Hi,
If I have 3 bases and 3 fleet type and I want to add a 4th type but only at one of my bases, does the commonality cost of the 4th only impact my one base in which I fly the new aircraft? or does it increase the cost for all my bases?
Should hose everything.
All types go up exponentially when you add your 4th in service regardless of base status.
If you add a 4th fleet type, it will increase the costs of all fleet types. Furthermore, if you fly that 4th fleet type out of a base (versus your HQ), you'll see an additional 15% increase on those individual planes flying out of your bases.
I do it all the time when I base out of CYYZ with 3 other Canadian bases, in JA4 I had a top 5 airline ( by fleet size ) with 4 fleet types at 3 bases and a 5th fleet type at the other base to again have 4 types at that base. It will cut into your profits a bit but you can still be very successful with more than 3 fleet types at multiple bases. I would not add a second type in the small or medium type, only in large or very large.
psw231
Quote from: psw231 on June 26, 2011, 06:26:22 PM
I do it all the time when I base out of CYYZ with 3 other Canadian bases, in JA4 I had a top 5 airline ( by fleet size ) with 4 fleet types at 3 bases and a 5th fleet type at the other base to again have 4 types at that base. It will cut into your profits a bit but you can still be very successful with more than 3 fleet types at multiple bases. I would not add a second type in the small or medium type, only in large or very large.
psw231
In DOTM1, I had 600 planes in service and another 400 on the market. When I had 3 active plane types, my weekly staff training and commonality costs ran about $20 million per week. If I put a 4th type "in service" (like when it got returned off lease and auto-C/D checked), my weekly costs rose to $100-120 million per week. To me, that is a fairly significant cost of having the 4th fleet type. It might not be as exaggerated in smaller fleets, but it out about half of my weekly profit (on about 700million in revenue).
commonality means nothing right now. it is one of the reasons I am not playing. You will only feel its impact early on if you have a few planes. You CAN easily run an airline with a mixed fleet of MD80s, 737s, and A320s.
I agree with both you and schro.
If you play the game "wrong", starting with 737, A320, and MD-80 all at the same time, your airline will adapt to the cost structure, and fleet commonality won't change anything. At the same time, if you play the game "right", limiting your fleet types, if you try to start a new fleet, the results are disastrous.
Quote from: BobTheCactus on June 26, 2011, 11:55:45 PM
I agree with both you and schro.
If you play the game "wrong", starting with 737, A320, and MD-80 all at the same time, your airline will adapt to the cost structure, and fleet commonality won't change anything. At the same time, if you play the game "right", limiting your fleet types, if you try to start a new fleet, the results are disastrous.
Am I reading this correctly? If i start the game with lots of fleet types (say 3) and I add the 4th 5 years later, I will not feel the hit much. However if I start with 2 types and add a third and forth 5 years later, the impact will be greater assuming both have the same fleet types and flying the exact route in 5 years? Is that right?
Quote from: ACfly on June 27, 2011, 12:06:38 AM
Am I reading this correctly? If i start the game with lots of fleet types (say 3) and I add the 4th 5 years later, I will not feel the hit much. However if I start with 2 types and add a third and forth 5 years later, the impact will be greater assuming both have the same fleet types and flying the exact route in 5 years? Is that right?
hmm, yes.
Although the best option is to start with 2 and end with 2, starting with 5 and ending with 9 ::) would be less painful than starting with 3 and ending with 5.
I am confused: If you fly 600 aircrafts and then receive a returned leased out aircraft that will feature a new fleet type, your fleet. comm and staff training costs rise from 20m USD to around 100m USD? That would mean +400%.
I have conducted similar approaches, e.g. adding the long-haul fleet later in the game and going from 4 to 5 fleet types. But I have never heard or seen of a +400% increase in costs. Did I understand this correctly?
Cheers,
Denis
Here is an example from a previous thread.
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,17667.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,17667.0.html)
The attached picture is very enlightening. This guy ran a large enough operation, and when they added a 4th fleet type the training costs rocketed by four times. Then after ten weeks the fleets went back down to three and the costs shot down again.
