1. Does cargo-only aircraft need a slot?
2. Does the time of day of the flight make a difference? Say 2 AM cargo flight vs. 2 PM cargo flight?
Quote from: JumboShrimp on December 14, 2017, 07:07:30 PM
1. Does cargo-only aircraft need a slot?
2. Does the time of day of the flight make a difference? Say 2 AM cargo flight vs. 2 PM cargo flight?
Shrimpness! Good to see you again as always ~
1. Yes, slots are assigned as they would on a normal pax route.
2. No, cargo does not care when it flies out.
Talentz
Thanks Talentz. One more:
Does cargo only aircraft affect fleet commonality?
Quote from: JumboShrimp on December 18, 2017, 05:33:17 PM
Thanks Talentz. One more:
Does cargo only aircraft affect fleet commonality?
As far as I know, yes. The same principles apply that we have grown accustom too.
Talentz
One more Cargo related (I just read the manual and I don't see it addressed).
Do Tech Stops have the same effect on Cargo as they do on Pax?
I have not noticed any appreciable effect on tech stopped cargo in 1968.
Quote from: dx87 on December 19, 2017, 05:00:30 AM
I have not noticed any appreciable effect on tech stopped cargo in 1968.
Myself as well. Although if competing against a non-stop flight, I would expect there to be some differences. Can't yet confirm that though.
Talentz
Another question: how does cargo LF affect your company score? In my current airline there is simply not that much cargo demand, but I think of it more as an added revenue source, not as a priority in any way. So for me and my airline it is not needed, but I would be somewhat disappointed if my cargo LF would drag down my score...
Load Factor has no relevance in scoring, company image or anything.
How does the allocation work with cargo?
Is it based mostly on frequency, as is pax allocation or mostly on ratio of capacity supplied?
Quote from: JumboShrimp on December 27, 2017, 12:38:17 PM
How does the allocation work with cargo?
Is it based mostly on frequency, as is pax allocation or mostly on ratio of capacity supplied?
Its a mix of both.
Cargo handles a bit differently then Pax in that its more heavily dependent on RI. It's less forgiving then pax.
As for the calculation, it handles much like AWS 1.2. Its favors frequency alot. Price is not as big a factor as some would think. There's some favoring of CI as well. It allocates to whatever is supplied. If no aircraft capable of carrying HC, HC will transfer to SC or LC, depending on whats supplied. This applies to SC and LC. Cargo shifts to whatever the supply is based off its update.
From this, we can conclude so far:
Frequency controls cargo; Pax airlines will mostly likely win on LC and SC. Unless your willing to match frequency.
HC can only be taken by LG and VLG freighter. Since cargo re-allcates to whatever is supplied, Its typical (thus far) that putting a freighter on a route can max the HC demand on that route. While pax airlines will claim most of the LC and SC, all or most of the HC will be flown by you.
Since HC is the most profitable cargo and your taking most, if not all, chances are your making more money on the cargo side then the pax airlines.
Talentz
Quote from: Sami on December 26, 2017, 11:32:28 AM
Load Factor has no relevance in scoring, company image or anything.
Hi Sami,
Do you mean both passenger LF and Cargo LF has no relevance on LF or just Cargo LF has no relevance?
Is it possible for you to tell us what does influence the score and company image? I understand from previous posts has no effect on the score.
Quote from: dagwood on December 28, 2017, 03:03:18 AM
Hi Sami,
Do you mean both passenger LF and Cargo LF has no relevance on LF or just Cargo LF has no relevance?
Is it possible for you to tell us what does influence the score and company image? I understand from previous posts has no effect on the score.
Load factor is the result of kgs of cargo transport sold divided by total available cargo kgs. It's an OUTPUT from the determination of what has been sold, rather than in INPUT.
More of a City Based Demand question:
1. Catchment Radius - is it any way to know that it is?
The airport screen could say it or show the circle, or give it to us numerically.
Or some guideline of, say what it is for given Infrastructure and traffic level.
