15 replies to this topic

[D.Y.]

It seems there are a lot of discussions about gatehogging here. The proponents of it claim that it happens in real life too - but however it would be completely impossible to see an airline operating for example Paris CDG-Paris Orly route 40 times a day with Beechcrafts. As I do believe one of the main goals of airline simulation needs to be realism, a total ban of gatehogging would perhaps be bad, but this practice should be restricted to realistic ammounts.

In my opinion, this is what should be implemented:

After the airport runs out of gates (and there are no airlines anymore that does not use their gates) the airport would send messages threatening to revoke gates for all airlines, which fly small aircraft many times a day to the same destination. These airlines would have to switch to larger aircraft (if there is demand) or decrease frequency and, in order to keep gates, add new routes. Probably aircraft under 100 seats would be considered "small", this message could be sent to airlines which operate same route either over 5, over 7 or over 10 times a day with small aircraft and the ammount of gates to be revoked would depend on the ammount of such flights (leaving only 1 or 2 gates for same route).

Gateghogging therefore would still be possible, but more realistic - the airlines would have to operate more different routes; and due to the limit of airports close enough it would mean that the total ammount of gates possible to gatehog would be somewhat limited as well.

Another measure that might be implemented togther with this one is that after there are no more gates possible to revoke under this rule, airports would threaten to revoke gates for airlines which use small aircraft to fly to it (at first 19 seats, then 30 and so on; the ammount of gates to be revoked would depend on the ammount of gates used for flights with such aircraft), therefore forcing the change of various minor local routes to major ones and, over the time, further realistically restricting gatehogging (this measure would however effectively remove newly registered users from major airports later in the game, therefore is probably more controversial than the first one).

These measures in my opinion are realistic and goes together with interests of the airports.

[Glennos]

A much easier solution would be to only allow a certain amount of gates per city per airline unless you build a terminal.

But this has been mentioned many times and nothing as yet has been done and until it is the issue of gate hogging / holding whatever you wish to call it will be with us.

[LOT 737-300]

I like Glenno's suggestion. See, small scale gate hogging (in other words, holding a gate or 2 for a plane that will come in 2 AE months or less) is ok, large scale gate hogging in my opinion is just not cool. I still fail to see why these large scale gate hoggers don't build a terminal. I mean when I operated last round out of VKO, I had 10 gates, but eventunally, I couldn't get anymore gates, so I just built a 20 gate terminal and it didn't affect me that badly in the Finance pages, it probebly helped me more than anything.

PS, I just freed up 17 gates at MCO after building a terminal, gave me some pretty hefty savings with the discount.

[D.Y.]

I guess the problem with this solution is that it would be way less realistic (and cause such illogical situations as to where someone based in otherwise empty airport, for example Johannesburg, would have to build terminals when there are great ammounts of unused gates and it wouldn't seem that they would run out soon). It would however be easier to implement (although my solution probably wouldn't require extremely great amount of PHP code either).

However, both solutions would be better than current situation in my opinion.

[Glennos]

And for the time being we can all read the following book available on Am(ozon) .com

[ian]

And for the time being we can all read the following book available on Am(ozon) .com

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Kcrwflyer]

HAHAHA. Who made that?

[Glennos]

HAHAHA. Who made that?

I did, and I had fun doing it

[watchdog]

And for the time being we can all read the following book available on Am(ozon) .com

that is the best post within this whole post

[sawilson1971]

How about limiting frequencies between cities that are close together. I know that LF is limited but why not the frequency. 5 x Daily on routes of less than 100nm for example.

[Maestro69]

Clever post Glennos... thats hilarious

[airozzie]

gosh that was absolute spiffing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[glarus]

How about limiting frequencies between cities that are close together. I know that LF is limited but why not the frequency. 5 x Daily on routes of less than 100nm for example.

I'm not saying that's a bad idea, but 5x is a bit low. Delta used to fly DCA-LGA every hour, the "Delta Shuttle" (I assume they still do). And that's not even a short route as is being discussed here (like CDG-ORY). Further, DCA and LGA are the most restricted airports in the US.

[sawilson1971]

OK. The idea is always open for tweeking im just thinking of ways to stop multiple flights to gates that are close together in order that they dont get hogged (CDG-ORY) being a very good example. Maybe no routes of less than 50nm or a max of 10x per day on routes of less than 100nm them?

[travelhouse]

OK. The idea is always open for tweeking im just thinking of ways to stop multiple flights to gates that are close together in order that they dont get hogged (CDG-ORY) being a very good example. Maybe no routes of less than 50nm or a max of 10x per day on routes of less than 100nm them?

Miller has stated in the forum many times that this game is to be as close to the real world. So just accept whats there and work around it. For the game is given to you FOC

[YamazaruNinja]

Personally, I believe that as there should be a lot of gates available at all cities. And maybe as there are fewer and fewer gates, they should cost more (I was relating this to real life)