Interesting...
In my fleet now 13 very large aircrafts (7 – B-767 series and 6 B-777 series).
Total flying hours for all 13 a/c of fleet – is about 6000 h./month
Cabin crew need for 1 flight = 2 pilots.
Sanitary code for 1 pilots = max. 80 flying hours/month
Calculation:
6000:80=75*2=140
(75 crews, 140 pilots)
Require reserve crews:
75:5=15 crews, or 30 pilots
(For each five crews should be 1 reserve crew)
Require pilots for a covering of issue/holyday: 140+30=170/12=14
Total require: 140+30+14=184 pilots
Why in game required 230 pilots?
25% of pilots - absolutely unnecessary.
Why?
---
P.S.
Training of crews doesn't influence flight-time.
There is flight time (80 hours per month) and is working times (168 hours per month).
168-80=88 hours - per month it is intends for trainings.
You could actually still count if it's even possible to schedule a 80hr/month rotation for the pilots in your schedule. And I guess not.
So it's always not as simple as it may look, and here too the general (rough) level or crews per aircraft in longhaul airplane is derived from a real data what a real airline has had.
But, for info. The staff numbers are NOT calculated on what kind of schedule or how many hours you fly. It's based on the assumption that each plane flies a normal rather "full" schedule, and also that long-haul planes are used for longhaul ops (requiring more staff than if used for shorthaul) and so on. So it is "never accurate" down to the last pilot.
Quote from: sami on March 01, 2012, 10:00:15 PM
So it's always not as simple as it may look, and here too the general (rough) level or crews per aircraft in longhaul airplane is derived from a real data what a real airline has had.
Very strange. )))
"Aeroflot" actually fleet data B767/A330 (2011 y.):
A/c number of fleet – 24
Total flying hours (2011 y.) = 124417
Average Flying hours per 1 a/c – 432 h/month
Crews members (with flight attendant and instructors) – 587 humans
587:24=24,4 member per 1 a/c.
In game: 230:13=17.7 – crew only!!! + more 600 flight attendant.
It's unreal...
---
I've checked up other planes (medium and large), for them pilots data is similar to the real.
The quantity of flight hours is calculated from the schedule - easy! )
I think you'll find that especially on long haul fleets the crew complement goes up due to more than 2 crew flights (relief crews), and long overnights required for rest with low frequency schedules.
Quote from: moberg on March 01, 2012, 11:33:02 PM
I think you'll find that especially on long haul fleets the crew complement goes up due to more than 2 crew flights (relief crews), and long overnights required for rest with low frequency schedules.
No.
For the sake of experiment, I h've cancelled some long flights, but result hasn't changed. It is required as much pilots (Was 230, remains 230).
---
I think, that AWS problem consists:
- the true requirement of crews is hidden from the user
- it's impossible to make the integrated analysis of expenses
- it's impossible to make calculation the cost of flight hour for each plane type (or each group planes)
- it's impossible to correlate indirect expenses and to distribute them for according to a share
(For example see the pict.)
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 12:48:39 AM
No.
For the sake of experiment, I h've cancelled some long flights, but result hasn't changed. It is required as much pilots (Was 230, remains 230).
Please read what I wrote previously.
The staff requirement is not calculated by your actual schedules or flight hours. As it would make no sense to need to fire or hire new staff every time you make the slightest change to the schedule.
Quote from: sami on March 02, 2012, 09:25:50 AM
The staff requirement is not calculated by your actual
I don't try to dismiss pilots. I want accurate understanding, how many it is required pilots.
Managers of airline create predesign. The future economic model of the schedule and preliminary result pays off.
P.S.
If pilots aren't involved for flights it pays only the salary. The additional salary for flight hours isn't paid.
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 07:04:38 PM
I don't try to dismiss pilots. I want accurate understanding, how many it is required pilots.
Managers of airline create predesign. The future economic model of the schedule and preliminary result pays off.
P.S.
If pilots aren't involved for flights it pays only the salary. The additional salary for flight hours isn't paid.
The short answer is: if you schedule one single 55 nm route that takes 2 hours, the system hires full set of pilots for that aircraft, as if the aircraft was busy around the clock for 24 hours. If you keep adding routes to this aircraft, the number of pilots required remains the same.
It's kind of like you have a pilot "capacity" for the aircraft, and then it is up to you how much you utilise it (hence emphasis on higher fleet use than real world). Perhaps with hourly pilot wages as well, direct costs would go up.