It's kind of hard to visualize this without any guideline.
2. I have seen the Traffic go up at one of the airports. Does infrastructure ever go up? The highest that seems modeled in the system is 5, but do airports with lower level infrastructure ever go up? Any chance infrastructure level to go higher than 5?
Was thinking about this as well. Perhaps on route planning pages a list of airports which also fall into the same catchment area (and are thus alternatives for flying a certain route)
Quote from: Talentz on December 27, 2017, 11:03:13 PM
As for the calculation, it handles much like AWS 1.2. Its favors frequency alot.
I have a feeling this is not going to end very well. (Frequency with nothing to counteract it)
For heavy cargo, it should be strictly capacity based allocation. How many times do the dedicated cargo carriers go between 2 destinations? My guess, in 95% + cases of cargo aircraft, they make 1 flight per day.
I could see some small advantage of other types of cargo, of > 1 per day, but allowing (encouraging) players to go crazy with frequency is a very bad idea, IMO.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on December 27, 2017, 12:38:17 PM
How does the allocation work with cargo?
Allocation of cargo demand to flights works on the same code/principles than passengers, with the exception that some variables are not taken into account that are not relevant for cargo. For example the dep/arr times or aircraft seat type are not included in cargo calculations.
Cargo demand does NOT shift between classes (i.e heavy cargo will not magically split into smaller cargo boxes).
Quote from: JumboShrimp on December 30, 2017, 09:58:47 AM
More of a City Based Demand question:
1. Catchment Radius - is it any way to know that it is?
2. I have seen the Traffic go up at one of the airports. Does infrastructure ever go up?
1) Pending the update of airport info pages, it will be shown there.
2) ref.manual & changelog; not yet.
Quote from: Sami on December 30, 2017, 11:54:16 AM
Allocation of cargo demand to flights works on the same code/principles than passengers, with the exception that some variables are not taken into account that are not relevant for cargo. For example the dep/arr times or aircraft seat type are not included in cargo calculations.
Cargo demand does NOT shift between classes (i.e heavy cargo will not magically split into smaller cargo boxes).
Does the allocation take place in one pass (for all 3 classes of cargo) or on separate passes per class?
The reason I ask is that I think Heavy Cargo should be allocated mainly by capacity (and price). Frequency should play no role.
Doing it this way would prevent the frequency / tech stopping wars with small aircraft crossing oceans. Eliminating Frequency as a variable for allocation of Heavy Cargo would prevent all that, and it makes sense from the Real World perspective.
Quote from: Sami on December 30, 2017, 11:54:16 AM
1) Pending the update of airport info pages, it will be shown there.
Excellent. Just as a ballpark figure before the update is installed, what is the radius of some typical modern airports with
Infrastructure x Traffic Level of
5 x 10
5 x 9
5 x 8
5 x 7
Quote from: JumboShrimp on December 30, 2017, 11:13:45 AM
I have a feeling this is not going to end very well. (Frequency with nothing to counteract it)
For heavy cargo, it should be strictly capacity based allocation. How many times do the dedicated cargo carriers go between 2 destinations? My guess, in 95% + cases of cargo aircraft, they make 1 flight per day.
I could see some small advantage of other types of cargo, of > 1 per day, but allowing (encouraging) players to go crazy with frequency is a very bad idea, IMO.
I posted some ideas for the route planning page to help with the visualization of the information presented
https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,74722.0.html
new cargo question, GW3.
does cargo rollover from one day to the next? I'm looking to run dedicated freighters that carry 50,000Kg but some routes have daily 30,000kg heavy cargo on them. If I visited every other day, would some of the heavy cargo wait for the next days flight? I'm the only heavy cargo on the route and the distances are 5000nm or so.
Many thanks, Simon
No, cargo does not roll over to the next day (or pax). It was discussed as a feature to be added later.
