1)504 Gateway Time-out

2) 1655, GMT+8

3) http://ae31.airline-...om/aircraft.php

4) I was trying to access the aircraft page to adjust some aircraft routing.

5) The problem has been reoccurring for 10 minutes after constant refreshing and reaccessing of the page.

6) O1 World, Air Formosa, Keelung

I was recently trying to order 65 new A319-100LR to replace my aging fleet and as usual the winglets option was set on "Yes" which I would not change sensibly as winglets would save fuel. However once I confirmed the purchase the new page would show "This aircraft cant have winglets installed at this time!" and I can't make the purchase. As I have ordered A319-100LRs' before with winglets, I was wondering if this problem has to do with the Airbus A320 series getting the new "Sharklets" installed and the data on the new fuel savings are unknown. Also, is it due to the fact that up till now only A320-200s have Sharklets installed like the once on AirAsia's and the ones for A319s are still undergoing tests? Or maybe is it just because there is a bug? 

 

On the side note, is it possible that we could order airplanes of the same series together? For example I would like to order A318s, A319s and A320 at the same time, and airlines can schedule the delivery of airplanes themselves so they can be able to receive planes of different types of the same series in interlocking order however they like. I know that this might complicate the purchase of airplanes all together on the discounts we get, but it would surely be helpful for airlines as they might need different types of aircraft of the same series at the same time, just like any airline in the real world would. I guest this would make the game more realistic, and if the management can pull this off, a big THANK YOU to you!.

 

Air Formosa, O1

• I would like to have Pearl White as a base, maybe like the design of ANA's first 2 787-8s, but with Viridian Green instead of the blue. The wave would reach the second door not the third but still curving down at the rear of the fuselage like the original design on ANA. However I would want to do away with the 3 white stripes but at the same time retaining the white line that crosses the three, while replacing white color with Volcano Red. This Volcano Red line would start from the tip of the vertical stabilizer like ANA but I would like it to curve down and curve back a bit to the belly then thin-out. In addition I would like to have the stripe that United's have on their 787 from the nose to the tail, replacing Gold with Madagascar Orange.
• My airline's name "AIR FORMOSA" in capitals would be painted over the fuselage like Virgin Atlantic with a slick font but not too thin and big in Lightning Silver. The name would cover the Viridian Green painted fuselage while the other colors would go across it. Lastly, I would like the shape of Taiwan in Lightning Silver be painted on the vertical stabilizer. I don't really know what designs should be made over the shape, so feel free to add, however I would like the livery to be "clean" with no extra bits and pieces.
• Boeing 787-8/9 (Preferred), Airbus A350-900R or any aircraft of the A320 series, but certainly not Boeing 737s as I'm phasing them out of the airline to streamline my fleet.
• The logo would be a shrink of the livery, but feel free to use your imagination.

I hope I'm not asking too much of a favor, a BIG THANK YOU TO YOU!!!!

Air Formosa, World O1
Keelung

Bugs, as I have thought so. Everyone's getting a lot of them lately...

Well on my second note, just trying to make suggestions to make the game more realistic and better, however, the game is already an AWESOME game.

 

Thank you Airline Empires team!

Arad International Airport's IATA Code is ARW

Beaufort County Airport's IATA Code is BFT, FAA LID is ARW

AE Management has mistook Beaufort's FAA LID as IATA Code and now Arad International Airport is missing.

Beaufort is also spelled wrongly as "Beaufont"

Hope that this would make the game just a little better

Regards,
Keelung

Maybe I'm too elaborate. Just take inspirations from my idea. Thank you!

Forget whatever I posted before. Just build upon your own imagination! Thank You! 

When our airlines get big with a lot of routes, it will be a nightmare to open the Airline Summary page as the computer will be lagging just trying to compute and pin-point the routes on Google Maps provided. I don't think it makes sense to have Google Maps in the Airline Summary page as we already have them on the My Routes page and Alliance Routes page where in both cases there will be no problem loading. Maybe being a "summary" of the airline, players would want to have that Google Maps beside just for the feel of it, but is it possible if we could have a function in the settings where we can choose to switch it off. It is getting seriously annoying when I'm trying to view the average age of aircraft as it is not clear enough in the Aircraft page and loading the Airline Summary page would just cause my browser to crash. Thank you!

