There are alot of threads about wish lists to the point its got confused what everyone wants. Sami knows about tech tweeks that need done in 1.3 so going forward what are the top 3 features people want added?
For me:
1) Weekly/Daily Demand (I.e. you can fly to some places once a week etc)
2) City Based Demand
3) Cargo
1) Improved ("partial") commonality
2) Engine release dates
3) Realistic figures for future aircraft
1) Small Airline Capability
2) Business plans and models
3) cargo
1. Cargo
2. City Based Demand
3. Connecting Pax
1. Small Aircraft Capability
2. Additional "generated" pax through targeted advertising for your company routes
3. More contract things like ground handling being done by another operator.
1. Connecting pax (AWS 2.0?)
2. City / Grid based demand (As opposed to airport based demand) (AWS 2.0?)
3. Time based demand (during different hours of the day), accumulated demand (if there is no flight, some demand will accumulate, spill into next day) (AWS 3.0)?
Something that may be possible for 1.x
1. Dynamic growth of slots (based on demand)
1. Frequency Changes
2. Small A/C useability or removal of (so sick of looking at pages of useless a/c)
3. Financial Modelling improvements
1. City Based Demand
2. Commonality (manufacturer/partial commonality; engine release dates & engine manufacturer commonality to be more important)
3. Connecting Pax / Codesharing
1) Ability to take over a b/k'd airline's production slots i.e. Buy their slots and a/c from them
2) Ability to takeover another airline (no clue how that would work in practice)
3) Connecting passengers...
1). Lower slot cost
2). Ability to run a small airline or a low cost model (cost structure has to be flexible {much lower than regular eg: BA Vs easy jet - diff models}
3) cargo
1) City Based Demand
2) Low Cost Carrier/Regional Airline Better Modelled
3) Ability to chose service levels on flights (ie Inflight Entertainment, Meals, Complementary drink/snacks, Economy/Premium Economy and seat pitch per cabin class)
1) City based demand
2) Cargo
3)
Quote from: ukatlantic on August 05, 2011, 07:56:24 PM
Ability to chose service levels on flights (ie Inflight Entertainment, Meals, Complementary drink/snacks, Economy/Premium Economy and seat pitch per cabin class)
Make that to actually be more desirable to pax, better seating arrangements and IFE at the same price should be a winner against a cramped tube. Specially in LH.
1) Ability to make a week's worth of daily schedules in a single window.
2) Export to CSV, all the data and dates related to my aircraft, service obligations, expiry of lease etc ...
3) City Based Demand
1. Get our beyond rights restored, without cabotage allowed. ABCBA again please!
2. Ability to charge Y fare for C class and fill the seats.
3. And one more time......ABCBA back again please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1. Maintenance - Have in-house or external (high set-up/lower check cost vs no set-up/higher check cost)
2. Alliance rewards - Sharing knowledge and so on is great but things as code share and shared maint. for common types and etc. would really make it worth joining an alliance. It would also make it more worth for alliance leader boards to plan where they would like to have their members.
3. City/Grid based demand
Could probably make this list 15 pages long, but options for #3 are Corgo or Regional (small TPs) playable.
Anyway great job as always Sami! V 1.3 is neat!
My 3, in no particular order are;
Cargo (both on board pax types and dedicated fleets)
City based demand
Export to .csv !!! This would be so helpful. Not sure what type of db backend AWS uses (Oracle? SQL? or *shudder* DB2? lol) but this would save me creating duplicate info in spreadsheets whenever I take on a new fleet type.
1) Connecting passengers
I think it would open up new strategies such as staking out a moderate-sized airport and then adding lots of flights to small & medium sized airports to greatly increase that airport's supply of passengers. You could then "grow" the airport into a major hub that could support larger aircraft and trans-continental routes.
To take it a step farther, maybe these "extra passengers" would only be available to you and to your alliance partners. This would add another level of strategy.
2) Multi-city routings
I.e, allowing A to B to C to A instead of just A to B roundtrips (not counting tech stops)
3) The ability to designate "reserve" aircraft(s) at your home base(s)
As many airlines have an aircraft or two available at their hubs just in case of a technical issue, I think it would be great if we could do the same. It could be set to "reserve status" and, as long as the aircraft has the ability to fly the route, automatically fill in as substitute if a scheduled aircraft encounters a technical or scheduling issue that would cause a long delay or cancellation. Once the substitute aircraft returns, the original aircraft would continue to fly the rest of its schedule and the substitute aircraft would be available again for other routes if needed.
Quote from: fark24 on August 10, 2011, 01:28:56 AM
3) The ability to designate "reserve" aircraft(s) at your home base(s)
As many airlines have an aircraft or two available at their hubs just in case of a technical issue, I think it would be great if we could do the same. It could be set to "reserve status" and, as long as the aircraft has the ability to fly the route, automatically fill in as substitute if a scheduled aircraft encounters a technical or scheduling issue that would cause a long delay or cancellation. Once the substitute aircraft returns, the original aircraft would continue to fly the rest of its schedule and the substitute aircraft would be available again for other routes if needed.
being that thats a big part of my job, would be good to see it :)
1. Specified and exact marketing and location image. Say you are a small airline in sweden but want to focus on routes to spain. You create a campaign for spain, raise your CI in spain and route your planes from all bases to spain. This could be drilled down to city level on all locations to create more competition between airlines.
