optimal level of capital in play vs having to manage around them with some kind of reserve however short lived.
The cost of that smoothing would be less than the NPV of the revenue stream, which I think I logically demonstrated in my prior post (the difference seems vast enough that the cost of shifting c-check schedules looks like pennies). But, I could be missing something, if someone could non-offensively point it out, I'm quite willing to admit error. :laugh:
Notwithstanding all that...
It comes back to a compromised choice because of an unintended constraint in game play.
Not having the flexibility to schedule c-checks means I must either carry a larger airline cash balance to cover the "waves" ...OR... I must risk not being able to meet opportunities because my IRL schedule does not permit me to be active in the game at the time they present themselves.
It is this non-game-financial, IRL consideration that motivates this request.
It is not a choice I WANT to make, but one that I must, given the constraints of functionality in the game.
Quote from: LemonButt on September 18, 2013, 11:13:51 PM
...but as your fleet size increases all of that gets smoothed out.
According to the theory, on average, yes. However, the average is made up of several observations/instances. It is instances we live with, not averages.
I would think that 50 should be a good number for an average spread of closely even across a year, if it were random (I could sub-optimise my aircraft selection at lease time to force a smoother c-check schedule, but that would have other costs). After some nudging, I now have them roughly equal by quarter and not bad monthly.
Still, even if they fell close to the average, I'd expect month to month and week to week variation, and it still seems desirable to smooth them out, for my reasons stated above.
Where to from here...
I doubt anything will be done soon, as this has been open for some time, so I have to make my choices and play on. ;D
That said, not sure I'll go further than what I have for now, given the hassle and that it is time to diversify aircraft, perhaps to something new.
BD I agree that a C-Check Schedule would definitely enhance the game.
Personally I would take your idea and add a little to it. Perhaps a separate 'Schedule' could be created to allow zero touch C-Checks without affecting operations. For example sake I will use a nice round number of 24 planes.
If I have a fleet of 24 of aircraft of the same 'family' eg A32x or 737NG's and a C-Check takes 2 weeks. This means 23 aircraft will be in service at any given time and 1 on C-Check.
A screen that allowed me to plan C-checks on a 12 month basis and also allowed automatic assignment of my 'spare' aircraft to replace the one going into maintenance would be very handy. Essentially it would enable planning of C-Checks for years in advance and mean we wouldn't have to worry about manual intervention to ensue routes are unserved when planes hit the hangar.
Steve
Automatic scheduling was not part of that request and is not possible for far more reasons than you just mentioned.
That was discussed here before many times.
Although C-checking before it´s due would mean more costs, there are reasons esp. for smaller airlines to do so. Not everybody gets to the stage of flying a few hundred birds off 4 bases.
It even would be closer to reality to consider manpower, space and cash management in scheduled checking.
Would be nice to have the opportunity to set a date for checking actions (on individual aircraft page). In a second step an individual pre-setting of every schedule moving action (on schedule page) would be nice,not only to cover checks with spare planes but also to guarantee a smooth transition from old plane leaving your airline to a new one if you are not online at that special time.Plan time
could be limited to next 30 days by giving the option of chosing the next matching date number (1-31).
So basically just a manually operated thing that sets the C check to be performed in a future date?
UI-wise easy to put to maintenance actions page, technically would require some work.
I'd be happy with just a simple 'perform c-check on date xx;xx;xx' function on the maint page for an aircraft : imagine it would also require a background check to ensure the date is valid and not after the otherwise due date.
that would go a long way to smoothing out cash-flow and schedule disruption for smaller operators working on tighter margins.
'auto-re-scheduling to a spare ' of aircraft in maint is a nice idea, but not vital, imho : if you could pre-plan the fleet c-check skeds, then manual swapping would become much easier anyway or just leave it to do its thang, as prefered
Quote from: brique on September 25, 2013, 12:31:50 AM
I'd be happy with just a simple 'perform c-check on date xx;xx;xx' function on the maint page for an aircraft : imagine it would also require a background check to ensure the date is valid and not after the otherwise due date.
that would go a long way to smoothing out cash-flow and schedule disruption for smaller operators working on tighter margins.
'auto-re-scheduling to a spare ' of aircraft in maint is a nice idea, but not vital, imho : if you could pre-plan the fleet c-check skeds, then manual swapping would become much easier anyway or just leave it to do its thang, as prefered
Agreed...main point is the ability to move the date - and no limit on the date other than it must happen within a 12 month cycle.
Thanks for the updates by everyone. ;D
I came here looking for exactly this.
