Hm, only 4 and 5 doesn't get a 5* rating either...

Guess I just have to keep trying or stay with my current 3* rating.

Thanks anyways!

Hey,

I know there have been topic on this before, but I couldn't find the answer I was looking for.

I have tried A LOT of combinations of different foods with different prices, but even by offering 5*, 4* and 3* food for free I wasn't able to recieve a 5* food rating.

So the main question is: What quality/price combination results in a 5* food rating?

Btw, I am trying to create a somewhat realistic IFS, so I probably wouldn't offer 3 different food types for free (at least not in B and Y).

At the moment I have a 3* IFS and just wanted to maybe improve it to a 4*.

If someone has a realistic and good rated accessories combination I would be happy to hear it as well.

Thanks in advance and have a great day

Karoue

Because of this anti-competitive behavior I can not operate a profitable 7 x Weekly (1 x Day) flight

on sector ATL - ORD [...]
 

Then let the route go and concentrate on other routes. It happens. Sometimes I also let a route go if I can not or do not want to face the competition.

Because of this anti-competitive behavior I can not operate a profitable 7 x Weekly (1 x Day) flight

on sector ATL - ORD [...]
 

Then let the route go and concentrate on other routes. It happens. Sometimes I also let a route go if I can not or do not want to face the competition.

Thanks for the answer!

But are the routes automatically recalculated when the demand changes?

Because if not, I doesn't seem to make so much sense!?

Hello,

I have noticed more than once, that passenger demand decreases on certain routes.

I usually match the number of available seats as closely as possible to the requested number.

However when I sometimes change the IFS on a route and the route is recalculated I notice that I suddenly offer way more seats then necessary (without changing seat number).

Are these changes automatically simulated? (e.g. according to the current season or just randomly)

Are the changes only taking effect when I manually recalulate the route (e.g. IFS change) or are all routes sometimes recalculated?

Here is my suggestion, I tried to keep it minimalistic like you said .

Unfortunately I didn't have a A320-200 template at hand, so I used an A319 . Maybe you want to use it anyways.

Hey!

Thanks for the replies!

Your other points are valid and good though (depite the fact that big aircraft can be tuned quite precisely too).

They can to a certain degree. However when I add (remove) 1 flight/week with e.g. a Fokker 27 (56 seats) the amount of daily seats increases (decreases) by 8 seats. However when I add (remove) a flight with a 737 (e.g. 136 seats) the daily seats increase (decrease) by ~19 seats.

So with smaller planes you are usually able to match the number of requested seats more closely.

(Of course you can still work with cabin layout and stuff but I think it is clear what I mean in general).

To add to your points: High frequency takes up a lot of slots, so a Cessna Caravan fleet doing 300 weekly runs will likely run into problems.

I added this to my first post (with credit) so others with the same question can easily find pro and cons, I hope that is ok.

Where did you get that part from? That equals more than 4 daily flights, which only routes between at least bigger spokes or big hubs can support. At my home airport ( ~ 10 mio pax/year) I can think of at most a handful routes getting 4 or more daily flights.

I know, that is why I said that I can't imagine it bo realistic for small routes. For big routes however this seems to happen (as discussed here (http://www.airline-e...s-on-one-route/) with reference to http://en.wikipedia....craft_movements

My point was that I end up with 25 R/T per week when I try to serve a 200 pax/day route with a small plane (e.g. F27 with 56 seats). This seems unrealistic to me, but it also feels wrong to serve a less than 250 miles trip with a 737 (although I have no information if that is unusal in the real world).

Of course there are many aircrafts available so you can probably find one that fits well for these parameters but if you try to operate only a few a/c families it is not always an option.

High flight frequency doesn't always mean high reputation. I believe maximum reputation can be achieved between 15-35 flights a week. 60 flights per week give the same amount of reputation as 5 per week.

That would make sense, I'll try to monitor this.

Greetings,

Karoue

Hello!

I am currently wondering about whether to use small airplanes with a higher frequency or larger planes with lower frequencies.

Using small airplanes has some advantages:

• less fuel costs
• less leasing and maintenance costs
• higher frequency -> better frequency reputation
• number of available seats/day can be tuned more precisely

However I also see two disadvantages:

• small planes (e.g. truboprops) are often slower -> uses more hours
• more flights are necessary -> uses more hours
• high frequency takes up a lot of slots (pointet out by mxax-ai)

I would like to hear some other opinions and also how other people decide whether to use a small or big plane.

I know that 30 R/T per week are realistic in general but somehow I can't believe that they are so realistic on small routes like TUN-CTA with less than 200 pax/day.

Greetings,

Karoue

Hey,

Thank your very much for the liveries, they are both great!

How did you make the logo?

If you are talking about the logos I attached in the starting post:

I made them with PowerPoint. Sounds crazy, but in my opinion it is an easy way to quickly make a logo like this. PowerPoint offers some nice text effects and you can easily cycle through the fonts and in the end you just save it as an image.

