Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Under Development / Wish List / Suggestions / Re: Fuel burn per seat
« Last post by camron on September 10, 2020, 06:11:57 pm »
747-400 burns less fuel per seat than the 747-100? wonders never cease.
12
Under Development / Wish List / Suggestions / Re: Fuel burn per seat
« Last post by NorthCoast on September 09, 2020, 01:32:27 pm »
According to Wikipedia, yes. However Wikipedia can be wrong, better use SeatGuru as a reference.

Here is an all-economy 767-300ER:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Thomson_Airways/Thomson_Airways_Boeing_767-300ER_V4.php

It seats 328, which is 22 less than the 350 it's supposed to seat in the game. Wikipedia can claim seating capacities of 269 and 218, but TUI has proven Wikipedia wrong.

I couldn't find any all-economy 787s, but this is the closest:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Scoot_Airlines/Scoot_Airlines_Boeing_787-800.php

It seats 335 while the front section is premium economy. If you'd convert that into regular economy as well, it could seat about 350. Then keep in mind in the game this plane only seats 250, which would be 100 too little. Again Wikipedia has been proven wrong as they only claim a seating capacity of 242.

Of course there are airlines with lower seating capacities on these planes, but they shouldn't be counted because they include business and first. Seating capacity listed in the game is all-economy, the capacity is being lowered if you add business and/or first. So you shouldn't lower it double.
13
Game FAQ / Let's play Airline-club!
« Last post by patson on September 07, 2020, 05:17:39 pm »
A very nice video series created by Sky Chariot ! :)

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2ZQQcKdU0KhJiPLzLxNKjQ
14
Airport and City Suggestions / Caribbean vacation destination fixes
« Last post by RogueAir on September 06, 2020, 03:12:24 pm »
Not going to bother suggesting adding small airports that are missing from the caribbean since it's probably not worth the server load. But the airports that do exist in the game world seem incorrect in terms of country openness and lack of 'vacation hub' charms.

Looking specifically at:
AXA - Propose change Country Openness to 6 - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~150k - 175k)
SXM - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~400k - 500k) - Propose airport scale 4 (KLM 747's arriving are still all over the internet)
SBH - Propose change Country Openness to 6 - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~200k)
SKB - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~150k SPLIT BETWEEN SKB AND NEV BELOW)
NEV - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~150k SPLIT BETWEEN NEV AND SKB ABOVE)
ANU - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~200k) - Propose airport scale 4
MNI - Propose change Country Openness to 5 (but no tourist charm, usually have scheduled service to Antigua and charter to Anguilla, but low tourism @ ~10k)
DCF - Propose add Tourist Hub charm low though (annual tourists only ~65k)
FDF - Propose change Country Openness to 6 - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~500k) - Propose change scale to scale 4 (flights from France come in)
SLU - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~400k SPLIT BETWEEN SLU AND UVF BELOW)
UVF - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~400k SPLIT BETWEEN SLU AND UVF BELOW) - Propose change to scale 3 (lots of flights from US, lots of A320's)
SVD - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~80k) - Propose change to scale 3  (flights from N. America)
GND - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~160k - 180k) - Propose change to scale 4  (flights from N. America & Europe)
EIS  - Propose change Country Openness to 6 - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~200k - 300k) - Propose change scale to scale 4 (flights from France come in)
GCM - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~4000k) - Propose add Business Hub charm (come on, offshore banking!)
CZM - Propose add Tourist Hub charm (annual tourists ~5000k) - Propose change to scale 3 (lots of flights from N America)
16
Airport and City Suggestions / Re: mixed up airports
« Last post by testpilot on August 31, 2020, 05:38:36 pm »
Hello.

I want to leave a comment about two airports in the region where i live, namely Anapolis, GO - Brasil.

In the game there are 2 airports: namely the Anapolis one (and according to the game the population coverage is about 90k.
Nearby, there the "Base Aérea Airport", and also according to the game it serves about 150k people.

Firstly, I would like to say that the Base Aérea Airport is a military airport, closed for public, thus it should not be open in the game. Also, the real live location of the Base Aérea Airport is way out the city, as contrary to the main Anapolis airport that is located near the industrial zone, thus i also find t very strange that a closed, military, way out of town airport serves more people than the public airport.

Also, the public airport serving only about 90k people, on a city of about 400k people, i find it a bit on the low side..