My current situation: my fleet is made of a 21 planes in one base and 14 in a second one. I usually have an extra spare plane for every 24 so that when one goes in c-check I can keep flying the routes by moving the schedule on the spare plane(s).
I have received a new plane every two weeks, which means that with 24 planes, I have a c-check every two weeks. Smooth, except for used planes that I have sometimes gotten by the pair on the same day.
I don't login regularly enough to do keep it up and sometimes I find myself with 2 expired checks+1 expring that day. All the sudden I have to run 3 c-checks at the same time, with only one spare plane.
If I could schedule the c-check on a given date I would move the schedule to my spare plane and set the c-check to run at a set date.
Example:
AAA c-check 01/01
AAB c-check 15/01
AAC c-check 30/01
XXX spare plane
What I usually do: on 31/12 I move AAA's schedule to XXX and run AAA's check. I will than move the schedule back to AAA and repeat the process on 14/01 with AAB and on 29/01 for AAC. With more aicrafts I do the same but with two spares.
If I don't login for 2 weeks, I will find myself with AAB and AAC's check at the same time, for example, defeating the whole purpose. Instead, if I could schedule the c-check, I would be able to set it up before logging out. And if I have a cluster, I can spread it back again by anticipating the c-check.
I probably did a horrible job describing it, sorry!
Quote from: brique on September 25, 2013, 12:31:50 AM
I'd be happy with just a simple 'perform c-check on date xx;xx;xx' function on the maint page for an aircraft : imagine it would also require a background check to ensure the date is valid and not after the otherwise due date.
that would go a long way to smoothing out cash-flow and schedule disruption for smaller operators working on tighter margins.
'auto-re-scheduling to a spare ' of aircraft in maint is a nice idea, but not vital, imho : if you could pre-plan the fleet c-check skeds, then manual swapping would become much easier anyway or just leave it to do its thang, as prefered
this exactly!
A GUI would be nice to display the up and coming C-Checks. This should also apply to D-Checks since they are MUCH more time and cost intensive.
It would also be nice to have a maintenance cost forecast for a filterable amount of time. On this maintenance scheduling screen, there should be the ability to reschedule C-Checks and then see the checks move in "real time" to match the changes. You could do something similar to the aircraft scheduling screen, where you see 12 months instead of the 7 days, with the horizontal bars indicating maintenance of aircraft.
Quote from: Zoom on October 24, 2013, 09:12:21 PM
A GUI would be nice to display the up and coming C-Checks. This should also apply to D-Checks since they are MUCH more time and cost intensive.
You mean like this? ;)
No, I mean for the whole year for C-checks and make 12 separators for each month. For D Checks, you could make a line for 7 years, and 7 separators for each year. I am no graphic artist, nor am good with any image editing software, otherwise, I would post a sketch of what I mean. But the similar layout to the aircraft scheduling page would be awesome, very clear, and offer a nice design carryover to allow ease of use for everyone.
The picture you posted is an awesome illustration of why something simple is necessary for easily planning and scheduling heavy checks. That screen is an information overload and really isn't all that useful for planning since it is simply showing the next month.
Zoom
I just go to aircraft --> my aircraft --> maintenance view, then sort by D check to see if I have any coming up in the next year or two, meaning I should probably decide whether to do the D-check or switch off the lease renewal.
Quote from: Zoom on October 24, 2013, 09:12:21 PM
A GUI would be nice to display the up and coming C-Checks. This should also apply to D-Checks since they are MUCH more time and cost intensive.
I, too, would like to see them on the Upcoming section in the Aircraft summary page. Perhaps they don't show up there for me, as I turned off auto D check.
I DO get a message about two months in advance on D checks (not sure if that is because I turned auto off), which is a reasonable time-frame to take action in response.
The Aircraft summary page only seems to give a 30 day heads up, which is cutting it tight IRL for gameplay purposes.
As mentioned just above, IMHO, it really is necessary to regularly survey the Maintenance view to give oneself a long runway for planning around several D checks (logically, the larger the airline, the more critical this becomes).
Quote from: Sanabas on October 25, 2013, 07:05:22 AM
I just go to aircraft --> my aircraft --> maintenance view, then sort by D check to see if I have any coming up in the next year or two, meaning I should probably decide whether to do the D-check or switch off the lease renewal.
That is good if you want to sort through the numbers. But it is not very convenient for for determining HOW many aircraft will be D-Checking at one time or if there are any gaps in the D-Check schedule. A visual depiction would help out a lot.