Quote from: alexgv1 on March 02, 2012, 07:38:05 PM
It's kind of like you have a pilot "capacity" for the aircraft, and then it is up to you how much you utilise it (hence emphasis on higher fleet use than real world). Perhaps with hourly pilot wages as well, direct costs would go up.
I daily study documents of some Airlines and compare with AWS simulation.
For all a/c types, except "Very Large" category the quantity of crews almost coincides with the necessary in AWS.
For "Very Lage" a/c cat. requirements pilots are overestimated.
I'm speaking simply of the way things are modelled at the moment, building on Jumboshrimp's analogy. Sure the numbers aren't quite perfectly worked out for staff, but it is good enough now. It would be a colossal project to get all the details right I would imagine :'(
So do you propose some coding which could do this?
Quote from: alexgv1 on March 02, 2012, 08:44:03 PM
I'm speaking simply of the way things are modelled at the moment, building on Jumboshrimp's analogy. Sure the numbers aren't quite perfectly worked out for staff, but it is good enough now. It would be a colossal project to get all the details right I would imagine :'(
So do you propose some coding which could do this?
I think what Uran is sayig that evaluating aircraft "siza" groups, all match very well with real world except Very Large. If he is right on that, it would not be a question of recoding a whole lot, just the fixed pilot count constant that the system has for Very Large pilots.
What do airlines when change schedule model? For example, the airline has decided to cancel all or reduce intercontinental (long-time) flights.
In this case there are two decisions:
1. To dismiss pilots
2. To train for flights by other planes type
Anyway user should see in the simulator, how many necessary pilots for the schedule actually.
And more:
- why dismissal of pilots should influence image of Airline? These are Airline internal affairs.
For the passengers this event is indifferent.
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 09:55:50 PM
What do airlines when change schedule model? For example, the airline has decided to cancel all or reduce intercontinental (long-time) flights.
In this case there are two decisions:
1. To dismiss pilots
2. To train for flights by other planes
I think that is being considered for future versions of AWS
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 09:55:50 PM
Anyway user should see in the simulator, how many necessary pilots for the schedule actually.
And more:
- why dismissal of pilots should influence image of Airline? These are Airline internal affairs.
For the passengers this event is indifferent.
When you have a headline: "British Airways announces staff reductions" it puts the company in bad light -> reduces Company Image.
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 09:55:50 PM
What do airlines when change schedule model? For example, the airline has decided to cancel all or reduce intercontinental (long-time) flights.
In this case there are two decisions:
1. To dismiss pilots
2. To train for flights by other planes type
1. Currently the only option
2. Is a feature request which will hopefully be implemented one day :) (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,17556.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,17556.0.html))
Quote from: JumboShrimp on March 02, 2012, 10:08:04 PM
I think that is being considered for future versions of AWS
When you have a headline: "British Airways announces staff reductions" it puts the company in bad light -> reduces Company Image.
Passengers don't react to it. For passengers the price of tickets both comfortable seats and regular flights - is important only.
"British Airwyas" one million times dismiss employeesl, the personnel declared strikes, but image of Фirline hasn't suffered from it any way.
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 10:58:25 PM
"British Airwyas" one million times dismiss employeesl, the personnel declared strikes, but image of Фirline hasn't suffered from it any way.
Really? Facts please.
I would claim that any company cutting large amount of staff is getting negative PR. And there are many examples of that in the near past (try searching "nokia bochum" for example, or try this link http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/2011/04/nokia_paid_dearly_for_bochum_factory_closure_2484261.html )
In any case, the fact that is that reducing staff in AWS will result in negative effects in company image. It will not change (as it makes perfect sense).
Quote from: sami on March 02, 2012, 11:00:42 PM
Really? Facts please.
Sami, do you ever worked in a real Airline?
For Airline image can negatively influence only:
1. Air crash or incidents
2. Delays of flights
All.
---
The sale tictket constantly increases by flights BAW.
On the real route Moscow-London the passengers wishing to flight BAW every year more and more.
One more daily new flight since March, 25th, 2012, type: В-744 (BA-232/233).
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 11:20:32 PM
Sami, do you ever worked in a real Airline?
Just got back from my work at the airline a few hours ago.
And sales on a single route is not in any way related to what was spoken about image loss earlier since there are so many factors involved. And in my mind airline's image (which is of course something that cannot be really measured, which actually creates the whole dilemma here?) is affected by MANY other things than just crashes or delays. (??!). ...and since that is my opinion, that is the way it has been planned and coded here too and everybody seems to be happy with that.
