Quick beta available

[begla]

A little more cash would be much appreciated now  

[michael]

Hi Sami,

I have 12 A321s with 3 flights per each going between Haneda and Sapporo, equaling 36 flights a day. When I go to schedule the 37th, I get the below warning. I thought the limit was higher than 40 flights a day but anyway, can't schedule the 37th.

[Dasha]

The company and route image are important but reducing prices drastically works as well. I think it's also based on demand. Flying 130 seats on a 140 demand route will take longer than flying 100 seats on a 10.000 demand route. I think.


Sami one thing I realized. Is the time frequency limit removed? I am flying out of Copenhagen to Goteborg. Two of my flights depart 30 minutes after eachother. One is flown with an A319 and the other with an Embraer 170. The total demand is 790 pax per day.

In total I fly 8 times a day but these two routes depart 30 minutes after eachother. Still the loadfactors are 80% and 90%. I do remember reading something in the previous version that penalties occurred if flights leave within an hour of the other one.

[Sami]

The "flights too close to each others" penalty is already active.

However if you have a route with low RI and huge demand, you still may be able to get nearly full planes despite of the flights being too close.

I have 12 A321s with 3 flights per each going between Haneda and Sapporo, equaling 36 flights a day. When I go to schedule the 37th, I get the below warning. I thought the limit was higher than 40 flights a day but anyway, can't schedule the 37th.

Have to check


Also. MONEY HAS BEEN RESET TO $100MIL AGAIN FOR EVERYONE.


Edit: Otherwise all OK for everyone? Other feedback and comments so far?

[alexgv1]

With everyone having many millions of money and several top ups, will it be feesible to start a game with only a few million and get good enough LFs to get enough profits to survive and grow. And I mean the average player too, not just those having played the beta, as they might not know the ideal aircraft/size for routes.

[NorgeFly]

With everyone having many millions of money and several top ups, will it be feesible to start a game with only a few million and get good enough LFs to get enough profits to survive and grow. And I mean the average player too, not just those having played the beta, as they might not know the ideal aircraft/size for routes.

That's a good point... It's relatively easy with millions in the bank and plenty of aircraft on the used market. The start if a real game is not so easy. It may however, be a good thing as it may force players to be consider more carefully which aircraft to lease rather than grabbing any aircraft they can get their hands on. This will of course probably mean that players will be chasing the popular types even more though....

[Hwoarang]

I set up some routes to test differences from small price changes.  On RJAA to RKSI I've got Dash8s flying at default, default + 5% and default -5%.  Both the routes above default pricing and the routes below default pricing are attracting less passengers than the route at default pricing, which seems odd.

Also, how seriously should I be being penalized for flying Dash8s on a route with ~2000 demand?  I don't seem to be being hit very hard for it at the moment.

I started flights on the same route, but with MD-11 widebody planes (capacity is 1060 pax/day). Would love to compare our numbers on that route when you have a similar number of capacity on that route

[freshmore]

These a finances for B772 in my fleet, how can I be making 2.2 million this week when my takings every week are about 600,000! Bug I think?!

Financial overview
Values show the actual profit/loss of the aircraft including all fees and payments.
Profit yesterday
97 947 USD
Cumulative profit this week
2 232 025 USD



Cumulative profit last week
-272 614 USD
Financial overview, weekly estimate
The sums are an estimate of next week's incomes based on previous day.
Sold tickets
609 852 USD
Line maintenance (A+B)
-19 711 USD
Insurance
-80 548 USD
Fuel cost
-237 126 USD
Route fees (1)
-115 617 USD
Weekly leasing cost
-403 977 USD
Total
-247 127 USD

EDIT: This is also happening with other aircraft like 762's 1.5 million cumulative profit with only 500,000 in ticket sales. Am I missing something here?!

In terms when we start with a few planes, things will be a lot easier, growth will be slower and once you've realised how much you need to drop prices a good short haul aircraft fleet will be good early game, I have to say going long haul quickly may not be as easy as in the past. You also need to make sure you undersupply the route and get more than one Frequency in there it seems (or at least allow space for two frequencies). My short haul are very good but my long haul flights are a pig to get right, I think when CI comes into it in the real game you may find opening up long haul routes easier after a few months when CI is higher and you are making good money from your short haul flights.

I think rule of thumb for plane choice:
Anything below 300 pax demand a plane that can supply two freq per day approx 110-150 pax if short haul or 220 to about 260 or so with long haul.
400-500 pax demand for long haul Approx 300 pax carrying capacity for long haul or 180 or so for short
I'd say anything above 500 pax demand the biggest things you can reasonably get on the route (757's for short haul 380 for long haul for example).

This is what seems to be getting the easiest and best results for me. Got A333 working very well and B772 working well on this rule. B747's need plenty of pax demand to work it seems. I.E. At least and preferably over 500 pax. Still need to lower prices though.

[ARASKA]

It seems as if it is going to be much harder to run a regional airline or even start an airline with the new LF system that depends on RI so much. let's say you wanted to start out of Ekaterinburg for example. There are lots of routes that you could put 737's on to Europe like London and Madrid but the demand is only 130 Pax. per day. Previously, it would be feasible to start an airline like this bit with the new system, the LFs would be too low to run a profit. The same could be true for restarting in the middle of the game world. If you are trying to fly all the smaller demand, not served routes before you attack the your competitors, you won't be able to turn a profit doing this. Could this be tweaked?