It's nice to know that my FOUR-year-old post is finally getting some traction. ;)
Sometimes it just takes a little time, I guess.
Quote from: Kazari on October 27, 2013, 01:52:11 PM
It's nice to know that my FOUR-year-old post is finally getting some traction. ;)
Sometimes it just takes a little time, I guess.
Well your post is over 5 years old now and we still don't have anything happening on this.
We simply need a c check scheduling and aircraft substitution system. I am a medium sized company and c checks absolutely kill my profit and they can BK a new company. We need to be able to schedule a c check and substitute another aircraft, In real life (which we are trying to simulate here) there is no way an airline would just shut down a route for 20 days to do aircraft maintenance. Yet this is basically what I have to do because even if I have a substitute aircraft and happen to be online at the right moment to swap the flights over I am still screwed when 2 aircraft require a C check. There simply has to be a better way to do this. Could you please chime in Sami as I believe this is a very important issue. I am a relatively new player and I am tired of going BK because of C Checks. I takes the fun out of the game for me. There are enough challenges for a new player without trying to deal with this one which is almost completely out of our control. I would almost guarantee you that this is one issue that is costing you real money.
If you are going bust because of C checks, then the problems are TOTALLY elsewhere than in the lack of this replacement feature..
tip is just to let the automation handle the c checks, and do not have any planes sitting idle waiting to act as replacements. The replacement scheme really only works if you have more than a dozen planes in each fleet.
....but anyway, this feature is currently not in short term plans.
Quote from: sami on October 02, 2014, 04:05:59 PM
If you are going bust because of C checks, then the problems are TOTALLY elsewhere than in the lack of this replacement feature..
tip is just to let the automation handle the c checks, and do not have any planes sitting idle waiting to act as replacements. The replacement scheme really only works if you have more than a dozen planes in each fleet.
....but anyway, this feature is currently not in short term plans.
Actually you should probably revisit your C check intervals anyway, on the Boeing 777 for example in real life they are about 16 to 20 months apart, not 12. Even longer with the implementation of MSG maintenance routines. Page 13 of this document shows a pretty good example of current check maintenance intervals.
http://www.aircraftmonitor.com/uploads/1/5/9/9/15993320/basics_of_aircraft_maintenance_programs_for_financiers___v1.pdf
Basically the entire check schedule is wrong according to this document.
Hi guys,
I'm new to this game and I feel like my C check will destroy my company, but at least stop my growth. I'm relatively OK on money and good on profit, but since I operate from a smaller base, I have only 6 aircraft (3xa320, 3xq400). Sadly two of my a320s will have the C check nearly at the same time (they will share 7 days of the checks). Meaning, 40% of my revenue will go away for 7 days and about 20-30% for an other 7 days.
What should I do? Force the C check one of the planes to make it earlier, so I'll have a more stable cash flow or just let it happen as it is and go for luck? Later this year two of my q400s will have the exact same fate.
This scheduling feature would be amazing and would make it easier to handle.
Thanks,
Chris
UPDATE: And there we go. The previous double C-check was managable, but as I woke up this morning, I just lost 10M+ dollars (which is lot for a small European airliner), since I was not able to wake up at 4am to force the C Check. 2 of my most valuable planes were off, others were waiting for delivery, I lost slots, etc. Please, make C check and route swaps(!!) sheduling available! Thanks!
Haha... I have a fleet of 26 aircrafts B737 adv. ALMOST all my routes are competed by another players. That means that I have to try hard to be "in game". And what do I see today? I have two aircrafts on C-check and one more oncoming in 4 days. That means that after these 4 days I will be without 6 routes for 4 days. as far as 3 of 26 my aircrafts will be out of service. The only way to avoid this cashflow gap is to abandone leasing contract and lease a new one. I will keep my routes online at least.
What would be if I can manage C-checks by myself? I think it is already written in this thread:))
I understand, that C and D-checks are probably based on flight hours amount (as it is written in wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_maintenance_checks). Why would not it be allowed to players to manage C-checks exact dates based on theirs routes planned? (read as "flight hours planning")? For example, if I know about C-check oncoming, I can rearrange one of routes to another aircraft so that the first one would go to c-check at the more convinient date. In this way, step by step, I can organize all my routes in a proper order during a game year (or two) and use my a/c fleet for 8-10 years more with no such significant income fluctuations. And It would be closer to real life, I guess.
P.S. It is easy to calculate in excel approximate dates of C-checks if I know flight duration (see attachment)
so basically you are complaining that C-check is destroying your airline because you have competition, and to solve it is to allow planned c check so you can use a hot spare to fly it.
