sq_a380

Yes.
Hence why we need to go for a percentage, rather than star, based system. *cough*

Thanks Sheepy. That's the answer I was looking for.

I agree that the system should allow for a percentage-based ranking instead of just 5-stars. Hopefully we will see this in the coming versions of AE.

Now that's I've got your attention , please stay tuned as I upload the many pictures taken onboard SIA's last B747 flights. I assure you, it's worth waiting for

KUL-SIN A330 Business
SIN-HKG B747 Business
HKG-SIN B747 Economy

Hey 9M-TKS, I was on SQ748 HKG-SIN

EK has, for all intents and purposes, everything based at Dubai.
Although I do like the idea of bases, to continue allowing stopovers I'll propose this. Imagine it sort of as the add aircraft page.
Lets say this is ZRH-CDG. Each line is one aircraft 'group'. We'll say that the A330 group already flies 5 times per week to ZRH from GVA.
Aircraft Type/Configuration/Configuration Name/Group Base/Number of aircraft/Hours available (total)/Frequencies available for this route
A320-200 16C/129Y "EuroFly" ZRH 4 560 114
A320-200 20C/117Y "International" ZRH 2 280 114
A330-300 6F/32C/199Y "Long Haul" GVA 2 264 5
This should allow stopovers.

Good example. You clearly understand my concept.

This can also be applied to fifth freedom routes, for example if I want to operate SYD-SIN-LHR.

Say all my aircraft are based at SYD. Without opening a route from SYD-SIN, the system shows "No aircraft available" when I try to create a route for SIN.

So I create a SYD-SIN route 7x weekly.

Aircraft Type/Configuration/Configuration Name/Group Base/Number of aircraft/Hours available (total)/Frequencies available for this route
747-400 12F/50J/313Y "International" SYD 1 154 8 (When creating SYD-SIN)

assuming flight time 8hrs, connection time 1hr.
7 x 2 x (8+1) = 126
154-126 = 28

Aircraft Type/Configuration/Configuration Name/Group Base/Number of aircraft/Hours available (total)
747-400 12F/50J/313Y "International" SYD 1 28 (After creating SYD-SIN)

With 1 aircraft in the fleet, I have 28 hours left. Assuming 13hr flight time and 1hr connection for SIN-LHR, it allows me to create 1 weekly flight SIN-LHR, leaving me with 0 hours.

Aircraft Type/Configuration/Configuration Name/Group Base/Number of aircraft/Hours available (total)/Frequencies available for this route
747-400 12F/50J/313Y "International" SYD 1 28 1

So I buy another aircraft and assign it to this fleet. It becomes

Aircraft Type/Configuration/Configuration Name/Group Base/Number of aircraft/Hours available (total)/Frequencies available for this route
747-400 12F/50J/313Y "International" SYD 2 182 6

Still can only fly 6 frequencies. I decide to buy another 744.


Aircraft Type/Configuration/Configuration Name/Group Base/Number of aircraft/Hours available (total)/Frequencies available for this route
747-400 12F/50J/313Y "International" SYD 2 336 7(Limited to number of connecting flights from base)

Just a thought I may be wrong...

22 hours per aircraft for example....
2 A320's each with 3 hours remaining, you then set up a flight that has a return flight block time of around 5-6 hours.....

Would we still set-up the routes in same way by seeing a list of individual aircraft to assign frequencies too or would we just select the aircraft family to be used for X amount of frequencies.

I think the base idea is great, but we still need to have control over individual aircraft and how they operate.

The point of this system is so that we do not have to assign individual aircraft to routes, but rather assign them as a collective fleet. This is what happens in higher-management in airlines in real life.

Your example is correct, and is not impossible in real life. Aircraft do not operate the same flights every day and this allows for optimisation of aircraft hours and greater flexibility.

Individual aircraft rotation and scheduling is usually done at a lower level, and is not fixed. A particular aircraft is only assigned to the particular flight on the particular day around 2 weeks before the flight. This is subject to many changes depending on the circumstances.

Hope you understand what I'm saying

Would only be feasibly if we follow your suggestion? .... Everyone has an opinion but you can't just assume you're idea is the best It will likely be an optional extra for players, maybe only a part of certain rounds similar to how we already have realistic or open worlds. I did struggle to get my head around your idea, are you suggesting aircraft to be based at ONE airport and only serve flights at that one airport? if so I do agree with that with the understanding that stop overs and connections are being introduced soon so that the two features/ideas would work well together

I'm do not claim my suggestion to be the best and you clearly do not understand airline scheduling.

The current system limits players to schedule aircraft individually to operate the same flight x times per week. This does not happen in real life as it would make it impossible for airlines to operate flights at the same timing every day. Aircraft rotate on routes within their fleet and operate different flights on different days in real life, which allows for flexibility and optimal aircraft usage.

I would appreciate if you do not put words in my mouth just because you are not pleased with my views towards having the timetabling feature in AE.

In any case I'm happy with the idea of having automation when this feature is implemented.