[freshmore]

You downsize aircraft, you would look for E-jets and F-70 possibly F-100 etc. You just have to adjust what aircraft you would choose on the route, possibly use Turboprops aswell. You may only fly a 130 pax route once a day with 70-80 pax aircraft but this works whereas using 125 pax aircraft on a 130 route doesn't work (as easily if at all) due to the need of frequency, your optimal aircraft for a route is smaller than the demand on that route it seems. You may have a more varied fleet with E-Jets, ATR's and 737's/320's for higher demand routes and possibly the odd long haul aircraft if you have those routes available to your airline. Trust me, smaller aircraft on leases are working very well for me, BAe146's making quite a lot for me and working well.

Basically don't always think in 737's!!!

[Glob-Al]

But part of the aim here is to make this more realistic. I don't think Turboprops or F70s from Ekaterinburg to Western Europe really ticks that box.

So I share araska's concern that it will be particularly hard for airlines starting up later in the game. Otherwise though I really like the new system, so I hope this issue could be solved with a small tweak. Perhaps a one-time boost to RI (not applicable to day one) if you open up a route that no one else currently flies - encourage people to take on the empty routes and be able to grow more quickly on them?

[AAL558]

I like the new system. Most airlines in the Real World can't just start off with A320s and expect full planes unless they have really low prices. Otherwise, no one will know who they are. In this game, it makes sense for airlines to start off with small aircraft while they build their CI and RI.

Anyway, Sami; I'm not sure if this is how its supposed to work but, I have a DEN-SLC route that has a RI of 70 and a LF of 80% while my DEN-LAS route has a RI of 60 and I'm getting a LF near 95%. Is this a bug?

I'm flying both routes with the A320 Family. SLC gets flown 4x a day and LAS 9x a day. I meet the demand and leave just a little left over.

Oh and apparently I'm attracting 'C' Customers a lot easier than 'Y.' 100% on 'C' and 76% on 'Y'. Both prices were decreased about 15% at their opening.

[ARASKA]

I like the new system. Most airlines in the Real World can't just start off with A320s and expect full planes unless they have really low prices. Otherwise, no one will know who they are. In this game, it makes sense for airlines to start off with small aircraft while they build their CI and RI.

Anyway, Sami; I'm not sure if this is how its supposed to work but, I have a DEN-SLC route that has a RI of 70 and a LF of 80% while my DEN-LAS route has a RI of 60 and I'm getting a LF near 95%. Is this a bug?

I'm not asking for full planes, I would just like to have 60% LFs instead of 25% LFs.

Regards, Sean

[Frost33]

I think that it would be interesting to start an airline in these conditions with the normal amount of money, but I think it will drastically help stop 70% of airlines succeed straight away, which just isn't realistic. I think the increased dependence of l/f on ci and ri vastly improve the reality of the game. I did however notice that when I decreased prices by 30%, there wasn't particularly an increase in l/fs, I will however try it again in a few months with improved images.
Gianni

[JumboShrimp]

Edit: Otherwise all OK for everyone? Other feedback and comments so far?

I would like to test where and how the "higher than optimal" frequency kicks in.  I am guessing that it has to be tested by 2 players...

Any example of what should be considered higher than optimal frequency?

[JumboShrimp]

I like the new system. Most airlines in the Real World can't just start off with A320s and expect full planes unless they have really low prices. Otherwise, no one will know who they are. In this game, it makes sense for airlines to start off with small aircraft while they build their CI and RI.

Anyway, Sami; I'm not sure if this is how its supposed to work but, I have a DEN-SLC route that has a RI of 70 and a LF of 80% while my DEN-LAS route has a RI of 60 and I'm getting a LF near 95%. Is this a bug?

I'm flying both routes with the A320 Family. SLC gets flown 4x a day and LAS 9x a day. I meet the demand and leave just a little left over.

Oh and apparently I'm attracting 'C' Customers a lot easier than 'Y.' 100% on 'C' and 76% on 'Y'. Both prices were decreased about 15% at their opening.

When RI is high enough (and yours is) C pax should have no problem flying your airline.  If there are very few C class seats available, high C demand would be appropriate...

[LemonButt]

Here is an example of what I assume is a route working correctly:
https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/X/KORD/KMSN/?TB_iframe=true&width=800

It looks like demand is split based purely on seats avail versus filling up planes based on frequency.  Please confirm this is how a route should be working when you can sami.

[JumboShrimp]

I'm not asking for full planes, I would just like to have 60% LFs instead of 25% LFs.

Regards, Sean

It depends on the route supply and demand.  Some start with higher than 25%.  If you supply small percentage of demand at the beginning, you will have higher initial LF.

[JumboShrimp]

Here is an example of what I assume is a route working correctly:
https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/X/KORD/KMSN/?TB_iframe=true&width=800

It looks like demand is split based purely on seats avail versus filling up planes based on frequency.  Please confirm this is how a route should be working when you can sami.

Interesting.  I can see the supply, but I can't see the RIs if you and your competitor.  Under the old rules, everything else being equal (RI, CI etc), the 735 would be slaughtered.  So I am guessing that the "higher than optimal" frequency thing is kicking in....

[Sami]

Anyway, Sami; I'm not sure if this is how its supposed to work but, I have a DEN-SLC route that has a RI of 70 and a LF of 80% while my DEN-LAS route has a RI of 60 and I'm getting a LF near 95%. Is this a bug?

This depends entirely on the demand of the route.

Route Image is a factor of people who know your route, and with RI 0 this is about 25-35% of the potential demand.

If you have a demand of 100 pax daily, you cannot get more than ~30-50 pax with RI 0 (depending on other factors). But if you have a route that has 5000 pax/daily demand, you can get rather full planes right from the start. At least now when there is no competition yet.

Here is an example of what I assume is a route working correctly:
https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/X/KORD/KMSN/?TB_iframe=true&width=800

Does not look too bad to me?  You have 11x daily with C208 with is clearly "too much" for that route.



Also, for any new actual game worlds the start money will be increased. This allows the airlines to run some losses while they build RI/CI.