Bottom line is your argument is invalid, you are essentially paying for the 2 weeks delivery of leased aircraft without revenue, having an aircraft without permanent schedule. If you can micromanage to the point where the hot spare aircraft will be constantly flying your c check routes nonstop your airline will not care about C or D checks. You are making a mistake somewhere else.
Heh... I just tried to follow Sami's advice in this topic:
"If you are going bust because of C checks, then the problems are TOTALLY elsewhere than in the lack of this replacement feature..
tip is just to let the automation handle the c checks, and do not have any planes sitting idle waiting to act as replacements. The replacement scheme really only works if you have more than a dozen planes in each fleet.
....but anyway, this feature is currently not in short term plans."
And what I can conclude for myself - it is bad automation.
I think it is worth to try splitting the route into two a/c with less passenger capacity to reduce traffic loss when one of a/c goes to c-check.
I posted a feature request a while ago about pools of aircraft that would be assigned to schedules, rather than individual aircraft, and the system would automatically re-assign replacement aircraft from available aircraft in a pool, in case of C/D check:
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,54631.msg314923.html#msg314923
Quote from: JumboShrimp on May 14, 2015, 06:01:39 PM
I posted a feature request a while ago about pools of aircraft that would be assigned to schedules, rather than individual aircraft, and the system would automatically re-assign replacement aircraft from available aircraft in a pool, in case of C/D check:
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,54631.msg314923.html#msg314923
I guess the difficulty is those nice planes with 20+ variants, each with different range(and other things, but only range matter here). Especially when you build a fleet on used planes, it's a nightmare to have a standardized fleet. Or even new. Take the F70, a plane with a single engine...but 4 different weights. Currently, in GW3, the 1110NM version costs 27,485M$, while the 2010NM version costs 36,941M$. That's one third more in terms of cost of acquisition. It's huge. If you've got a mixed fleet, the algorithm will have an headache. And if you fly only the LR version, you're wasting around 3-4% of exploitation margin(if you lease).
In other words, that's not at all something easy to do. And I'm not even sure it is desirable.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on May 14, 2015, 06:01:39 PM
I posted a feature request a while ago about pools of aircraft that would be assigned to schedules, rather than individual aircraft, and the system would automatically re-assign replacement aircraft from available aircraft in a pool, in case of C/D check:
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,54631.msg314923.html#msg314923
To me, this is a more realistic approach. Each route is flown by the best suited (based on location, maintenance availability etc).
The other thing all the people complaining about their C checks seem to forget is, EVERYBODY has to do C checks. You're plane is out for 2 weeks this year? Well, guess what, so is your competitors. Swings and round-abouts. I've yet to see any evidence that having a dedicated "bounce bird" to cover C and D checks makes more money than just putting the plane on a regular schedule and making money off it that way.
Quote from: pascaly on May 14, 2015, 10:21:47 PM
To me, this is a more realistic approach. Each route is flown by the best suited (based on location, maintenance availability etc).
But who will decide what is "best"? How? What criterion? It seems to me that it would be a door open to endless complaning "waaaaah, the machine did not choose the proper aircraft" for something that is not worth it, as you noticed here :
Quote from: pascaly on May 14, 2015, 10:21:47 PMThe other thing all the people complaining about their C checks seem to forget is, EVERYBODY has to do C checks. You're plane is out for 2 weeks this year? Well, guess what, so is your competitors. Swings and round-abouts. I've yet to see any evidence that having a dedicated "bounce bird" to cover C and D checks makes more money than just putting the plane on a regular schedule and making money off it that way.
I raised this exact same request on another thread.
I have around 45 ATP's with 2 hot-spares. I have to manually cycle them for the checks. I do it, but if I go on vacation even for a couple of days, the system is out of whack!
A C-Check scheduling system with Hot-Spares would be nice to have!
PS: Does C-Check down time count towards cancellations and hence Company Image?
i think the system is too complex for such little gain. almost everyone is taking the hit for c/d check, if you want to optimize, do it manually. Having a automated system means everyone may do it, and you get 0 gain from it, especially against large wealthy airline who doesn't care if they have 100+ aircraft on the ground already.
sometimes you may have 2-3 or even 10 aircraft doing C-D check, there is no real way of automation without major overhaul to the system. having hot spare while not having large enough fleet to cycle everyday is a waste in your finance especially if you lease the aircraft. Having 3 types of aircraft means you will need to keep 3-6 hotspare that can easily turn into revenue if you put them into normal schedule.