I do use GC maps though, but its rather inconvenient as I would mostly view My routes page and not the alliance map. Just wondering if we can turn it off for good and not affect the other functions.

Thank You!

• Airport Name: Naypyidaw Airport
• ICAO Code: VYNT
• IATA Code NPT
• Passenger Numbers: No idea
• Coordinates: 19°37′24″N 096°12′03″E
• Runway length: 12000ft/3657m
• Country: Burma (Myanmar)
• Naypyidaw

World O1, Air Formosa

 

Somehow I was logged as a hacker while I was trying to install winglets on my new Airbus....interesting.

I did numerous long-haul flights in FSX, TPE-LAX,TPE-SFO,TPE-EWR, TPE-YVR, TPE-KIX-JFK, TPE-NRT-HNL, TPE-LHR, TPE-FRA, TPE-CDG, TPE-AMS and a lot more that I can't remember on EVA Air and China Airliens. I always do it before sleep, so I could just set it on autopilot and land the next day. Sometimes sh%t happens, things fail and the plane crashes. I don't do it anymore, it's a waste of time and electricity.

<p>I think we should separate the concept of slots from gates, they are two different matters. Slots are the rights to land and takeoff at the airport which can be owned by the airport, bought by airlines, or leased by airlines from the airport or other airlines. The cost of utilizing the slots either owned or leased should be determined by the Category of the aircraft being flown into the airport. There should be a limited number of slots per week, but considering the number of airlines and airplanes they operate in AE, unless there is a system where airlines can finance airport expansion which costs astronomically and takes years to construct in the game, we should include a unrealistic number of slots. In case an airport runs out of slots like London Heathrow, if there are slots owned by airlines which are unused for a given period of time, the slots would be placed on sale or lease on market. If the slots are leased from other airlines, they will be returned and the airline which owns the slot would be alerted through mail and if the slots belong to the airport authority they be just be returned and placed back on market.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Gates can either be owned by the airport or airlines through terminals. Operating costs should be lower if airlines own the gates or terminals. The number of aircraft that can use a single gate in a week will be determined by the aircraft's turnaround time. So theoretically, it will be the number of minutes a gate has, which will be 11080 minutes a week. Airports would lease gates out in minutes. Airlines can choose to lease their gates out in minutes to other airlines. If the airport runs out of gates, airlines can choose to construct a new terminal or expand from their own.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>I guess this would make the game more realistic but I hope it doesn't complicate things</p>

I was wondering if we can actually set up catering companies and maintenance companies through our own airlines like major carriers do in the real world. We will be able to save costs on our catering and maintenance expenses and offer these services to other airlines. I think maintenance should remain flawless (unless we set up a crash system), while airlines can compete in catering services through prices and quality of ingredients used, staff expertise et cetera which would affect the customers' satisfaction of the meal. If airlines set up catering and/or maintenance subsidiaries at airport A, they would only be able to use their own service at A and will have to opt for other companies at other location unless they open one there as well. Slots should be allocated to these services. For example, a catering company can only handle a definite number of first class meals, business class meals and economy respectively, unless it is expanded. Same goes for maintenance services, with a X number of (size) hangers would only be able to handle fixed number of narrow bodies of certain class, fixed number of wide bodies or a mix. Airlines can choose to offer any number of slots  to other airlines regardless of whether they can handle their own if they find it financially beneficial to opt for default. These  companies can also be sold on the market with prices determined by AE so no airline can cheat in the game. It would also be great if we can sell individual hangers or plants like we do with terminals. These companies, like aircraft, when left idle would lose money (payment of salary and taxes etc.) . It should cost hundreds of millions or even billions so that it would only be financially beneficial in the long run (5~10 years) to allow the market to be regulated not saturated. I guess this addition would make the game a whole lot interesting and realistic!

I think due to AE's unusually high demand for aircraft, we should have a totally different system of delivery from the current one that is similar to those of real life. 

 

For example, for the Airbus A320 series production line, we can have 20 slots per AE day which amounts to 140 slots per week. Each airline would only be limited to 2 slot per AE day for receiving aircraft, a maximum of 4 per AE week, 12 per AE month and 100 per AE year. This means that when airlines are ordering their aircraft, they can either opt for the system to evenly spread their orders or they can choose the available slots they want. Airlines can factor in when they are able to play the game and the number of aircraft they can possibly handle. This system would ensure that big airlines would not be hogging slots and deter them to receive more aircraft than they can cope as they would be piling up aging unused aircraft. This would also allow players who have the time to be able to grow their airline as fast as possible with their limited time. If airlines choose to defer their aircraft, they would still have to pick slots and their original slots would be opened to others.