Finaly, i also would like to ask why i cannot connect to Goiania (as the game says that the distance should be greater to make a route). However, in real life, one of the biggest uses is Goiania - Anapolis - Brasilia, due to the heavy presence of industry in Anapolis, and the presence of larger airports in both cities.

forgot to mention the iata codes: Anapolis=APS, Base Aérea Airport=also APS (strange :/)
17
Airport and City Suggestions / mixed up airports
« Last post by testpilot on August 31, 2020, 05:35:27 pm »
Hello.

I want to leave a comment about two airports in the region where i live, namely Anapolis, GO - Brasil.

In the game there are 2 airports: namely the Anapolis one (and according to the game the population coverage is about 90k.
Nearby, there the "Base Aérea Airport", and also according to the game it serves about 150k people.

Firstly, I would like to say that the Base Aérea Airport is a military airport, closed for public, thus it should not be open in the game. Also, the real live location of the Base Aérea Airport is way out the city, as contrary to the main Anapolis airport that is located near the industrial zone, thus i also find t very strange that a closed, military, way out of town airport serves more people than the public airport.

Also, the public airport serving only about 90k people, on a city of about 400k people, i find it a bit on the low side..

Finaly, i also would like to ask why i cannot connect to Goiania (as the game says that the distance should be greater to make a route). However, in real life, one of the biggest uses is Goiania - Anapolis - Brasilia, due to the heavy presence of industry in Anapolis, and the presence of larger airports in both cities.
18
Airport and City Suggestions / Re: Missing airports
« Last post by NorthCoast on August 29, 2020, 11:10:48 am »
I just keep finding more missing airports. Add please.

Airport name: Mataveri International Airport
IATA code: IPC
ICAO code: SCIP
City: Hanga Roa
Country: Chile
City population: 3.304
Urban population: 7.750
Metro population: unknown
Passengers per year: 314.283
Runway length (meters): 3.305
Proposed scale: 5
Charms: Tourism

Airport name: Pierrefonds Airport
IATA code: ZSE
ICAO code: FMEP
City: Saint Pierre
Country: Réunion
City population: 84.212
Urban population: 307.770
Metro population: 859.959
Passengers per year: 98.194
Runway length (meters): 2100
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: None

Airport name: Sir Gaëtan Duval Airport
IATA code: RRG
ICAO code: FIMR
City: Port Mathurin
Country: Mauritius
City population: 6.000
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: 41.669
Passengers per year: 49.500
Runway length (meters): 1287
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: None

Airport name: Teniente R. Marsh Airport
IATA code: TNM
ICAO code: SCRM
City: Villa las Estrellas
Country: Chile
City population: 80
Urban population: 150
Metro population: unknown
Passengers per year: unknown
Runway length (meters): 1292
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: Science

Airport name: Taba International Airport
IATA code: TCP
ICAO code: HETB
City: Taba
Country: Egypt
City population: 3080
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: unknown
Passengers per year: 41.142
Runway length (meters): 4000
Proposed scale: 3
Charms: Tourism

Airport name: Sharm El Sheikh International Airport
IATA code: SSH
ICAO code: HESH
City: Sharm El Sheikh
Country: Egypt
City population: 73.000
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: 104.000
Passengers per year: 8.693.990
Runway length (meters): 3081
Proposed scale: 4
Charms: Tourism

Airport name: Wake Island Airport
IATA code: AWK
ICAO code: PWAK
City: Wake Island
Country: United States of America
City population: 100
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: unknown
Passengers per year: unknown
Runway length (meters): 3000
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: None

Airport name: Scandinavian Mountains Airport
IATA code: SCR
ICAO code: ESKS
City: Rörbäcksnäs
Country: Sweden
City population: 147
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: 284.524
Passengers per year: 14.157
Runway length (meters): 2500
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: Tourism

Airport name: Narsarsuaq Air Base
IATA code: UAK
ICAO code: BGWB
City: Narsarsuaq
Country: Greenland
City population: 123
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: 6.439
Passengers per year: unknown
Runway length (meters): 1835
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: Tourism

Airport name: Kangerlussuaq Airport
IATA code: SFJ
ICAO code: BGSF
City: Kangerlussuaq
Country: Greenland
City population: 508
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: 9.378
Passengers per year: 133.381
Runway length (meters): 2810
Proposed scale: 4
Charms: None

