56 replies to this topic

[Yuxi]

Right now, there is no real aircraft manufacturer backlog - every airline gets a new delivery ever X weeks. Some people have requested a more realistic backlog system, but a simple backlog would deny delivery slots to smaller airlines, as big airlines are able to order hundreds of aircraft at a time.

So if we were to implement a more realistic backlog, it would have to be somewhere in between. Also, the aircraft demand in AE is a lot higher than in real life, so using realistic production line speeds may not work either.

1) Should leased new aircraft come out of a limited pool of aircraft provided by leasing companies (who then order the aircraft using their own slots), or should we continue new aircraft leasing directly from manufacturers?

2) Assuming leased aircraft come out of a separate pool and the delivery system applies only to buying aircraft directly from manufacturers, should we keep the delivery system as is, or do you have other proposals on how to manage delivery schedules and the backlog?

In either case, if we have subsidiaries (each player having 1 "holding company" in each world), should delivery slots be shared among all carriers in that one holding company?

[QK Flight Industries]

• Should leased new aircraft come out of a limited pool of aircraft provided by leasing companies (who then order the aircraft using their own slots), or should we continue new aircraft leasing directly from manufacturers? Why not both? If you could create a market system which would allow airlines to choose leasing/buying from either the manufacturer or the lease companies, then put up and downsides to either. (e.g. Manufacturer provides better aircraft, but is more expensive to choose from; Lease companies only sell used aircraft at the end of their life (25+ years) and have a limited amount of lease aircraft, but provides a better price than the manufacturer, etc.)
• Assuming leased aircraft come out of a separate pool and the delivery system applies only to buying aircraft directly from manufacturers, should we keep the delivery system as is, or do you have other proposals on how to manage delivery schedules and the backlog? Perhaps if larger orders (5+ aircraft) are broken into blocks of 5 aircraft, then smaller orders (5 or less aircraft) get slotted in between the larger orders on the same delivery schedule as is currently implemented. This would make it a bit more fair to the smaller airlines.

In either case, if we have subsidiaries (each player having 1 "holding company" in each world), should delivery slots be shared among all carriers in that one holding company? Subsidiaries should be ordering aircraft through the parent company (e.g. Aero Lines and the aeroconnection are companies owned by the AE member (me)) and should therefore affect the pool of that one parent/holding company.

[El Cobrador]

I vote for keeping the current system.

[ccvl]

For the backlog, I suggest allowing airlines to use a maximum amount of the backlog, say 5-8% of available delivery slots. For leasing, new aircraft could be available within say 4 weeks from the companies but at a maybe 10% higher price. Subsidiaries, that would depend on the system.

[Royen]

The backlog at the moment seems fine to me! Even if it did change I probably won't notice it but if a change means making it more like real life, I'm all for it!

[Yuxi]

The backlog at the moment seems fine to me! Even if it did change I probably won't notice it but if a change means making it more like real life, I'm all for it!

If anything, making it more realistic would mean fewer and slower deliveries. So be careful what you ask for

[Royen]

If anything, making it more realistic would mean fewer and slower deliveries. So be careful what you ask for

I mean with the backlog process!

[Sheepy]

One possibility for the backlog process would be to maintain something similar to the current system where there is overall an unlimited number of slots, however as the backlog increases, the time taken for delivery could increase significantly as well. For example, with a backlog of zero aircraft, an A320 would take 2 weeks per aircraft. However, with a backlog of 100, it would take eighteen days, and with a backlog of one thousand it could take five to six weeks. This would prevent a completely full queue, however would maintain an element of backlogs in aircraft queues.

As for leasing, I do believe we should continue direct leasing from the manufacturer, however limit it considerably if you don't actually need to lease. (e.g. an airline with 10,000 aircraft should only be able to buy).

[sviridovt]

I am for keeping current system, ever checked the backlog of those trololo's ordering 5500 planes that are delivered way past the game world end

[un1]

I'm going against Yuxi here and saying that having any form of backlog will ruin any form of balance this game has.