 

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.

We should not allow any airlines to pick delivery slots which are after the fixed game-ending year.

 

Therefore, this system would still be based on the "first come first served" basis, but with a lot more flexibility for airlines to plan ahead which would really bring out the airline "manager" part of the game.

Aero (Alliance) strives to provide the best service and experience to our customers, aiming to become a major and premium alliance of Airline Empires.

We are in preparations to officially launch Aero in World ( S3-B )

We need

- Deputy Manager

- Image Designer

- Airline Route Coordinator

All members would be authorised under approval to use the "Aero" name in any world to form an alliance, The board should notified before doing so. However,new members would have to apply to the alliance before being allowed to join any alliance under the name "Aero".

Players who are interested, please contact Keelung as soon as possible.

Please list your current airlines and the expertise you can provide to the alliance
All founding members would have to be involved in forming alliance rules and regulations

New Players in Airline Empires are very welcomed!

Regards,
Keelung

I was wondering if we can change the original settings and build airport terminals in foreign soil since in the real world companies do own airport terminals in foreign countries. One obvious example would be Terminal 7 at JFK which is owned by British Airways, Terminal 1 is also owned by four different foreign carriers - Lufthansa, Air France, Japan Airlines and Korean Air. There are also many more examples but the point is, the restriction that airlines cannot build terminals on foreign soil does not relate to real life, so I think this has to be changed. Hope this would make the game fairer and more realistic.

May I just point out this would be another step to taking a realistic world to an open world. In all honesty I think alliance terminals are the way forward.

Great point, very much looking forward to that, we can try it like in AE 3.2

For players who are interested, please submit your entry as follows on this page:

 

1. Current airlines you are operating (Name, World, Fleet number, Ranking, Link to airline etc.)

2. Expertise you can provide to the alliance

3. Your time zone/Current location

4. Average time a week you spend on Airline Empires

5. How long you have been playing Airline Empires

6. What kind of world would you like to operate in

7. Aims you have for the alliance

8. Any other ideas that would be crucial for the alliance

 

Hurry up and apply!

Though I still think that airlines should be able to build terminals on foreign soil which doesn't affect the fact that airlines cannot fly to other countries from this foreign airport in the realistic worlds. Unless we introduce the "via" system where airlines are allowed to fly from foreign soil to other countries with fifth freedom rights or open skies agreement, I don't see this going to affect our game play much now.

I don't think it should be limited, it should be more expensive.

I think it can be chosen whether the stop is a refuel stop or a revenue stop when you set up a route. We'll see.

May I just point out this would be another step to taking a realistic world to an open world. In all honesty I think alliance terminals are the way forward.

I still think that airlines should be allowed to owned terminals on foreign soil. Although this would make the "R" worlds different only by not allowing carriers to operate on foreign soil to other foreign countries, it is all the difference we would need between "O" worlds and "R". Besides, it will make the "R" worlds one step more realistic.

By division, yes, terminals are cheaper than gates, but they are more expensive to maintain when most of the time you would only need one or two slots to an airport. Airlines would have to be desperate or filthy rich to build terminals on foreign soil. Most airlines would only resort to this if the destination is a virgin territory and worthy of an investment. However, I do think that in AE's case it would be better to have alliance terminals which would differ with reality, On the other hand, as I have mentioned on other topics that AE should separate the concept of "slots" and "gates" as they are two different things. You need slots as a right to fly in and out of an airport and you need gates to board or deplane passengers. If these two were separate, we wouldn't be facing the problem of needing to build terminals in order to fly into airports as airlines would only be using the slots they need to fly into airports and time slots for using gates, they wouldn't be holding on to any unused and wasted slots. Plus separating "slots" from "gates" would make alliance terminals look more prestigious as to people building terminals as and when they like. I hope that this would be implemented as AE already has the fundamentals like how long a type of aircraft would take to use a gate, so I guess it wouldn't be difficult to make this work. Besides, the point of all this discussion is to brainstorm the ways to make this game better and more real, which I believe my idea will and so as yours of having alliance terminals.