2. Special dynamic gameworlds. Economic booms and shocks by random locations. Random catastrophies. Anything to shake up stiff gameworlds.
3. More dynamic commonality costs between fleets. Even if two fleets are perfectly compatible it would be possible to use some kind of simple discounts if models are similar and do share partly commonality.
1) Small aircraft capability
2) Cargo
3) More small aircraft types if small aircraft were capable
:)
If cargo were implemented the MU-2 would have to be put into this game, no arguments
Quote from: Pilot Oatmeal on August 12, 2011, 11:59:04 AM
If cargo were implemented the MU-2 would have to be put into this game, no arguments
If that was supposed to be a joke, no one laughed...
Quote from: Jona L. on August 12, 2011, 01:41:20 PM
If that was supposed to be a joke, no one laughed...
It was meant to be serious
Quote from: Pilot Oatmeal on August 12, 2011, 01:48:25 PM
It was meant to be serious
Is it used as a cargo plane too? ???
100% used in cargo, and air taxi, 12 years of experience with it would allow me to make the correct judgement on what is has been used as in the past...
Like the Navajos, at last you'll make them actually useful. :)
Quote from: Pilot Oatmeal on August 12, 2011, 03:23:47 PM
100% used in cargo, and air taxi, 12 years of experience with it would allow me to make the correct judgement on what is has been used as in the past...
Not questioning your judgement Jordan... just wanted to learn something new today :)
What routes did they fly on in Florida?
Many bahamas routes, I know a guy that was using them though as a charter service, but many cargo carriers used them to carry specific cargo routes that needed flying.
The MU-2 is a UTILITY aircraft, high performance, and very good field performance. Used by many drug runners ::) because of that. But the MU-2 has a bad reputation of being a pilot killer because of poor pilot training early in its career. A great plane, my dad has 3000 hours on them :)
Quote from: Pilot Oatmeal on August 12, 2011, 04:45:09 PM
The MU-2 is a UTILITY aircraft, high performance, and very good field performance. Used by many drug runners
Now I want drug running as a new feature! :P
Please implement the Piaggio aircrafts!
And less personnel pr. aircraft.
the piaggio hasn't been used in air taxi which sami says is a requirement, and even though the MU-2 has been used as an air taxi many times he still hasn't implemented it...
However, if he does cargo the MU-2 was also used in this area, and I have proof that is unarguable... the Piaggio however has not been used in cargo (to my knowledge)
1 city based demand
2 ability to actually use all the small AC which in turn would allow us to use the small airports
3 cargo?
1. Connecting pax.
2. Business plans ie. Low fares airline eg Ryanair, full fares airline eg Air Lingus, Regional Airline eg Aer Arann and cargo airline eg europe airpost.
3. Subsidiarys ie. Aer Lingus Regional and Air France Cargo.
Something that might be possible for future versions
1. Investment in airports by airlines. Eg terminal 5 in London Heathrow's terminal. Funded and exclusive to BA.
1. Connecting Pax
2. Cargo
3. In-flight Entertainment/Food
1) Ability to operate multi sector flights - very common in the 50's - 70s
2) CARGO
3) More accurate staffing levels dependent not just on the number of aircraft but also size of aircraft operated. i.e differentiate between an airline operating 8 B757s compared to another operating 8 Twin Otters.
Connecting pax (together with code share flights)
City Based Demand
Business plans like regional, full fare and low cost
City-based demand
Connecting passenger demand
No third option.
Just like everybody else:
Cargo, cargo cargo
City Based Demand
Connecting Pax, so we can actually use our hubs 8)
1) Cargo
2) Aircraft operate outside of base (eg. If you have a based that is close from 2000-0600. Those planes could leave and fly from other airports then return next morning.)
3) Keep Calm and Chive On
Quote from: SMOOTHEE50 on February 13, 2012, 07:21:01 PM
2) Aircraft operate outside of base (eg. If you have a based that is close from 2000-0600. Those planes could leave and fly from other airports then return next morning.)
You can already do that by scheduling a prolonged turnaround at the destination, you just can't do maintenance during that time.
Quote from: saftfrucht on February 13, 2012, 09:22:16 PM
You can already do that by scheduling a prolonged turnaround at the destination, you just can't do maintenance during that time.
No I mean that aircraft could make runs from another airport that is not it's base. eg. if it flew all day between A-B, while A is closed at night it could fly B-C.
1) Cargo
2) Transferring pax
3) A big airport attracting passengers from nearby airports, if no other flight available
1-Tupolev planes ;D
2-Venezuelan airports
-Ilyushin planes ;D