I don't think so. I'm pretty certain it's modeled in the same way as pax. It would make sense though - i.e that's how it happens in the real world, but it's just not how the game-engine works. In the real world, the same would be true for pax. too - they would just choose to fly on the days when a flight was available, thus increasing demand on those days. I think it would require a pretty big redesign of that part of the game engine to do this. (EDIT: sorry, just saw the other reply).
Not sure if this has been raised since I am back after a long hiatus, but cargo is absolutely broken. Needs a fare slash by at least 50% - the profit margins that are possible with cargo are just ludicrous. A couple of years back when I had monopolized LHR in a game my best planes on routes where I had the default fares about doubled turned close to 4 million in profits per week. Now I can make the same on default cargo rates in an MD-11F with 50% loads.
Quote from: Infinity on January 19, 2018, 11:19:46 PM
Not sure if this has been raised since I am back after a long hiatus, but cargo is absolutely broken. Needs a fare slash by at least 50% - the profit margins that are possible with cargo are just ludicrous. A couple of years back when I had monopolized LHR in a game my best planes on routes where I had the default fares about doubled turned close to 4 million in profits per week. Now I can make the same on default cargo rates in an MD-11F with 50% loads.
Hey there, long time no see ;)
Agreed. I think the pax default prices were reduced a bit too much and cargo default prices are too high. Some fine tuning is needed.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on January 20, 2018, 12:12:39 AM
Hey there, long time no see ;)
Agreed. I think the pax default prices were reduced a bit too much and cargo default prices are too high. Some fine tuning is needed.
But cargo is hard. LF are very low with small RI, conversions are a lengthy process, and for the use of fleet groups that are outdated for carrying pax. Fine tuning won't be easy at all. Currently, most cargo pure players BK very quickly, and those who survive are doing margins than no pax- player can dream about.
I agree, that starting up a cargo operation is a lot harder than a pax operation. But once established, the profit margin is really crazy. I'm flying an old fleet of DC8s
and making crazy amounts of money. There is not so much competition at this point because many haven't ventured into this field yet. I assume, it will get more
competitive in the future, driving profit margins down again. In any case, it made the game more interesting. Looking forward to more freighter and combi aircraft.
Cheers!
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on January 20, 2018, 09:58:24 AM
But cargo is hard.
Not sure if I can agree there. I was on the way to bankruptcy after 9/11 and all I had cash left over for was a moonshot at a cargo plane. That single cargo plane pulled my otherwise unprofitable 40 A320 operation out of the hole in no time. That's not how I think it should work. I used it on a completely new route btw, with 0 RI.
Quote from: Infinity on January 20, 2018, 08:04:29 PM
Not sure if I can agree there. I was on the way to bankruptcy after 9/11 and all I had cash left over for was a moonshot at a cargo plane. That single cargo plane pulled my otherwise unprofitable 40 A320 operation out of the hole in no time. That's not how I think it should work. I used it on a completely new route btw, with 0 RI.
Interesting... Because most of the cargo routes tend to lose money between RI of 0 and 90, while actual demand is shifting toward your route.. At least with bigger aircraft.
Unless you are extra lucky and start flying route where the
actual demand has already shifted to the route you are flying. That alone can take 1-2 years (about 4,000 kg per month, if you want to fill up 100k, it is 24 months). in addition (in parallel) to RI.
My first MD-11F flight in this game world started with 650k loss, just on the aircraft (per week). On top of that, there is staffing and route marketing (to cut the losses short) which amounted to well over $1 million loss per week the first week I was flying the aircraft. LFs were in low single digits.
One not-even-newbie-yet question about that fact: is the RI the same for pax and cargo, or do we have to build a new RI even if flying the route with pax for years?
Quote from: JumboShrimp on January 20, 2018, 08:17:21 PM
Unless you are extra lucky and start flying route where the actual demand has already shifted to the route you are flying. That alone can take 1-2 years (about 4,000 kg per month, if you want to fill up 100k, it is 24 months). in addition (in parallel) to RI.