[Delta787]

As for leasing, I do believe we should continue direct leasing from the manufacturer, however limit it considerably if you don't actually need to lease. (e.g. an airline with 10,000 aircraft should only be able to buy).

There could be a limit put in place for these 'mega-airlines' from clogging up space when ordering aircraft. Like, if your fleet is 700+ aircraft, you are automatically required to purchase your aircraft. Airlines with fleets that big shouldn't have to lease, they should buy, no questions asked!

[ar157]

In either case, if we have subsidiaries (each player having 1 "holding company" in each world), should delivery slots be shared among all carriers in that one holding company?

Yes and one would be able to swap around their time of delivery of their aircraft with subsidiaries. A bit off topic but i reckon slots at airports should also be shared.

[BritAbroad]

I agree with QK to an extent.


On another note, I am against forcing larger airlines to buy, rather than lease. Sometimes, to fill gaps I've leased things for 1 year, or less. This is similar to real life.

[QK Flight Industries]

I agree with QK to an extent.


On another note, I am against forcing larger airlines to buy, rather than lease. Sometimes, to fill gaps I've leased things for 1 year, or less. This is similar to real life.

What about limiting how long they can extend a lease, or limiting discounts for extending a lease? Say there is one base lease cost, no discounts, and contract for 3 years max, which will then sell the aircraft unless purchased before then.

[mrvol]

Guys, the current backlog does not reflect the real life. When a OEM as a long backlog they increase the production rate.

Right now its always the same in AE no matter the amount of order.

As an exemple, when Bombardier had 500 more CRJ 200 on order they increased the rate to 1.66 aircraft a day

This being said OEM can change their rate of production depending on the demand.

Let me know what you think about it!

[Yuxi]

What about limiting how long they can extend a lease, or limiting discounts for extending a lease? Say there is one base lease cost, no discounts, and contract for 3 years max, which will then sell the aircraft unless purchased before then.

I am also against disallowing large airlines from leasing. It's not realistic. And the problem is that large airlines (when they do lease) tend to lease in larger quantities, so they would get more discounts, not less.

[BritAbroad]

I see no problem with large-scale leasing in general. It happens in the real world. For instance, 99% of trains operated by private companies on the UK's railway system are leased.

[captaink]

I mentioned it in another thread, but what about dividing up leases into two categories: Capital leases and operating leases. Operating leases are effectively what having leasing companies would achieve (i.e. one company leasing planes to another company for given time periods, with the plane returning to the lessor at the end of the term). Capital leases would be a "lease to own" system where after a certain amount is paid for the aircraft, it is yours. Capital leases would only be offered by the manufacturer, and could be restricted to smaller airlines only. Also, there should be a stiffer penalty for buying out a lease, as I've got a feeling this is how most big airlines are abusing the system.

This would allow large airlines to still lease planes, without the system leading to huge backlogs.

[mariowebbocious]

what about the same kind of aircraft is not sent to different airline in the same day.
i.e:
3 airlines ordered/leased a Boeing 737200
at the time of delivery, usually all of them will receive the aircraft in the same day.
Airline A january 20
Airline B january 20
Airline C january 20
and so on...
what about sending the second aircraft for the next airline in the next day of first airline delivery?
like this:
Airline A january 20
Airline B january 21
Airline C january 22
the order might be based on several case, i.e: credit rating, reputation, or first ordered first delivered...

But that's just my thought...

because sometimes i feel it is unrealistic to see manufacture deliver 10 aircraft of the same type to 10 different airlines in the same day, and in the next day it still delivers another 10 aircraft to another 10 different airlines...

of course, this will hugely slowing down the aircraft delivery to every airline..
but maybe this could stop airlines growing too fast...

tell me if this has discussed before...

[Pineair]

would prefer to see unrealistic orders voided. For example in R5, which ends in 2025, one airline has ordered so many A380s that the last delivery is scheduled for 2051. If you make significant changes to the current set up you need to think of the implications.