8 replies to this topic

[Alpha Waffle]

Hi folks,

I've seen lots of posts about seat configurations and lots of out-of-date calculators, and so on. To rectify this problem, I'm providing my own data on seat selection for you to use.

Based on data I collected, route demand per class consistently follows the following trend:

Y: 86% of total demand
C: 12% of total demand
F: 2% of total demand

That is, on a route with 1000 passengers, you can reasonably expect 860 economy-class passengers, 120 business-class passengers and 20 first-class passengers.

Now, for seat configuration, capacity per aircraft is based on an all-economy configuration. First- and business-class seats take up more space in the following way:

Y: 1 economy seat
C: 1.6 economy seats
F: 2.5 economy seats

Note that these are always rounded up, so with a capacity of 100, you can the following example configurations:

0F, 1C, 98Y (total used capacity: 99.4)
0F, 2C, 96Y (total used capacity: 99.2)
1F, 0C, 97Y (total used capacity: 99.5)

This means you can optimize by, for example, placing first-class seats in multiples of 2 and business-class seats in multiples of 5:

0F, 5C, 92Y (total used capacity: 100)
2F, 0C, 95Y (total used capacity: 100)

Therefore to match the number of per-class seats with the amount of per-class demand, we want the following:

86 Y seats with 1 capacity for 86 used capacity.
12 C seats with 1.6 capacity for 19.2 used capacity.
2 F seats with 2.5 capacity 5 used capacity.

So adding this up we have a total capacity of 110.2, so as a percentage of total capacity we have:

Y: ~78.0% of total capacity
C: ~17.4% of total capacity
F: ~4.5% of total capacity

An aircraft with a capacity of 551 would perfectly match these requirements and have an ideal seating arrangement.

Based on this data, the following configurations are within 1% of the ideal ratios:

164-166 cap: 128-130Y 18C 3F
219-222 cap: 171-173Y 24C 4F
328-333 cap: 256-260Y 36C 6F
437-443 cap: 341-346Y 48C 8F
546-556 cap: 426-434Y 60C 10F
601-602 cap: 469-470Y 65C 11F
604-612 cap: 471-478Y 66C 11F
655-658 cap: 511-514Y 71C 12F
659-667 cap: 514-521Y 72C 12F

_{(Note that I have removed ranges for which there are no applicable aircraft in-game)}

In general, in terms of the maximum available seats in an all-economy configuration, the number of seats per class as a percentage of this maximum are:

Y: 78.04%
C: 10.89%
F: 1.81%

_{(Note that these do not add up to 100% because of the capacity losses from first- and business-class seats)}

So to calculate the number of seats you should assign, take the total capacity A stated in-game and do the following:

Y seats = [ 0.780399274 × A ]
C seats = [ 0.108892922 × A ]
F seats = [ 0.01814882 × A ]

where [ x ] is x rounded to the nearest integer.

I have attached a spreadsheet with the ideal configuration for every capacity up to 853, the A380-800.

I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Attached Files

•  SeatConfigurations.xlsx   65.09KB   375 downloads

[TNT88]

Side note: This is good for unrealistic players who wants to follow demand strictly, but not for realistic airlines.

[atnt71eb]

Alpha pretty much gets this dead on. Let me provide a few useful rules of thumb that I use and a caveat. 

 

Rule of thumb: To get ideal F seats, divide capacity by 55 and round down. For C, multiply F by 6. Everything else Y. Adjust so your remainder isn't 0.2, rather 0 or .8. 

 

Caveat: The game is more forgiving of excess Y capacity, that's why you definitely want to round down for F and C. It's much better to have more Y than ideal than to have excessive F/C. 

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

Next topic would be ratio of prices across distances, and the profit-maximizing ideal for those distances.

[atnt71eb]

duplicate

[Alpha Waffle]

Next topic would be ratio of prices across distances, and the profit-maximizing ideal for those distances.

 

Already done. The "real-world demand" feature severely skews ticket prices, but for all other routes not included in the real-world update the price is $0.28/mile.

[Alpha Waffle]

I lied. Price per mile is more complicated than that, and appears to be some collection of linear functions. I'm running an experiment now.

[atnt71eb]

I lied. Price per mile is more complicated than that, and appears to be some collection of linear functions. I'm running an experiment now.

 

It's a discontinuous linear function with price breaks after 99, 199, 299, 399, 1499, 2999, 5999, and 8999 miles. That's why shorter routes are nearly always more profitable. 

 

My "next" point was addressing the Y:C:F price ratios, which would influence the optimal configuration choices if one knows in advance on which length of routes the planes will be used. IIRC these ratios change with distance (as they should - the utility of a bigger seat is greater over longer distances). It's not something I've ever paid close attention to, however.

[Alpha Waffle]

My "next" point was addressing the Y:C:F price ratios, which would influence the optimal configuration choices if one knows in advance on which length of routes the planes will be used. IIRC these ratios change with distance (as they should - the utility of a bigger seat is greater over longer distances). It's not something I've ever paid close attention to, however.

 

Interesting. I'll look into it.

[Pacific]

It's not something I've ever paid close attention to, however.

The Empire only ever operates flight distances that can be walked.