Image editing softwares like Photoshop or Paint.net are certainly more suited for logo creation in general, but for my purpose it would have made things more complicated.

Hello ,

I would be happy if someone wants to make a livery for my airline TunisFly.

The plane should not be too big, so probably a 737 or something like that

I would prefer something simple and plain that goes with the logos:

Thanks in advance

Maybe I am wrong, but as far as I know you need a hub when you want to rent many gates at one airport:

From the FAQ:

Open worlds (O1, O2, ...) [...] You can lease up to 40% of the gates at any one airport (75% if it's a hub); [...]

Realistic worlds (R1, R2, ...) [...] You can lease up to 5 gates at any one airport (15 if it's a hub); [...]

And also from the FAQ:

What are the benefits of a hub?
Hubs provide you with connecting passengers (see above) on routes departing/arriving at that hub. However, a hub also doubles your gate rental fees at that airport (due to extra staffing costs).

So IMHO a hub only makes sense when you have reached the gate limit at an airport since I do not think that the connecting passengers compensate for the doubled gate rental fee (especially since connecting passengers make only half as much money as regualr passengers and are only effective if your loadfactor is not already 100%).

Greetings,

Karoue

No other airline on the route and yes, it is consistent. 

The classes are indeed independent, so adjusting C fares should not affect Y loadfactor as you described. I will have to look into this.

Here is an actual example, maybe it helps to find the problem:

Route: DUS Dusseldorf - TRI Tripoli

Frequency: 3 flights/week

Aircraft: A300-600R

No competition

Case 1:

Y: 399$ -> 100% (131/131)

C: 659$ -> 100% (6/6)

Case 2:

Y: 399$ -> 99% (130/131)

C: 699$ -> 100% (6/6)

Case 3:

Y: 399$ -> 98% (128/131)

C: 1049$ -> 100% (6/6)

Case 4:

Y: 399$ -> 100% (!!!) (131/131)

C: 1099$ -> 100% (6/6)

Case 5:

Y: 399$ -> 100% (131/131)

C: 1199$ -> 67% (4/6)

The only thing I changed was the C price. On some other routes the Y loadfactor decreased even more than just down to 98%.

However I did not notice before this explicit test that the factor rises if you keep increasing C prices   .

I hope this information helps to find the issue.

My understanding is that the three service classes are meant to be completely independent of each other...

That would make sense for me... in this case it seems to be a bug.

Thanks for your reply , but it is the other way round: I keep the Y prices constant so that I have 100% Y. I do not change the Y prices anymore.

Instead I increase the C pricess by lets say 100$. C remains on 100% but Y drops to e.g. 98%.

So C class is actually far off Y class, the prices for C class are at least twice as much. But still the Y loadfactor drops and not the C loadfactor. 

So while I do understand and agree with your point it does not seem applicable for this situation

Hello,

Scenario: I have BC loadfactor 100% and EC loadfactor 100%

Now I keep raising the BC prices to squeeze the most money out of my passengers . I usually would expect, that at a certain point the BC loadfactor drops. But instead the EC loadfactor starts to decrease while the BC loadfactor continues to be 100% (at least until I raise the prices even more).

Maybe it is a bug, but if not I would be very interested in the explanation for this behaviour since I don't really understand it .

Thanks!

Hey,

if more help is needed you can add me to the list as well, my native language is German and I also have a basic knowledge of French

Thanks for all the replies!

The game won't allow you to set up a disconnected route on the same aircraft, so like mxax said you will have to have at least 1 flight on DRS-DUS so that the schedule is physically connected.

Ah, so I guess whenever I recieve a "plane schedule incompatible" message that is because I do not have such a ferry flight?

Thanks for clearing things up

Hey,

I am sorry for the poorly chosen title, but I don't know how to describe my question in a better way. I also want to apologise for my English not being the best, but it isn't my mother tongue .

So here is what I am wondering about:

Assuming I set up a route from DRS to HHN, then it says "Route: DRS - HHN - DRS" when looking at a specific flight. So the plane flies to HHN and comes back to DRS.

But what happens if I set up another route for the same plane starting from a different airport, like DUS - BRE. I assume that the (empty) transfer from DRS to DUS uses up some of the aircrafts hours, but I would be happy if someone could confirm this.

I also wonder how things behave if I add a route from DRS to DUS. Since the route shows up as "DRS - DUS - DRS" I guess it wouldn't really change anything.

Long story short: Until now I tried to operate one plane from only one airport to avoid losing hours for transfers. This is not always convenient and sometimes I would like a plane to fly like from node to node, e.g. DRS - HHN - BRE - DUS and then maybe back to DRS. But if my assumptions above are right, I would lose a ton of hours.

So basically I just hope someone can clear things up, even if that would only mean to confrim my current estimate.

Thanks!

Great game by the way, thanks for offering something like this free of charge!