For some of your example if you have 25 aircraft and want to keep them 100% uptime, you will need 1-2 aircraft (assuming one type). that's almost 10% of your fleet.
QuotePS: Does C-Check down time count towards cancellations and hence Company Image?
no.
Please tell me, what will you guys gain if sami(spending many hours) implement this automated system?
Is it normal to have 3-4 constant c-checks during the whole month while aircraft fleet consists of 35 planes only? (11 C-checks in a month)
http://clip2net.com/s/3hWgMmk (2 C-checks has just passed)
I have this situation in September and really think it will kill me. It would not happen had I possibility to manage this situation somehow...
I think it is a really big impact with real financial operation activity...
Quote from: Aoitsuki on May 16, 2015, 11:08:47 AM
Please tell me, what will you guys gain if sami(spending many hours) implement this automated system?
I will gain more stable and planned cashflow which is important to plan firther development. But now it is a disaster for my company acting on a high competitive market. For now I have to manage this situation by pricing manipulations, loose my market positions and passenger traffic.
QuoteIs it normal to have 3-4 constant c-checks during the whole month while aircraft fleet consists of 35 planes only? (11 C-checks in a month)
http://clip2net.com/s/3hWgMmk (2 C-checks has just passed)
yes, when you first started your airline, especially the first 4 weeks you can obtain up to 8 aircraft that all falls into the same C check month, and ongoing month also if you are not careful.
eg: first month get 8 aircraft with 9 month c check remain, then second month get 8 aircraft with 8 month c check remaining assume they are wide body and require 20 days to check, all 16 aircrafts can fall on the same c check cycle.
I had a fleet of 500 in one game, and 400 of them will automatically C check and D check at the same time due to storage system. As long as you have cash reserve it really doesn't really matter, it is not game breaking enough for me to make any adjustment.
QuoteI will gain more stable and planned cashflow which is important to plan firther development.
when you first acquire your aircraft, you know when you will have your c check, it is shown on your lease page. Also you can engage in c check before the one year schedule starts.
QuoteBut now it is a disaster for my company acting on a high competitive market. For now I have to manage this situation by pricing manipulations, loose my market positions and passenger traffic.
regardless what you do, you will still trigger c check in a pre-determined amount of time. In this case it is one year game time. if you cannot afford the C check, then your business model have issue.
market position means nothing in this game other then bragging right. EVERYONE will miss revenue one way or another on a specific route every year unless you put a hot spare aircraft in. But who is going to pay for that hotspare aircraft if they are not using for check? That's inefficient. Also you can have a airline half your size with half the revenue and somehow makes way more money then their bigger counterpart.
If you want market position overload the route 200%, that's a fool proof way of discourage your competition, and ensure you won't loose your piece of pie when one goes offline for checks.
Bottom line, you should never use all your cash to expand, always keep some for checks, random event such as 9/11, aws random system and fuel spike. No smart business in this world is crazy enough to spend every single penny on investment without any cash reserve.
quoting from sami:
Quote from: sami on October 02, 2014, 04:05:59 PM
If you are going bust because of C checks, then the problems are TOTALLY elsewhere than in the lack of this replacement feature..
tip is just to let the automation handle the c checks, and do not have any planes sitting idle waiting to act as replacements. The replacement scheme really only works if you have more than a dozen planes in each fleet.
Quote from: Aoitsuki on May 19, 2015, 03:24:06 PM
when you first acquire your aircraft, you know when you will have your c check, it is shown on your lease page. Also you can engage in c check before the one year schedule starts.
Here is the solution! It was so obvious:) I knew about extra A and B checks but not even thought about possibility to make an extra C-check.
I think my negative is eliminated by this one sentence:)
And yes, You're totally right about cash reserve. It is a global mistake that I've made from the beginning...:) Trying to correct it but.. late:)
but really, don't worry about share and revenue. work on how to make profit. Most if not all player makes mistake, and many of them still hit the big red bankrupt button even after 2 years of game play. Don't be afraid to ask question and get a mentor, they can find error you may miss.
Quote from: Aoitsuki on May 16, 2015, 11:08:47 AM
i think the system is too complex for such little gain. almost everyone is taking the hit for c/d check, if you want to optimize, do it manually. Having a automated system means everyone may do it, and you get 0 gain from it, especially against large wealthy airline who doesn't care if they have 100+ aircraft on the ground already.
It is not at all a little sum. Let's take a very large aircraft as an example:
- 80 day D check, every 8 years, 10 days per year
- 20 day C check, once per year, 20 days per year
- 12 B checks per year
Total is 42 days that the aircraft is not available per year, out of 365. Or, to look at it another way, aircraft is flying it's schedule 323 days, schedule is not being flown 42 days. So the loss of revenue is 10-13%, depending on the way you look at it.
