joflo

I increased the frequency on the route TXL-LHR from 28 weekly to 42 weekly (all MD-81, if that matters), and yet the rating for the flight frequency decreased from 80 to 70.

I also tried to reproduce it on a new route. I opened TXL-CDG with 28 weekly flights, and the rating was 80. Then I added 14 additional flights, and it went down to 70, as before. Closing the 14 flights brought it back up to 80, and adding them once more back down to 70.

It is probably not waht you would actually call a bug, but I did not no where else to put it:

It happened that I started flights on a route with strong competition in C and Y seats (TXL-CPH, more than 3 times as many seats than demand). Eventually it turned out for me that I made most profit when setting the C price to $99 and the Y price to $129, getting 73% loadfactor in C and 48% loadfactor in Y. Although I guess that this arises from the fact that Y and C seats are calculated separately and therefore there is no actual bug, it is a rather strange behaviour of the passengers going for the more expensive Y seats when there are cheaper C tickets available, isn't it?

In case you want to reproduce, here the seats (daily) and ticket prices :

Airline A: 66 C ($99), 621 Y ($50)
Airline B: 1 C ($164), 21 Y ($75)
Airline C: 51 C ($99), 480 Y ($129)
Airline D: 64 C ($99), 592 Y ($56)

I've got a very small airline, but have huge training costs. Whilst for pilots, flight attendants and others there is some point in it, as my airline is fast growing, I also pay quite a lot for executive training: $240,000 each month, although I only have 3 executives and an attrition rate of 2.72% for this group.

I just tried to find out how the IFS pricing works, and arrived at some strange effect:

When I chose only one breakfast option (free of charge), the maximum income (or more appropriate cost) per passenger is the cost of the meal, e.g. $-24 for a 4star breakfast; additionally the base costs are $16. If I offer two options, the per passenger cost increases: for two 4 star options the maximum income per passenger becomes $-71, the base cost increases to $44. If I add a third option (also 4 star), the per passenger income and base cost remain at $-71 and $44 dollar respectively.

Although a sight increase might be possible, if the airline takes a bit more meals than passengers to be able to fulfil unexpected changes in the demand for one option or the other, this should not increase the cost so dramatically - even in the unrealistic case that the airline is so nice to have of both options as many meals as passengers on board, the costs should just double. Or in other words: I guess there is a bug.

By the way: I did those tests with the IFS without choosing any other options but the breakfast.

Edit: I also tested the same, but now setting the price for the breakfast to $40. If I only offer one option, I can make a maximum profit of $16 per pax (which is reasonable, as the 4star breakfast costs 24$). For both two or three options, the maximum income increases to $49 per pax.

I tried to set a DHC-7 on the route TXL-PSA, and I am told that the payload is restricted to 36 passengers. However, the planes are still filled to 44 passengers (the maximum of my seating configuration).