I checked on Air France Website and i found that AWS flight time is longer then real flight time.....Ive always notice this.
Here are some pics.
[attachment expired]
Also on the AWS Screen Shot its using a B777 just like Air France. Also the Flight time of 12h50min is referred as gate to gate. I AM NOT COMPLAINING.....Just checking
Thank You!
^The jet stream is positioned in a way that would permit these short times to occur.
Plus, AWS 'flight' times includes taxi times, whereas those times don't.
Correct me if wrong.
If I had to guess, I would say it's due to the jet stream calculations. AWS I assume uses a straight line to determine the average wind component and flightpath whereas real world airlines use a bit more strategy in harnessing the wind:
[attachment expired]
I think LemonButt is right here :) as the methods for Sami's calculations are in the link to this thread - https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,7058.0.html
Quote from: Ilyushin on March 13, 2011, 07:17:10 PM
Plus, AWS 'flight' times includes taxi times, whereas those times don't.
Correct me if wrong.
In Air France's Time its Gate to Gate
Maybe it should be improved for 1.3??
Quote from: Clement on March 13, 2011, 08:51:15 PM
Maybe it should be improved for 1.3??
why does it matter? Really?
Quote from: swiftus27 on March 13, 2011, 09:24:17 PM
why does it matter? Really?
Its not realistic and since this is a "Airline Management Simulation" it is not up to scratch and requires fixing
It's extremely complex and to further complicate things, the jet streams (polar, subtropic) are strongest at different altitudes, which means you could potentially fly under/over the jet stream winds depending on where you're flying. It seems the easiest way to adjust for this is to make flights with stronger winds/longer durations have a higher likelihood of showing up early/on time.
Quote from: Jordan112 on March 13, 2011, 09:25:59 PM
Its not realistic and since this is a "Airline Management Simulation" it is not up to scratch and requires fixing
Along with the other 10,000 unrealistic items. I'd say pass on this one until about 7,500 of the other ones are fixed.
If you want something to perfectly model every single variable factor that an airline has to face, I'd suggest you start up a real airline.
sami already has enough on his plate solving bug reports and adding connecting pax, city-based demand, etc.
Right fair enough, i wasnt complaining I was simply answering swiftuses question. It was like swiftus asking you why does geting connecting pax important?
Ok everyone RELAX......it was just a question ok......thats all and i just wanted to know why it was like that, thats it ok
Quote from: Clement on March 13, 2011, 10:18:53 PM
Ok everyone RELAX......it was just a question ok......thats all and i just wanted to know why it was like that, thats it ok
Argentina does not observe daylight savings time while France does. This can account for most of the time that you're looking for...
Quote from: Jordan112 on March 13, 2011, 09:48:56 PM
Right fair enough, i wasnt complaining I was simply answering swiftuses question. It was like swiftus asking you why does geting connecting pax important?
Connecting Pax has nothing to do with this at all. Don't use that logic path. I don't recall asking if connecting passengers are important. I just find one hour plus on a long long flight really requires that much tweaking. There are simply so many other areas I'd just focus my attention on instead of adding/subtracting an hour here and there.
Quote from: swiftus27 on March 13, 2011, 11:35:30 PM
Connecting Pax has nothing to do with this at all. Don't use that logic path. I don't recall asking if connecting passengers are important. I just find one hour plus on a long long flight really requires that much tweaking. There are simply so many other areas I'd just focus my attention on instead of adding/subtracting an hour here and there.
Its a 2hr diff.....
Feel happy that everyone else has to deal with it too :)
I have no problem with this. I have more issues with the following:
1. Flying non etops rated planes across oceans.
2. Flying 739s into London City.
3. Having the same commonality penalty adding the 738 to your 734s as you get adding the A380.
4. Frequency always winning
5. Small plane airlines having no competitive chance.
6. Do I need to say more?
Okay, there are some flights that are longer here than in real life. So be it. I just think that there are so many more areas to focus on.
Quote from: Jordan112 on March 13, 2011, 09:25:59 PM
Its not realistic and since this is a "Airline Management Simulation" it is not up to scratch and requires fixing
Really dude?!
Jesus, you guys must be bnred to honestly be worried about something like this. It's a game for crying out
loud. If it were a 'real' 'real' 'real' simulation, you'd need to hire 100 folks with various degrees to help you run it.
The game has a few flaws I would love to see addressed, but this one is absurd.
Quote from: Jordan112 on March 13, 2011, 09:48:56 PM
Right fair enough, i wasnt complaining I was simply answering swiftuses question. It was like swiftus asking you why does geting connecting pax important?