Thx for the example. In that case, they doubled -1,8m to 5,0m, around +100%; anybody have an example of +400%? There must be something else to it, I guess...
Cheers,
Denis
Is it only training costs that increase for commonality?
Quote from: flyboy842 on June 27, 2011, 01:18:32 AM
Is it only training costs that increase for commonality?
No,
Administrative costs
Maintenance costs
also increase. I think there might be some other stuff that increases too, but this is all that comes to mind right now.
Quote from: DenisG on June 27, 2011, 12:54:57 AM
I have conducted similar approaches, e.g. adding the long-haul fleet later in the game and going from 4 to 5 fleet types. But I have never heard or seen of a +400% increase in costs. Did I understand this correctly?
Cheers,
Denis
Commonality bites harder at types 4, 7, 10, etc.
For fleet types 1-3, they have a negiligble impact on the other's cost. When you add type 4, then it seems to me that the total costs for types 1-4 are about 5x higher than they would be if you only had 3 total types. When you add type 5 and 6, it doesn't impact your other commonality costs until you add number 7, etc.
So if you happen to have a 600+ plane airline hanging around in your pocket somewhere and it only has 3 types flying, go to the fleet commonality page and jot the numbers down. Then add a 4th type. Revisit the commonality page, then pick your jaw up off the ground.
Well, sounds like step costs at certain intervals; I have experienced the +100%, but not the +400%.
From a system point of view, sami will either have it interval-based relative to the current costs and maybe another jump due to size or as a fix variable. In both cases, the number of a/c in fleet then should not make a difference for the percentage.
But I am still curious about the +400%.
I will look into my case when I will be having 4 types on the fleet during replacement.
Cheerios,
Denis
From my experience (which is not small [!!])
It is 2nd type +0% 3rd +25% 4th +100% 5th +25% etc.
So every X+3 types you have a 100% cost-rise.
To make it easy understandable for also the not mathematicians (I don't have a clue of maths either, but I still do understand :P ):
Say type one costs you $100,000.
Then type two costs another $100,000 but not affect the former one.
Type three will add $100,000 BUT adds 25% to all, so you have 3x $100,000 + 25% --> 3x $125,000 --> $375,000
Type four will add it's own $100,000 adds 100% to the prior. As I have not yet investigated this phenomena this deeply, I must now offer 2 ways:
a) 4th type is NOT affected by the 25% of type three: So to make the example calculation: we have $375,000 [see above] + $100,000 --> $475,000 x 2 [+100%] = $950,000 Monthly cost in total.
b) 4th type IS affected by the 25% of type three: Example: ($375,000 [as above] + $100,000 +25%) x 2 --> $500,000 x 2 --> $1,000,000 in total.
The difference between a) and b) is marginal (5%) but will of course rise with rising number of types. It would go to far to list all that. Basically the tweaks are (as already named): 4, 7, 10, 13, etc.
Anyhow 400% are damn unrealistic, maybe if you add about 6 types or so you can reach that, but definitely not with only one.
I hope you understand this ;)
Jona L.
Simply put, you shouldn't be able to have this many types imho without massive penalties.
I've decided that I'm less in favour of punishing extra fleets and more in favour of rewarding common fleets. I'm actually quite happy with the fleet commonality system as it stands. I might draft up a proposition when I get some time. This would be more of a simple feature which can be worked into the current model.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 27, 2011, 08:12:35 PM
I've decided that I'm less in favour of punishing extra fleets and more in favour of rewarding common fleets. I'm actually quite happy with the fleet commonality system as it stands. I might draft up a proposition when I get some time. This would be more of a simple feature which can be worked into the current model.
I've proposed many ideas. None of them ever seem to get much attention from 'above' despite tons of positive feedback.
The used system is jacked up so that the F5 spammers win great planes early so they get the money needed to order all these types in order to get all of the slots. It is a very simple way to dominate an airport. Running a lean efficient fleet system is a path to failure.
Quote from: swiftus27 on June 27, 2011, 08:15:17 PM
I've proposed many ideas. None of them ever seem to get much attention from 'above' despite tons of positive feedback.
The used system is jacked up so that the F5 spammers win great planes early so they get the money needed to order all these types in order to get all of the slots. It is a very simple way to dominate an airport. Running a lean efficient fleet system is a path to failure.