If you have 10 LH schedules, you need 11.3 aircraft to fly them.
If you have 100 LH schedules, you need 113 aircraft to fly them.
The inefficiency comes from staffing. The staff level you have includes vacations etc, but not C/D checks. During a D check, you are basically giving everyone extra 80 paid days off, on top of their vacations.
There are other good reasons for automated checks:
- your airport may be slot constrained, and you may not be able to create new routes. But you may be able to get 13% extra aircraft.
- you may have a real life, and not be able to get to scheduling every day, right on the dot, when a new aircraft arrives. So the newly arrived aircraft will go to a spare pool, and it may start earning revenue right away, not a week later, when you actually get to scheduling the aircraft.
Quote from: Aoitsuki on May 16, 2015, 11:08:47 AM
sometimes you may have 2-3 or even 10 aircraft doing C-D check, there is no real way of automation without major overhaul to the system. having hot spare while not having large enough fleet to cycle everyday is a waste in your finance especially if you lease the aircraft. Having 3 types of aircraft means you will need to keep 3-6 hotspare that can easily turn into revenue if you put them into normal schedule.
For some of your example if you have 25 aircraft and want to keep them 100% uptime, you will need 1-2 aircraft (assuming one type). that's almost 10% of your fleet.
Please tell me, what will you guys gain if sami(spending many hours) implement this automated system?
It is all outlined in this thread:
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,54631.msg314682.html#msg314682
Some conceptual changes:
- schedules would be entities, independent of aircraft, able to be named by player outside of restrictions of country registration codes.
(you can also pre-schedule this way - create full schedules before the aircraft arrives)
- "like" aircraft could be placed in groups - pools.
- you assign either a specific aircraft to a schedule or a pool of aircraft
- system would manage which aircraft from the pool is assigned to a schedule. If one aircraft from the pool becomes unavailable, a different aircraft from the pool would be automatically reassigned to the schedule.
Jumbo : it's an absolute monster of IA you want to have implemented there. It would be simple for a company flying only Saab 2000. But look at A320-200 and their endless variants, with all different ranges. Add to this different seating configurations(because some lines are full of business, but in Reus there is none), and you have a nightmare ready to be optimized.
I can already imagine the endless flame threads complaining "waaaaah!!! it took the wrong plane!!! it did cost me too much money in petrol!!! it did not have full capacity!!! it wrecked my game!!! And I did have useless C capacity there, and not enough here!!! That game is fubaaaaaaar!!!"
Frankly, I don't want that. Everyone has the same rules, and everyone bites the same loss of income due to C/D checks. And looking at your company in GW3, mhhh, well, You just have 9 times my benefit - and I'm easily in top 100. Where's the problem? Everyone else suffers from checks also.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 27, 2015, 06:58:33 AM
Jumbo : it's an absolute monster of IA you want to have implemented there. It would be simple for a company flying only Saab 2000. But look at A320-200 and their endless variants, with all different ranges. Add to this different seating configurations(because some lines are full of business, but in Reus there is none), and you have a nightmare ready to be optimized.
You would not have to do anything. Everything having to do with aircraft pools would be optional. You can either assign a specific aircraft to the schedule or a pool of aircraft.
As far as different variants of A320, they are not really that different. If your airport has 95% of it's routes under 2500nm, and a handful of schedules where you need longer range, you would put all your A320s into one big pool, except of the handful that fly specific, longer range schedules.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 27, 2015, 06:58:33 AM
I can already imagine the endless flame threads complaining "waaaaah!!! it took the wrong plane!!! it did cost me too much money in petrol!!! it did not have full capacity!!! it wrecked my game!!! And I did have useless C capacity there, and not enough here!!! That game is fubaaaaaaar!!!"
Frankly, I don't want that. Everyone has the same rules, and everyone bites the same loss of income due to C/D checks. And looking at your company in GW3, mhhh, well, You just have 9 times my benefit - and I'm easily in top 100. Where's the problem? Everyone else suffers from checks also.
But real world airlines, medium to larger airlines just don't stop flying because of a C or D check. Maybe tiny airlines do, but mainline airlines fly their schedules. They have extra aircraft that replace other aircraft that's in service.
Everybody suffers the C checks of the
aircraft, nothing changes about that, but an airline does not have to suffer lost revenue because of C checks. All it takes is to have a few extra aircraft, and an airline can run pretty much the full schedule.