(And I have no idea what you are trying to achieve here in these forum threads, but like mentioned if you have some actual and proper suggestions instead of random rants please post them properly sourced and thought to the request forum. You are not achieving anything like this....)
I have already said: recommend calculation method to determine req. crews for long-time flights.
The user must have a preliminary calculation. When user open a new flight/route, it's impossible to determine advance the expenses of cabin crews and flight attendant.
I think you should read the replies to your posts carefully, so that this is a conversation.
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 11:43:01 PM
I have already said: recommend calculation method to determine req. crews for long-time flights.
As was stated before, the pilot requirement calculation is based on aircraft basis, not on flight basis. I sincerely doubt it is going to change, and even if it is considered, it will be a very low priority.
Quote from: Uran on March 02, 2012, 11:43:01 PM
The user must have a preliminary calculation. When user open a new flight/route, it's impossible to determine advance the expenses of cabin crews and flight attendant.
Since the pilot requirement is based on aircraft, not flight/route, the actual costs for a perticular flight depends on how well your aircraft is scheduled. So the system can't tell ahead of time.
If you really want to know what it costs in terms of staff requirements for pilots, flight crew, just pick an aircraft, save a "before" picture of Personell, then schedule a flight (any flight), and save the "before" and "after" figures. That's your requirement per aircraft. (there may be some rounding involved).
The rest of the staff requirments (customer service, ground handling etc) does depend on flights. For every route that is added to schedule, those other staff categories are incremented. So in this particular case, some estimate per flight could be achieved, but since the staff requirment is calculated globally, some rounding will be happeneing. You can hire half of a person. Each person on staff is a unit, and everyone works full time.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on March 03, 2012, 12:47:17 AM
I think you should read the replies to your posts carefully, so that this is a conversation.
Maybe I don't understand?
How can I determine the crew expenses and other?
A concrete example (B-777-series fleet).
I think, that standart metod can be applied for help only:
1. I must to now total flying hours of fleet
2. I need to know proportion of the fleet 777-series.
3. I need calculate INDIRECT other cost/expenses (administrative, pilots salary, marketing, etc.) and distributed result to the 777-series.
For example:
Pilots salary (777-series only) = $ 2 232 230
Cabin crew salary (777-series only) = $ 165 655
Other (office rent, marketing, alliance fees) cost = $ 35 000 000
Total: $ 37 397 885
I've 5 B-777 series avircaft. Total flying hours (last month) – 2000 h (2000/5=400 h average 1 a/c)
Flying hours all fleets (all aircraft) – is (for example) 42000 h / month, thus, the proportion of B-777-series = 42000:2000=4,7%
The next step: $ 37 397 885 * 4.7% = $ 1 757 700 - this portion of other costs related to 777-series per month.
Therefore $ 1 757 700 : 5 aircraft = $ 351 540 for each a/c a month, or $ 87 885 /week
The result on screen must be reduced amount $ 87 885 ...
Quote from: Uran on March 03, 2012, 01:48:00 AM
Maybe I don't understand?
We understand that your way would be more accurate.
It is just too much work for Sami to change it from the current system, which works fairly well as it is.
Isn't the idea of indirect (or overhead costs) such as office rent that you don't rationalise them by unit time, etc. as they are a company wide thing. Or is the proportion of CEO salary to come out as an operating cost for every aircraft 8)
Maybe someone who does more accounting than me can clarify this.
Quote from: alexgv1 on March 03, 2012, 01:58:22 AM
Maybe someone who does more accounting than me can clarify this.
For God's sake! )))
Practice shows that the leading Airlines in the world, the most typical cost structure that is used in calculating the economic efficiency of flights, is to break all the costs into 3 basic groups:
1 Direct variable costs
2. Direct fixed costs
3. Other quasi-fixed costs
Group 1 – Direct variable costs include:
- Fueling
- Navigation fees
- Airports handling and servicing
- Passenger taxes
- Crew salary increment (for 1 h flight)
Group 2 – Direct-fixed costs include:
- Leasing or amortization (if the plane own)
- basing aircraft in airports
- Maintenance (A,B,C-check) & repair (D-check)
- Insurance
- Crew training
- Permanent part of crew salary
Group 3 - Other quasi-fixed costs include:
- Office and representation rent
- Marketing
- Salary of other staff
- Bank interests&fees
- Penalties, taxes
Calculation of one flight hour for every a/c type.
Step 1. All expenses listed in group № 2 : flying hour concrete a/c type (or series)
Step 2. Expenses listed group № 3 must calculated by proportion (total flying time a/c type : a total flight times all aircraft).