Could very well be that was the case, I don't know anything about the mechanics of how cargo works in the game. But still looking at the top margin players in GW#3 right now the results of established cargo ops are beyond the pale.
Quote from: Tha_Ape on January 20, 2018, 08:26:01 PM
One not-even-newbie-yet question about that fact: is the RI the same for pax and cargo, or do we have to build a new RI even if flying the route with pax for years?
It is the same RI for cargo and pax. Cargo just seems more sensitive to RI then pax.
Quote from: Infinity on January 20, 2018, 08:58:06 PM
Could very well be that was the case, I don't know anything about the mechanics of how cargo works in the game. But still looking at the top margin players in GW#3 right now the results of established cargo ops are beyond the pale.
I did agree earlier that the I think Sami turned the dials for default pax prices too low and default cargo prices too high. I think they should be fine tuned a bit.
As far as profitability, you will see players in the "first world", tapping markets in other "first world" countries. Those can be very profitable (competition may erode the profits). But more typically, most of the cargo is one way, and nearly empty returning, as players expand to more marginal markets.
My cargo planes are already printing money at routes with RI 30-50.
I think that cargo planes should be moved to separate AC fleets group. it must be mostly impossible to run both pax and cargo company without sacrificing something. Like flying long haul and cargo, but sacrificing MH and SH demand.
otherwise players at cargo hubs like FRA/HKG etc. would have colossal advantage from others.
Currently in GW3 in FRA. Cargo company with 43 planes has more income than 523 AC company from USA.
if we look at his fleet choice - he can easily now spam his base with pax plane. he will only need a small tuning to cover pax LH demand.
Another idea:
Why not to implement Cargo only companies?
If at start of the game - player choose to play cargo only company - then he will have special ability:
1. he cannot fly pax and combi planes.
2. Bases amount is limited to 3 (or 4) - needed to test.
3. Player can open 1 base at each of region (Europe/Asia etc...).
4. Time delay between opening next base is 3-5 years.
This will increase worldwide competition between cargo companies from one side, but will allow to make worldwide cargo networks (like Fedex or DHL IRL).
I think there is an easier way to re-balance the system, but increasing default Pax prices by ~5%-10%, lowering default Cargo prices by ~10%-15%, before any drastic rule changes are implemented.
Also, I think it would be a good idea to first wait for Cargo Transfer ability to see what it does, an how it changes the landscape for Cargo.
why bother fiddling with default prices when they are exactly that, default prices! If this game is truly a free market exercise then surely it's up to players to set their own prices and live or die by competition and their cost base etc. Default prices are only there for the lazy who don't want to fine tune their airline to optimise it.
pah! Socialism! 8-) Simon
Quote from: JumboShrimp on January 23, 2018, 03:08:49 PM
I think there is an easier way to re-balance the system, but increasing default Pax prices by ~5%-10%, lowering default Cargo prices by ~10%-15%, before any drastic rule changes are implemented.
Also, I think it would be a good idea to first wait for Cargo Transfer ability to see what it does, an how it changes the landscape for Cargo.
that will not change the fact that cargo hubs based players get more advantage then pax only bases
Quote from: groundbum2 on January 23, 2018, 03:20:53 PM
why bother fiddling with default prices when they are exactly that, default prices! If this game is truly a free market exercise then surely it's up to players to set their own prices and live or die by competition and their cost base etc. Default prices are only there for the lazy who don't want to fine tune their airline to optimise it.
pah! Socialism! 8-) Simon
1. Price management as implemented, is the weakest area of the system - as far as design and implementation
2. Setting prices to absolute values, while inflation is a moving target does not quite work long term
3. fine tuning 1000+ route pairs individually does not quite work
BTW, I have not experimented enough with cargo to know the price sensitivity and elasticity
new question : GW3, when does cargo supply rise? I've flown some routes for over a year and the supply has not increased one iota, despite my oversupplying the route by +30% and there being +50% "potential supply" according to the charts, and no competitors flying to other nearby airports and siphoning off supply...