Airport name: Gander International Airport
IATA code: YQX
ICAO code: CYQX
City: Gander
Country: Canada
City population: 11.688
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: unknown
Passengers per year: 177.532
Runway length (meters): 3109
Proposed scale: 3
Charms: None

Airport name: Stephenville Airport
IATA code: YJT
ICAO code: CYJT
City: Stephenville
Country: Canada
City population: 6.623
Urban population: 19.806
Metro population: 31.917
Passengers per year: unknown
Runway length (meters): 3051
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: None

Airport name: Deer Lake Regional Airport
IATA code: YDF
ICAO code: CYDF
City: Deer Lake
Country: Canada
City population: 5.249
Urban population: 19.806
Metro population: 31.917
Passengers per year: unknown
Runway length (meters): 2440
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: None

Airport name: Timmins/Victor M. Power Airport
IATA code: YTS
ICAO code: CYTS
City: Timmins
Country: Canada
City population: 41.788
Urban population: unknown
Metro population: unknown
Passengers per year: unknown
Runway length (meters): 1829
Proposed scale: 2
Charms: None
19
Under Development / Wish List / Suggestions / Re: Fuel Consumption Rework
« Last post by NorthCoast on August 29, 2020, 07:13:59 am »
Thanks for the suggestion! Aquantis!

The fuel consumption as of V1 is simply a parameter to balance the game, it really does not really reflect any real fuel usage

The problem tho by following realistic data is that we will need something else to balance the airplane performances, while the current operation cost model is pretty straight forward, the easiest way is to manipulate the so called fuel consumption to achieve that.

Simply put, fuel consumption as of V1 is simply a "cost to operate".

As for V2, we will need some substantial change to the "cost to operate" model if we want realistic fuel consumption. Honestly I have not put too much thoughts into that yet :)

Then go put some thoughts into it. Right now the fuel consumption is way wrong and it's a pain in the ass.

And yes, it seems like users do want realistic fuel consumption. At least I do.
20
Under Development / Wish List / Suggestions / Fuel burn per seat
« Last post by NorthCoast on August 29, 2020, 07:08:53 am »
Not entirely sure where to post this, but right now the fuel burn per seat is very unrealistic. I've made a list.