I agree that the points you make are very relevant and valid to the gameplay and balance issues. However my passion is to do with cross 737 commonality, DC9 and variant commonality, BAe 146/Avro RJ commonality, 757/767 commonality, etc...
But I have made many posts on these so no point repeating myself.
Also I think this F5 spammer thing is becoming a false crusade, I've sat by the used market often refreshing and getting no luck, and logged on for two minutes and got my weekly limit of aircraft. I think a lot of it is luck, being at the right place at the right time. Sure, if you are there for longer, you are more likely to be there at the right time.
Also myself and others are running lean efficient 2 fleet types airlines and are in the top 20 of success. There still are a few airlines with random fleet choices at the top, but their decisions will come to bite them eventually.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 27, 2011, 08:38:00 PM
There still are a few airlines with random fleet choices at the top, but their decisions will come to bite them eventually.
You are so cruel :(
Quote from: Curse on June 27, 2011, 08:48:20 PM
You are so cruel :(
I was thinking more of the Yak-42s in Atlanta ::)
Only excuses!
:D
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 27, 2011, 08:58:09 PM
I was thinking more of the Yak-42s in Atlanta ::)
Heh, last time I checked with Pai those were doing quite nicely. He did quite a bit of math on how bad things would have to get fuel wise for those to go south on him before he bought um, and I was surprised on how high it would have had to go.
Any comment on the reasoning behind getting them? It really baffled me and a few others and I personally would love to know.
Quote from: alexgv1 on June 28, 2011, 02:04:29 AM
Any comment on the reasoning behind getting them? It really baffled me and a few others and I personally would love to know.
availability?
He simply enjoys extreme adventures. Yak-42 are the drag race of AWS, Bungie Jumping of aviation, a fight with a South Central Los Angeles Gang for internet users :)
What I was a bit confused about is not only the fact he uses them - it's the fact he purchased them. No possibility to get rid of them... and the production line is closed till early '90s when the D Version shows up.
aha, never expected that I can draw a bit of attention from those big names by have a small fleet of russian metal :-)
actaully Yak-42 was not a bad choice for me, I was prepared to face three types of results: good, normal, bad, and ended up with normal.
basically I grab Yak 42 because it was very cheap, and I had 30% off as a launching member
Cheers
Pai
That leads me to the biggest question in DotM#2 for me.... you ordered 30x Yak-42 but only 28x were delivered. Why did you cancel two of them? :)
well, I sold them, to test how much time/price do I need to get rid of them :-p
Sold to a human or AI?
And... wtf @ strategy :D
Thanks for your response Pai. As credit, in this gameworld which was tough at the start, you are still in operations so that says something for the yaks.
Quote
Lunar Airways has declared bankruptcy
Lunar Airways has been put into bankruptcy today by the airline CEO. All operations of this airline are ceased, all staff will be fired, and all assets and aircraft are returned to their owners or to creditors.
Lunar Airways operated from Atlanta - Hartsfield-Jackson (KATL / ATL) airport and had a fleet of 273 aircraft in operation at the time of the closure.
I would like to retract my previous statement please
He only bankrupted out of boredom. ::) He wanted to run in MT5 but didn't have the time for two airlines, per Alliance forum.
Hehe the usual excuses then ::)
Quote from: RushmoreAir on July 10, 2011, 05:02:18 PM
He only bankrupted out of boredom.
Atlanta wasn't maxed out, I'm curious how this could cause boredom... :)
Quote from: Curse on July 10, 2011, 06:39:53 PM
Atlanta wasn't maxed out, I'm curious how this could cause boredom... :)
I will see how to max it out... just moved in there a few minutes after he BKed ;D
Jona L.
Quote from: Jona L. on July 11, 2011, 09:28:22 PM
I will see how to max it out... just moved in there a few minutes after he BKed ;D
Jona L.
Use a full fleet of B747-400
Quote from: RushmoreAir on July 10, 2011, 05:02:18 PM
He only bankrupted out of boredom. ::) He wanted to run in MT5 but didn't have the time for two airlines, per Alliance forum.