Simon
Quote from: groundbum2 on January 23, 2018, 03:37:28 PM
new question : GW3, when does cargo supply rise? I've flown some routes for over a year and the supply has not increased one iota, despite my oversupplying the route by +30% and there being +50% "potential supply" according to the charts, and no competitors flying to other nearby airports and siphoning off supply...
Simon
What is the route in question?
Most typical answer would be that there are other overlapping airports serving the rest of the demand.
For example, flying cargo to Hethrow - there are other 3-4 airports serving the same catchment area just on the London side. So you may be competing with another flight(s) that you are not readily seeing (without some more in-depth investigation.
I think at this point, its more a case of competition or
lack thereof. Flying huge cargo routes by yourself, yeah, your going to bank just as you would flying pax by yourself.
Nothing has changed in that regard.
Quote from: MuzhikRB on January 23, 2018, 02:37:46 PM
Currently in GW3 in FRA. Cargo company with 43 planes has more income than 523 AC company from USA.
if we look at his fleet choice - he can easily now spam his base with pax plane. he will only need a small tuning to cover pax LH demand.
That would be a similar situation as two airlines from one airport, one going SH and the other LH. If there's no competition on either end, one gets the short end of the RPK.
If you want to compete with a cargo (or mainly cargo) airline, you have to fly freighter aircraft or aircraft with
alot cargo space. Otherwise, its a moot point.
Talentz
Quote from: Talentz on January 23, 2018, 04:01:10 PM
I think at this point, its more a case of competition or lack thereof. Flying huge cargo routes by yourself, yeah, your going to bank just as you would flying pax by yourself.
I started to post something similar. I think MuzhikRB's suggestions would mean more regulations, less cargo supply / suppliers, which would mean less competition. At this point, supply for cargo is too low, there is a lack of competition. We just need to wait 5+ years, by which time supply should catch up with demand, and we will see what happens with Cargo airlines and Cargo margins.
I'd say pricing is good the way it is. In most cases demand is very one-sided with no demand on the return-leg. As soon as competition enters through pax aircraft, covering small and medium cargo (I've seen up to 10:1 or more), the only thing left is heavy cargo. When that also gets split around various airports it really does not leave much profit.
That said, the CBD system works and I sure hope it get's implemented for pax traffic in GW4. If not, we'll have to wait around 8 months before the chance of it getting implemented in a long term scenario. (I assume pax CBD will not be introduced for running gameworlds?)
Yeah, I agree, JS.
~ Also players need to start looking at max payload range for the aircraft's they choose. Don't pick an aircraft that is payload or volume limited to the destinations your flying and wonder why the other player(s) are making more money.
For nearly a decade AWS has been solely a pax only calculation and max payload range was an afterthought. Now, its the key to success. What worked before cargo... doesn't work as well now.
Talentz
ps: https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,74876.0.html (https://www.airwaysim.com/forum/index.php/topic,74876.0.html)
Quote from: Helix on January 23, 2018, 04:29:44 PM
I'd say pricing is good the way it is. In most cases demand is very one-sided with no demand on the return-leg. As soon as competition enters through pax aircraft, covering small and medium cargo (I've seen up to 10:1 or more), the only thing left is heavy cargo. When that also gets split around various airports it really does not leave much profit.
Good point. I mentioned it earlier to Infinity. Cherry picking a route that has unmet demand that is balanced, both ways as a standard for Cargo would likely lead to wrong conclusions, since it is not a representative sample.
Quote from: Helix on January 23, 2018, 04:29:44 PM
That said, the CBD system works and I sure hope it get's implemented for pax traffic in GW4. If not, we'll have to wait around 8 months before the chance of it getting implemented in a long term scenario. (I assume pax CBD will not be introduced for running gameworlds?)
I agree. CBD has proven to be fantastic!
I think some informational pages (for airport, route planning) need to be upgraded to make it easier for the players to visualize what is going on with CBD.