Plane name         Capacity   Fuel burn   Fuel burn per seat
Cessna 421         7      7      1,00
Britten-Norman BN-2 Islander   9      9      1,00
Cessna Caravan         14      14      1,00
Pilatus PC-12         9      10      1,11
Bombardier DHC-6-400      19      22      1,16
Britten-Norman MKIII Trislander   17      22      1,29
ATR 42-600         48      72      1,50
Dornier 328-110         33      59      1,79
Bombardier CRJ-100      50      90      1,80
Bombardier CRJ-200      50      90      1,80
Dornier 328JET         44      83      1,89
Let L410UVP-E20         19      36      1,89
Embraer EMB120 Brasilia      30      57      1,90
Bombardier DHC-8-200      40      76      1,90
Saab 340         34      68      2,00
Let L410NG         19      41      2,16
Embraer ERJ135         37      81      2,19
Bombardier DHC-8-300      56      123      2,20
Bombardier DHC-8-100      40      88      2,20
CASA CN-235         40      88      2,20
Mitsubishi MRJ-90      92      211      2,29
Bombardier CRJ700      78      179      2,29
Mitsubishi MRJ-100      88      202      2,30
Short 360-200         36      86      2,39
Short 330-200         32      80      2,50
Embraer ERJ140         44      110      2,50
Saab 2000         58      145      2,50
Embraer ERJ145         50      130      2,60
Fokker 50         60      156      2,60
Bombardier DHC-8-400      86      232      2,70
Embraer ERJ145XR      50      135      2,70
Bombardier Q400         90      251      2,79
ATR 72-600         78      218      2,79
Bombardier CRJ900      90      261      2,90
Embraer ERJ170         72      216      3,00
Embraer EMB170-200      88      264      3,00
Embraer E175-E2         88      264      3,00
Bombardier CRJ1000      104      312      3,00
Embraer ERJ175         78      249      3,19
Bombardier CS100      133      425      3,20
Bae 146-200         100      320      3,20
Embraer EMB190         100      320      3,20
Airbus A318         132      435      3,30
Boeing 737-700C         140      462      3,30
Fokker 70         79      268      3,39
Airbus A319         156      530      3,40
Fokker 70ER         79      276      3,49
Comac ARJ21         90      315      3,50
Embraer E190-E2         106      371      3,50
McDonnel Douglas MD-81      150      525      3,50
McDonnel Douglas MD-90      160      568      3,55
Boeing 737 MAX 7      172      619      3,60
Embraer E195-E2         146      540      3,70
Boeing 737-700         149      566      3,80
Boeing 737-800         184      699      3,80
Antonov An148         85      323      3,80
Airbus A320         180      684      3,80
Fokker 100         109      425      3,90
Boeing 737-600         149      581      3,90
Boeing 737 MAX 8      189      737      3,90
Boeing 737 MAX 9      220      858      3,90
Boeing 737 MAX 10      230      897      3,90
Boeing 737-100         124      496      4,00
Boeing 737-900         189      756      4,00
Airbus A320neo         195      780      4,00
Boeing 737-900ER      220      880      4,00
Sukhoi Superjet 100      108      442      4,09
Boeing 737-300         149      610      4,09
Boeing 737-400         188      770      4,10
Boeing 767-200         245      1004      4,10
Airbus A321neo         244      1000      4,10
Boeing 737-500         140      574      4,10
Airbus A321neoLR      240      996      4,15
Boeing 737-700ER      149      625      4,19
Boeing 737-200         136      584      4,29
Airbus A321         236      1014      4,30
Airbus A321neoXLR      236      1014      4,30
Boeing 757-200ER      239      1027      4,30
Boeing 767-200ER      245      1053      4,30
Boeing 717-200         134      576      4,30
Boeing 757-200         200      860      4,30
Airbus A310-300         240      1032      4,30
Airbus A350-800         390      1677      4,30
Boeing 727-200         189      831      4,40
Airbus A330-800neo      406      1786      4,40
Airbus A310-200         240      1056      4,40
Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner   360      1584      4,40
Boeing 777-8         440      1936      4,40
Airbus A350-1000      475      2137      4,50
Tupolev Tu-204         210      945      4,50
Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner      250      1125      4,50
Boeing 767-300ER      350      1575      4,50
Boeing 777-200         440      1980      4,50
Airbus A330-900neo      440      1980      4,50
Boeing 777-200ER      440      2023      4,60
Airbus A300-600         266      1223      4,60
Boeing 777-200LR      440      2063      4,69
Airbus A330-300         404      1898      4,70
Airbus A340-500         375      1762      4,70
Boeing 767-400ER      409      1922      4,70
Airbus A340-300         350      1645      4,70
Airbus A330-200         380      1786      4,70
Tupolev Tu-154         180      864      4,80
Airbus A350-900         440      2156      4,90
Airbus A350-900         440      2156      4,90
Boeing 777-9         550      2695      4,90
Boeing 747SP         400      2000      5,00
Lockheed L-1011-500      330      1682      5,10
McDonnel Douglas DC-10-30   380      1976      5,20
Airbus A340-600         440      2288      5,20
Boeing 747-8i         605      3146      5,20
Lockheed L-1011-1      400      2160      5,40
Boeing 777-300ER      550      3135      5,70
Boeing 777-300         550      3135      5,70
Boeing 747-100         550      3245      5,90
Boeing 747-200         550      3245      5,90
Airbus A380-800         853      5118      6,00
Boeing 747-400         660      4025      6,10
Boeing 747-300         660      4092      6,20
Boeing 747-400ER      660      4092      6,20
Ilyushin 96-400         436      2790      6,40

The columns didn't come out right, that's one of the downsides of the forum. But let's ignore that for now.

As you can see, there is a huge difference in fuel burn per seat. It's totally unrealistic, with big planes having a far higher fuel burn per seat than small planes. In the real world it's the other way around.

Also there are a good number of aircraft on this list with way wrong capacities, such as the 767-300ER having 100 more seats than the 787-8. What the hell? The 787-8 is way bigger than the 767-300ER, how can it possibly have fewer seats? Looking at real capacities, both aircraft are listed wrong. It looks like no research has been done at all when these aircraft were added to the game.

But this was about fuel burn per seat, which has a way too big difference. That should be brought closer together, maybe even give all aircraft the same fuel burn per seat or at least keep the differences small. If this means a total database overhaul, then so be it.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10