Airlines have people who keep track of when aircraft need service, and schedule it to the minimum disruption of their flight schedule. It can be done manually in AWS, but it takes a lot of time, and it is not much fun. Which is why I am proposing automating the task.
Only when it is automated, it starts to make sense to schedule your C-Checks, which is the subject of the thread. Let's say you have a month when you have only 5, and next month you have 15. It would make sense to move some around.
But without some automation of swapping aircraft, it makes no sense to even talk about scheduling the C checks.
I was not clear : "automating the task" is not at all an easy thing to do. Not at all. I've done my share of computer projects, and this really seems the false good idea to me, the one that sends everything in the wall.
You speak about pools. Who decides about pools? The player? You're good for a full interface design. The IA? good luck programming it dynamically.
Schedules also would need a full new screen, with all the works that come within. So there would maybe be a nice schedule screen, where you would drag & drop spare planes to planned checks. Weeks of work to have something that look like something, & months for real, efficient, polished screens.
That's a full project that you ask there, not just a little nice neat thin to have in addition. I can already imagine pages & pages of specification. Unless you program it without preparation & get lost in the amount of details.
IIRC, there is already a big project in the works(city-based demand & cargo that go with). As much as I support cosmetic but useful screen revamps(replacing those RPKs with more useful stats, for example), because it's a low-hanging fruit, this C-Check complete remake that some ask, on a regular basis, is a huge big thing with not much added value. Of course it would be better to have it than not. But it's very low in term of priorities. The cost/value is not good.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 27, 2015, 11:13:59 AM
I was not clear : "automating the task" is not at all an easy thing to do. Not at all. I've done my share of computer projects, and this really seems the false good idea to me, the one that sends everything in the wall.
You speak about pools. Who decides about pools? The player? You're good for a full interface design. The IA? good luck programming it dynamically.
It would be a lot simpler than you are imagining. Player creates a pool, gives it a name, selects the fleet type (this would be the only new screen). Aircraft can be assigned to a pool. Just an extra field for aircraft, to be able to assign an aircraft for the pool.
The scheduling screen would be pretty much intact. The only difference is that a schedule could be either assigned (to aircraft or pool) or unassigned / free. Player could create as many of the free / unassigned schedules as he likes to (for planning purposes).
A flag would control if you are looking at assigned or unassigned schedules.
The "move schedule" button would have a new functionality:
- unassigned schedule could be "moved" / assigned to an aircraft or pool (would no longer be unassigned)
- for assigned schedule, move could either move it to a different pool, different aircraft or schedule could be un-assigned, taken off-line (= would become unassigned).
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 27, 2015, 11:13:59 AM
Schedules also would need a full new screen, with all the works that come within. So there would maybe be a nice schedule screen, where you would drag & drop spare planes to planned checks. Weeks of work to have something that look like something, & months for real, efficient, polished screens.
None of that stuff is necessary. When a schedule is assigned to a pool, the first available aircraft from the pool would be assigned to it (immediately, during player interaction, or player would be warned that there are more schedules than aircraft in the pool and disallow assignment.)
Then, at midnight (or whenever aircraft goes into or out of B/C/D checks), the system would swap the aircraft automatically. For every aircraft that is in B/C/D check, and is assigned to a schedule, the system would check if there is an unassigned aircraft within the pool not flying any schedule. If so, the system would swap them. That's all there is to it.
No UI is necessary for any of this. The only UI change I foresee is adding filter "pool" to "My Aircraft" and maybe to Scheduling screen.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 27, 2015, 11:13:59 AM
That's a full project that you ask there, not just a little nice neat thin to have in addition. I can already imagine pages & pages of specification. Unless you program it without preparation & get lost in the amount of details.
IIRC, there is already a big project in the works(city-based demand & cargo that go with). As much as I support cosmetic but useful screen revamps(replacing those RPKs with more useful stats, for example), because it's a low-hanging fruit, this C-Check complete remake that some ask, on a regular basis, is a huge big thing with not much added value. Of course it would be better to have it than not. But it's very low in term of priorities. The cost/value is not good.
I think this is relatively small project that can have a quick turnaround. There are very few interface changes, the logic behind it is extremely simple. At least compared to passenger allocation algorithms.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on May 27, 2015, 12:51:10 PM
(.../...)
None of that stuff is necessary. When a schedule is assigned to a pool, the first available aircraft from the pool would be assigned to it (immediately, during player interaction, or player would be warned that there are more schedules than aircraft in the pool and disallow assignment.)