As far as extending CBD to passengers - I am not sure if would not be better to implement connectivity (on Cargo first). Destroying current Pax hubs without ability to recreate hubs may not be the best sequence. I think it would be better to add cargo transfers first, as a test vehicle, that could be added to existing game worlds without too much disruption.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on January 23, 2018, 04:54:45 PM
Destroying current Pax hubs without ability to recreate hubs may not be the best sequence. I think it would be better to add cargo transfers first, as a test vehicle, that could be added to existing game worlds without too much disruption.
Ah yes, I forgot this would be much more critical for pax operations. It would probably prohibit any LH operations since that traffic gets channeled through the hubs. (not counting the obvious trunk routes)
I think freight breaks down like pax into 2 categories.
SH/domestic US freight seems fine. It made the 757 relevant again - although it remains to be seen whether or not the 733/734F will eat its lunch. Regardless the cargo volume and prices seem fine as there's usually a good amount of competition from belly cargo that eat into light/standard loads.
LH cargo is ludicrously profitable. A 7-day scheduled freighter with no competition will easily make more profit than a 7-day scheduled pax aircraft, often 2-3x as much.
Quote from: dx87 on January 23, 2018, 06:40:46 PM
I think freight breaks down like pax into 2 categories.
SH/domestic US freight seems fine. It made the 757 relevant again - although it remains to be seen whether or not the 733/734F will eat its lunch. Regardless the cargo volume and prices seem fine as there's usually a good amount of competition from belly cargo that eat into light/standard loads.
LH cargo is ludicrously profitable. A 7-day scheduled freighter with no competition will easily make more profit than a 7-day scheduled pax aircraft, often 2-3x as much.
Re: LH Cargo
I think players are taking a while to figure this out and get into this market (and it is extremely slow and costly to start an undeveloped LH Cargo flight from RI=0).
For example, to this day, probably the most fantastic and versatile aircraft for LH cargo (for many airports) - 767-300F is far less utilized then it should be.
So you can't really judge present situation, where everyone started totally inexperienced, and draw conclusions about how to change the game based on that. Those monopoly LH Cargo routes will get oversupplied quicker in future game worlds.
Just FYI on LH Cargo:
Just started flying to some new destinations, and here are my Week 1 LFs to 6 new destinations:
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.4
1.6
1.7
All solidly in the red. So when you see an anecdote of some fantastic profitability from Day 1 on a new route, it is anomaly rather than the rule. The rule is that it is slow and painful, but eventually very rewarding.
Quote from: dx87 on January 23, 2018, 06:40:46 PM
SH/domestic US freight seems fine.
An airline I observe in GW1 is running US domestic cargo and he probably will not survive. Light and medium cargo is covered by passenger aircraft and heavy cargo is not enough to survive on (apparently).
Running one set 7-day 727-100F on US domestic routes myself only yields 100k per frame, which is what a passenger 727-100 makes on heavy competition. I have those freighters running for 1 year now and it was really not worth the conversion. I basically play around with them and just let them run
to annoy the competition for testing.
If we had connections though, a central US hub would basically make this a whole different game.
Quote from: Talentz on December 27, 2017, 11:03:13 PM
Its a mix of both.
Cargo handles a bit differently then Pax in that its more heavily dependent on RI. It's less forgiving then pax.
As for the calculation, it handles much like AWS 1.2. Its favors frequency alot. Price is not as big a factor as some would think. There's some favoring of CI as well. It allocates to whatever is supplied. If no aircraft capable of carrying HC, HC will transfer to SC or LC, depending on whats supplied. This applies to SC and LC. Cargo shifts to whatever the supply is based off its update.
From this, we can conclude so far:
Frequency controls cargo; Pax airlines will mostly likely win on LC and SC. Unless your willing to match frequency.
HC can only be taken by LG and VLG freighter. Since cargo re-allcates to whatever is supplied, Its typical (thus far) that putting a freighter on a route can max the HC demand on that route. While pax airlines will claim most of the LC and SC, all or most of the HC will be flown by you.