For example. We have 36 aircraft Boieng 737-classic serie.
Total flying hours – 16500 h/month, or 40% of all fl-hours by Airline
Total costs by group № 2 – is $ 46 325 000
Total cost by group № 3 – is $ 76 785 000, the proportion costs of group № 3 – is $ 30 714 000 (76 785 000 * 40%).
How much cost 1 flight hour?
(46 325 000+30 714 000):16500= $ 4 669
See true result at the screen below
Quote from: Uran on March 03, 2012, 02:46:38 AM
For God's sake! )))
Practice shows that the leading Airlines in the world, the most typical cost structure that is used in calculating the economic efficiency of flights, is to break all the costs into 3 basic groups:
1 Direct variable costs
2. Direct fixed costs
3. Other quasi-fixed costs
......
Firstly I please ask that you would not take the Lord's name in vein as I find this offensive.
As for my comment, I meant maybe another player who works in finances can clarify what
I said, I was not askin for them to give you a lesson as that would be patronising.
My comment was with regards to the group 3 variables as you have called them. Yes puttin them per flight would be good, but is this standard accounting practise? Your request is valid because right now all your aircraft can show profits and the airline still loses money from overheads. Whether this is necessary/worth it is another question. I'm not sure if the average armchair CEO will be able to calculate this in such depth.
Quote from: alexgv1 on March 03, 2012, 03:22:55 AM
Yes puttin them per flight would be good, but is this standard accounting practise?
I think so.
Aeroflot, LOT, Austrian Arlines, Transaero, Alitalia (and other Airline which I constantly work) apply this metodic procedure.
Airline CEO makes the decision for opening or closing flights/routes in next cases:
1. In case of flight opening - preliminary financial report
2. In case of flight closing - actual financial report (for last 1-2 months, may be more)
Preliminary report for open flights/routes looks so (for example):
Ok now I am liking this now that you have presented the data in this figure. And maybe this analysis would be nice if it was available in game when deciding to open a route, although perhaps some estimations like fuel or pax will require opening up the game mechanics.
If you could work on this with Sami then this could be a beneficial feature (think advisors idea, CEO has data presented to them then makes the decisions rather than micromanaging the operations jobs like scheduling). Maybe that appeals to Sami to think of it as potential for advisor feature? I think Uran is trying to help improve the game with best intentions. Seems like he has expertise which could assist you.
In 2003-2006 yy. I trained students for economy and management (Civil Aviation) in institutes in Moscow and St.-Petersburg ))
The direct/indirect costs is a thing what is missing here. And there have been plans for the financial update already for a longer time - it consists of balance sheet update and so on, and with that I am hoping to bring in the direct/indirect cost tables too.
However, with the current staff systems it will be impossible probably since staff cannot be easily allocated on single flights, and that is why it is not visible today either. Same with marketing and such things which never (apart from route marketing) cannot be directed to single flights fully properly, so getting a fully grown profit/loss figure with Doc & InDoc (or however they are shortened?) taken into account is difficult or not fully accurate.
And I have said it now three time already but will repeat once more since it seems to be a bit difficult... Any proper requests for adjustments or new features MUST be posted to the feature req forum (following the instructions there) - otherwise the discussion has probably no use as I never browse or search other forums than that one while searching for data on new features.
The planning cost estimation table looks good and clear, actually route planning page is due for an overhaul soon.
Quote from: sami on March 03, 2012, 10:08:38 AM
And I have said it now three time already but will repeat once more since it seems to be a bit difficult... Any proper requests for adjustments or new features MUST be posted to the feature req forum (following the instructions there) - otherwise the discussion has probably no use as I never browse or search other forums than that one while searching for data on new features.
I think you can simply move this post to Feature Request forum ;)
Quote from: sami on March 03, 2012, 10:08:38 AM
And I have said it now three time already but will repeat once more since it seems to be a bit difficult... Any proper requests for adjustments or new features MUST be posted to the feature req forum (following the instructions there) - otherwise the discussion has probably no use as I never browse or search other forums than that one while searching for data on new features.
Sami, I simply small-talk in this topic. If need concrete requests, I can prepare the long list (especially economics). When it will be ready, I'll publish special posted of a forum.
Quote from: Uran on March 03, 2012, 02:55:46 PM
Sami, I simply small-talk in this topic. If need concrete requests, I can prepare the long list (especially economics). When it will be ready, I'll publish special posted of a forum.
Look forward to this hopefully can help improve game mechanics 8)
Discussion continues here:
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,38346.msg205128.html#msg205128