Thanks for explaining to them for me :)
Commonality should be weighed more heavily, i stick to my 4 fleet types like a well run airline should with 80 planes. my competitor is out growing me because he has 7 types with 30 planes, are you kidding me there is no way in real life that an airline this small would stay afloat. Not to mention i have higher frequencies on most all routs and higher RI and CI and he still gets a disproportional amount of market share.
EX ( 7x daily with 320 vs 2x a day with 727) i have about 110% of available seats for demand (1100pax daily) on the 1500nm route yet he still has 45% of market share. What the hell?
i know if i was a passenger i would chose the airline that flew more often, in newer planes, with better image.
love the game some stuff doesn't make sense to me, maybe i missed something. please do tell lol
Quote from: tman558 on September 11, 2011, 12:19:25 AM
love the game some stuff doesn't make sense to me, maybe i missed something. please do tell lol
Have you considered that he might be offering cheaper tickets than you are? :P
I feel the pain in MT5.
Had 3 types at 20M/month = 5M/week for commonality costs
Added the 4th type, shot up to now 155M/month = 32M/week for commonality costs.
Profit dropped from 70M/weekly to 40M/weekly.
I only operate Large and Very Large aircrafts with over 400AC now. And now trying to rid of one of the fleets is very money consuming and tedious but needed to save the 30M/week...
Edit: Also why is salary so high at LAX? I remember last game in China, my airline was only paying 40M/week, now I'm paying close to 120M/week.
PPS. Also why do I have more staff than say SF Airlines who has 1HQ and 3Bases, AND more aircrafts than me AND more fleet types.
PPS. I play under the airline Air Redy at LAX.
I can answer about staff costs.
People in the USA make more money then people in China, so that gate agent in LAX will make more then one in Beijing.
Regarding why you have more staff, do you operate to more airports?
Quote from: Brockster on September 11, 2011, 12:26:41 AM
Have you considered that he might be offering cheaper tickets than you are? :P
i have discounted tickets slightly but was told that lowering ticket cost has very little effect, but as stated above i have made all the right choices and the competitor has made serious errors and yet it seems to have little effect.
Did you just create the routes? Were the planes in maintenance? Seems very strange (actually impossible) for someone to have 45% of an oversupplied 1100 pax route while just supplying ~300 seats.
Quote from: Sanabas on September 11, 2011, 07:07:54 AM
Did you just create the routes? Were the planes in maintenance? Seems very strange (actually impossible) for someone to have 45% of an oversupplied 1100 pax route while just supplying ~300 seats.
Maybe his 7x daily flights are all leaving at the same time - or pairs of 2 at the same time ...
there are none at the exact same time, morning and evening as well. Route is old (RI is 100) CI is (90) and no planes were in maintenance.
Quote from: Sanabas on September 11, 2011, 07:07:54 AM
Did you just create the routes? Were the planes in maintenance? Seems very strange (actually impossible) for someone to have 45% of an oversupplied 1100 pax route while just supplying ~300 seats.
ya tell me about it his load factor is probably close to 100% and mine on average is about 37%
how do you post a link to page view so you guys can see for yourself?
You can only see ingame screens for worlds you're actually in, so we can't look at those directly. Use the printscreen button to take a picture, and then paste & save it in paint, of the route planning screen, and another one of the lf info of one of the routes. You can attach jpegs to your posts.
If you have 37% LF with 90 CI and 100 RI, and the competitor only supplying 30% of demand, then the only possible reason I can think of for it is that your flights are too close together. Particularly since you specify there are none at the 'exact same' time. How close together are they? With 1100 pax demand, I think the minimum gap is 30-35 min, and probably safer to use 45.
thank you guys, i increased the difference in departure times from 20min to 45 min. Made a huge difference practically over night. Thank You
Quote from: tman558 on September 12, 2011, 06:26:08 AM
thank you guys, i increased the difference in departure times from 20min to 45 min. Made a huge difference practically over night. Thank You
That's what I thought it would turn out to be. I have seen this issue as well. I believe the penalt is a little too harsh...
As far as gap, 20min was way too little. for 1100 pax (average), 35min would be the minimum gap between the flights.