Since HC is the most profitable cargo and your taking most, if not all, chances are your making more money on the cargo side then the pax airlines.
Talentz
I've been wondering about frequency with regards to cargo and CBD...When we talk about frequency, are we talking about number of times we fly to a specific airport, or number of times we fly to a specific region or catchment area?
If there are six airports within a given catchment area or region and I fly to each of them once daily. Is that the same, more or less, as flying to one of those airports six times daily?
Understanding that not all potential demand at one airport is the exact same potential demand at a neighboring airport, but there IS some overlap in those two potential demand figures. Some of that demand just wants to go from A to B and doesnt care which airport provides that service.
If that basic assumption is correct, more or less, then if I fly once to both the airports in question, then that overlapping cargo would see two potential flights available, right?
As an example, I fly to Kennedy and La Guardia each once daily with HC supply. MY opponent flies once daily only to Kennedy, with no flights to any other NY-area airports. Are he and I competing only for the Kennedy cargo and therefore each have only one flight, or are he and I competeing for essentially ALL the NY-area cargo (or at least a lot of the same potential cargo) in which case I have more frequency than he does?
Hopefully this question makes some sense and isnt too dumb...
Quote from: johndd1 on January 23, 2018, 07:44:47 PM
If there are six airports within a given catchment area or region and I fly to each of them once daily. Is that the same, more or less, as flying to one of those airports six times daily?
If all six airports share the same area then you make more sense in flying to a single destination to cover the whole area.
Check the manual / city based demand for 2-airport explanation example on this.
I'm having a little bit of trouble figuring out cargo supply/demand. So I determined on passenger routes, a freighter has hard time competing with passenger jets since you lose out on light and medium size cargo due to frequency. However heavy cargo is completely untapped.
That said, I have a few cargo routes in GW#3 where cargo heavy demand is maxed out, and I have a freighter with the range (or tech stopped to have the range), but cannot capture 100% of the heavy cargo per flight. Why is that? If I have no competition on a route for heavy cargo, shouldn't even one flight per day capture all of the heavy demand on that flight?
I have RI of 100 and CI of 90 on all routes in question.
it's called life 8-) Shouldn't your girlfriend love you unconditionally, shouldn't the car start every time you turn the key, shouldn't your kids tidy their rooms every day, shouldn't mobile phone bills be easy to understand etc.
I guess the real question is - what can I do to get all that cargo waiting for me. And it looks like you've done everything possible. So much like the items above, accept a less than optimal outcome and find the next profitable niche...
8-) Simon
Quote from: Slurve30 on January 31, 2018, 12:11:23 AM
I'm having a little bit of trouble figuring out cargo supply/demand. So I determined on passenger routes, a freighter has hard time competing with passenger jets since you lose out on light and medium size cargo due to frequency. However heavy cargo is completely untapped.
That said, I have a few cargo routes in GW#3 where cargo heavy demand is maxed out, and I have a freighter with the range (or tech stopped to have the range), but cannot capture 100% of the heavy cargo per flight. Why is that? If I have no competition on a route for heavy cargo, shouldn't even one flight per day capture all of the heavy demand on that flight?
I have RI of 100 and CI of 90 on all routes in question.
Routes from nearby airports maybe?
Quote from: Slurve30 on January 31, 2018, 12:11:23 AM
That said, I have a few cargo routes in GW#3 where cargo heavy demand is maxed out, and I have a freighter with the range (or tech stopped to have the range), but cannot capture 100% of the heavy cargo per flight. Why is that? If I have no competition on a route for heavy cargo, shouldn't even one flight per day capture all of the heavy demand on that flight?
I have RI of 100 and CI of 90 on all routes in question.
If this is "Actual" demand for Heavy Cargo, and you are the only one serving the route, with Heavy Cargo capacity, you should be picking up pretty much all of it, if RI is 100, and your pricing default.