The two questions aren't apples to apples.
After that thread you starred in the other night, I'm starting to think you simply like to start arguments for arguments sake.
Frequency is not a problem because that is what real airline does to compete for passengers. But if the Frequency is scheduled with several departures on the sam time like 1800 then it become unrealistics...
But I agree with the one who started this thread that it is problem with flights that are too long...
Quote from: elvis141 on March 14, 2011, 06:43:56 PM
Frequency is not a problem because that is what real airline does to compete for passengers. But if the Frequency is scheduled with several departures on the sam time like 1800 then it become unrealistics...
Let's go head to head and I will show you how frequency owns.
Quote from: elvis141 on March 14, 2011, 06:43:56 PM
Frequency is not a problem because that is what real airline does to compete for passengers. But if the Frequency is scheduled with several departures on the sam time like 1800 then it become unrealistics...
Yes, but I bet pricing would have more of an effect in real llife than frequency (It has little effect in game).
Quote from: JonesyUK on March 14, 2011, 09:20:51 PM
Yes, but I bet pricing would have more of an effect in real llife than frequency (It has little effect in game).
total agreement. there are thousands of people who would fly out at inconvenient times even if it meant the savings of only $20.
Quote from: swiftus27 on March 14, 2011, 09:12:58 PM
Let's go head to head and I will show you how frequency owns.
It is no point to get upset just because I have a diffrent oppinion then you..
Quote from: elvis141 on March 14, 2011, 10:31:47 PM
It is no point to get upset just because I have a diffrent oppinion then you..
not upset at all. dont take it that way. I can easily show one how frequent flights are still one easy way to dominate an airport. I personally don't play that way at all. It is because I absolutely hate it. In the NA challenge, I am flying with only one fleet type. I like being crazy efficient. Simply, no one person could actually defeat me... even in my own base. Sure, I can't dominate a large airport that way, but it is great that I rarely truly have to worry about competition.
Thankfully, Sami has recently implemented the LHR F.27 rule... it limits the number of flights you can have between two points. Before, one person would simply get all the slots at a major airport by flying medium turboprops to heavily traveled... see example below.
If flown during normal hours, 21 dash8s would eat 8 752s lunches (~1200 pax a piece). Let's say that demand is 1200 total. Figure that the dash 8s would get ~70% of the total number of passengers. That means that they are about 80% full. The 752s MAYBE will get 50 pax on a flight. That's extremely unprofitable.
I am sorry I over reacted a little bit
Quote from: swiftus27 on March 14, 2011, 09:33:07 PM
total agreement. there are thousands of people who would fly out at inconvenient times even if it meant the savings of only $20.
This is true for leisure travelers. As a business traveller, I pay more for frequency and convinience and don't think twice about it.
But I would think there are a lot more holiday makers than business travellers ... well on the UK at least.
well, the type of travelers are one of them, but how about the turn around time? Do I REALLY need to use 3 hours and 20 minutes EVERY TIME to turn around a 744D for loading meals on board, cleaning the waste tank of toilet and make the fuel tank full, when 744D have no galley, no meal served on board, limited amount of fuel need for each flight and little chance in using toilets on board? And the Japanese can load and offload the entire plane within ONE HOUR in real life? THIS is way more important than a little time delay on flying, at lease for me ;)
there are tons of problem need to be fixed, and I think this flying hours extended is not that high on the list......
Quote from: type45 on March 15, 2011, 05:15:56 PM
well, the type of travelers are one of them, but how about the turn around time? Do I REALLY need to use 3 hours and 20 minutes EVERY TIME to turn around a 744D for loading meals on board, cleaning the waste tank of toilet and make the fuel tank full, when 744D have no galley, no meal served on board, limited amount of fuel need for each flight and little chance in using toilets on board? And the Japanese can load and offload the entire plane within ONE HOUR in real life? THIS is way more important than a little time delay on flying, at lease for me ;)
This is because of the Fleet groupings... I think there's a variable turnaround time feature planned for the future.
that's not the only problem......some 747 flights only stay on ground not more than 1 hour between legs, that means not every leg need a full turn around. For example, CX used 744 on a flight of HKG-NRT-TPE-HKG before, they load everything on board at HKG and spend only 1 hour each at NRT and TPE. Of course before and after that the 744 make a full turn around with around 3 hours at HKG before going long range. I don't mind spending 3 hours before flying tran-Pacific, but this do not make sense on a short haul flight. I really hope sami will fix this later :-\