Then, at midnight (or whenever aircraft goes into or out of B/C/D checks), the system would swap the aircraft automatically. For every aircraft that is in B/C/D check, and is assigned to a schedule, the system would check if there is an unassigned aircraft within the pool not flying any schedule. If so, the system would swap them. That's all there is to it.
(.../...)
As I said : it works wonders for Saab2000. In current GW3, I've got 5 bases and 8 different kinds of ERJs. Because each one fills a niche.
I can put everything in a big bag, but the system will be lost. A leased ERJ145STD with 50 lowcost seats and 790NM range that flies 5 daily short flights is really different in terms of use than a purchased ERJ135LR with 30 premium seats and its stunning 1860NM range that even allows some transatlantic flights - yeah, I know, I'm crazy. Still, it's making a little bit money with that bird.
Or I can make 8 pools, multiplied by 5 bases, that's 40 pools, most of them useless. With idle, leased planes that do not fly half of the time, and that still leave holes when C-checks collide. In other words, it stays useless without a proper C-Check scheduling screen. Even with it, usefulness is limited.
And it does not work for B-checks, either. Not all B-checks begin at midnight. When you do red eyes flights and 7-days schedules(and I assume a big company as yours does), B-checks are spread throughout the day. Or you stop the plane 2 days for a B-check. Not very efficient use of tough-to-get planes...
Point well taken - it adds complexity and not all players want this.
What about introducing the pool for those who prefer to play it that way and keeping it on automatic for those who have a different strategy. That way everyone would be happy!
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 28, 2015, 08:00:55 AM
As I said : it works wonders for Saab2000. In current GW3, I've got 5 bases and 8 different kinds of ERJs. Because each one fills a niche.
As Frederik said, these pools will spare planes will not work well in
every situation. But no one would be forcing you to use them, it would be entirely optional. You can continue to operate the same was as you do currently.
There would be more
benefit to commonality. This would be a way to reward commonality, as opposed to just punishing lack of commonality, as the system does currently.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on May 28, 2015, 08:00:55 AM
Or I can make 8 pools, multiplied by 5 bases, that's 40 pools, most of them useless. With idle, leased planes that do not fly half of the time, and that still leave holes when C-checks collide. In other words, it stays useless without a proper C-Check scheduling screen. Even with it, usefulness is limited.
And it does not work for B-checks, either. Not all B-checks begin at midnight. When you do red eyes flights and 7-days schedules(and I assume a big company as yours does), B-checks are spread throughout the day. Or you stop the plane 2 days for a B-check. Not very efficient use of tough-to-get planes...
B checks are a bit of a gray area, since we are talking hours as opposed to days, but still, it would also, the pool of spare aircraft could provide a benefit here as well.
But primary reason is for C/D checks. A spare aircraft can be re-based to a different base for this (there may be some fuel cost. Ideally, the pools would not be base specific, but airline-wide, and aircraft would be re-based as needed.
Totally agree with the pool idea, kinda ruins the game for not 24/7 players as it is now.
Yes, I really want to be able to smooth out my C checks so I can keep a spare of the type as a back-up. Currently what happens is:-
1. I need to transfer routes a few weeks prior to C or D to be sure I don't miss the date and have my route vacant until the a/c returns.
Other situations where scheduling C & D checks are useful:-
2. I'm going to have a D check due before the following C check (buying 2nd hand often causes this) and I really want to do the D check when the next C check is due so it all smooths out in the end.
3. There's another thread discussing assigning Reserve Aircraft to fly the routes while C and D checks are being done. Scheduling should provide for stating which aircraft should be substituted (if available) while the aircraft is in service.
3b. You big players may want the Pool version of this where stand-by aircraft are assigned to a pool name, the Maintenance Schedule will allow for a stand-by aircraft to be drawn subject to availability (plus a range check).
I thought a D check pretty much covers everything. Not a need to do both at the same time. I do C checks if they are under a month away and the cash is available. It was also my understanding performing a B check covers the A check. Correct me if I'm wrong. :-\
L1011Fan - I believe you are correct. I sometimes do a higher check rather than the one due so there are no more interruptions to the schedule.
Totally agree!
There is a lot of automation that would be possible, the pool of spareplanes ia a good idea, and would not be hard to implement. As now it means you have to have your hand on the wheel 24/7 to cover it. That dont make sense in anyway with a gameworld spanning 1,5 real life years. Its kinda a gamekiller, when you reach 300 planes + I guess it would be a boring game with all automated but for now changing planes in an nonautomated way with known tasks is boring as well.