Sorry, if I am posting a newbie question, but I got confused.
I just read that very large combi aircraft can carry heavy cargo now. The manual confirms this:
Light Cargo (CL) Medium Cargo (CM) Heavy Cargo (CH)
Passenger aircraft Allowed Allowed if aircraft is at least class Large Not allowed
Cargo-only aircraft Allowed Allowed if aircraft is at least class Medium Allowed if aircraft is at least class Large
Combi aircraft Allowed Allowed if aircraft is at least class Large Allowed if aircraft is at least class Very Large
However, the same manual, as well as the route editing page says that heavy cargo cannot be carried by the pax aircraft:
Heavy cargo (CH) can only be transported by dedicated freighter aircraft.
For non-freighters the Heavy cargo allocation is automatically converted to other types
Well, if they are combi, aren't they pax/cargo kind of combi?
I started a few routes for a test, and I carry no cargo on LH DC-10-40CF. Hmm.
This would be a manual error, then. Sami probably updated the aircraft page regarding cargo, but not the cargo page regarding aircraft.
Because I can assure you that my MD-11C carry a good lot of HC :)
The issue with your -30CF is probably elsewhere. Payload/range is good?
Remember that the nominal range of combis (well, all planes carrying pax, in reality) is without any cargo capacity.
I think we're into "set" theory. There's a class of planes called pax, a set called cargo and a set called combi. Combi can carry passengers, but are in the combi set not the pax set, and the set's are mutually exclusive and do not mingle. So the manual is correct. The fact a combi-type aircraft can carry passengers does not make it a passenger-type aircraft. Passenger aircraft can carry cargo, but are not cargo aircraft!
Simon
Quote from: groundbum2 on February 18, 2019, 09:38:04 PM
I think we're into "set" theory. There's a class of planes called pax, a set called cargo and a set called combi. Combi can carry passengers, but are in the combi set not the pax set, and the set's are mutually exclusive and do not mingle. So the manual is correct. The fact a combi-type aircraft can carry passengers does not make it a passenger-type aircraft. Passenger aircraft can carry cargo, but are not cargo aircraft!
Simon
Alright. Still, I think my post was understandable :)
Edited it nonetheless.
My A340-600s are absolute cash cows. Theyre more profitable by almost 1 mil/wk then my best 7 day scheduled 330-200f. I think with Combi versions being able to carry HC coupled with players figuring out the optimal payload formula for their operation, it will put even more pressure on cargo only ops.
Quote from: Maxair on February 20, 2019, 01:21:17 PM
My A340-600s are absolute cash cows. Theyre more profitable by almost 1 mil/wk then my best 7 day scheduled 330-200f. I think with Combi versions being able to carry HC coupled with players figuring out the optimal payload formula for their operation, it will put even more pressure on cargo only ops.
The playing field levels.... Now, If you want to make the 757 the ultimate cheat, allow Large combi to carry HC.. Heheheh. ;D
Hey everyone,
I have a couple of routes that are stretching my aircraft's range and thus I am load limited. Will cargo be added to a day's flight when there aren't enough passengers? Or do you need to manually block seats out on the route?
Additionally, is there any way to block out seats on one flight, but not the return?
Thanks!
Quote from: WestCoastPilot on April 04, 2019, 11:43:28 PM
Hey everyone,
I have a couple of routes that are stretching my aircraft's range and thus I am load limited. Will cargo be added to a day's flight when there aren't enough passengers? Or do you need to manually block seats out on the route?
Additionally, is there any way to block out seats on one flight, but not the return?
Thanks!
Manually. Asymmetrical blocking unfortunately is not available despite several requests for such.
I'd go for the manual blocking anyway. If yo're only filling the plane on certain days, blocking 20 or 30 pax (or whatever) will cost you hardly anything, ensure you get a regular uptake of cargo (which is usually more lucrative than pax. anyway) and may even allow you to raise pax. prices by 10% or so without losing any bums-in-seats.