No, the complaint is that flying small props BETWEEN major airports is unrealistic. Nobody said anything about flying from large airports to 1 or 2 bar farm tracks.
No, the complaint is that flying small props BETWEEN major airports is unrealistic. Nobody said anything about flying from large airports to 1 or 2 bar farm tracks.
Maybe you should reread some of these quotes. No mention of flying BETWEEN major airports, just in and out of LHR.
I agree, it is wrong.
The best way to address that would be to make it economically unviable (as it is in real life). Ie charge a landing and atc fee large enough to make it unprofitable to fly there with a very small plane. In real life I do not see many ATRs or even E-jets in LHR, that is because it would not be profitable. I think the smallest planes I've seen there are A319s and B717s.
Just out of LHR, no destinations...
Absolutely support your opinion. This is Airline SIM(!) - completely unrealistic business models like starting masses of LETs from Heathrow should get banned.
Thanks to the team for taking actions.
Flying out of LHR, no destinations mentioned.
And now the same formulation with 16 ANTONOV AN-140A for European flights. Oh, man, how unimaginative.
Same
Again, this would be easy to fix. A landing fee of 10.000 AS$ for aircraft with MTOW less than 45.000 kg or so on 9-10 bar airports.
Up the landing fee at 9 and10 bar airports, which would stop the aircraft from being operated at all from 9-10 bar airports regardless of destination
ATR-72 out of AMS is not the same as LET, but if there was such a financial burden on ATRs, I wouldn't.
I just tossed the MTOW value out of my head without any proper scientific analysis, it might as well be less than 60 seats instead of MTOW. But the principle is the same. If we want certain types of aircraft to get out of large airports, do it with financial means. Then 25 LETs at LHR would not simply work because they would not make any money.
I don't know, maybe the LETs are not profitable even as we speak as the airline in question here restarted and changed to slightly larger aircraft ;-)
And it does not seem like the ATRs are making that much money at AMS either ;-)
Again the same thing. While the original complaint may have been about 19 seat aircraft operating on major routes, it has morphed into small aircraft being operated into large airports period. As quoted there is even a suggestion for CRJ and ERJ's to have a "financial burden" placed on them.
on the topico of 19 seat aircrafts between to major airports: have you looked at the landing fees on quimby? here are a few examples, route is LHR - AMS
B739 2,604
B736 2,433
A318 2,401
Dash8 2,249
ATR72 2,201
ATR42 2,136
LET410 2,093
so, with actual 19 seats in a LET410, you have to pay 110 AS$ per seat just for landing fees. the default price for this route on quimby is 95AS for Eco and 179AS for Business. A Dash 8 carriers for times to pax, so the per seat landing fee is only a fourth. It gets even better with bigger aircraft types.
so, there very clearly is an economical sanction to operate such small aircrafts between major cities.
don't get me wrong, if somebody founds to holdings just to use one to actually block slots and another to then grow into these blocked slots, that must be persecuted. Other than that, how about you give the game mechanics some time to actually work? let's say, 10 times it's current age? that would put it to the unimaginage old age of one month.
My personal opinion had always been that LETs and similar small props should only fly from large airports to very small airports only. That is a proposition I have no problem with, no objection against.
But the props mentioned in this (and other) threads are flying from 10-bar to 6-7 bar airports.
I do not think anybody would complain if a player started with small props flying to all of them to one-bar airports only.
No, the complaint is that flying small props BETWEEN major airports is unrealistic. Nobody said anything about flying from large airports to 1 or 2 bar farm tracks.
So, as a test I started an airline that flys nothing but LET’s. I fly out of a 10 bar airport, going to 1 and 2 bar airports, using a Great Lakes like model. It took less than six hours for my airline to be reported…
Yeah I saw your airline but I think it may have been reported for naming… Like Waiting, come on… (I did not report you but I checked your airline, saw those tiny cities you were flying to and knew immediately what you were up to 
) But I guess you know that name of yours is possibly borderline waiting to be reported. Waiting. Standing. Walking. Sleeping. Those are not airline names… But I get that “waiting” part. As an irony, it’s a nice one.
Purpose of the airline was immediately clear for me. Amazing, that it took somebody 6 hours to report you... "Waiting" was well choosen. <_<
The good thing: AS police is working.
Did you inform AS team about your little test with 40 LET's before you started?
*
so, there very clearly is an economical sanction to operate such small aircrafts between major cities.
If I wanted to block slots, a 2'000$ landing fee would definitely not stop me. It is naive to think that with ridiculously high profits, someone who wants to do this really does care about this 'economic sanction'
Well, if you just start up a company, I'm not sure you make ridiculously high profits. Yes, the demand is higher, and you can charge more, but your growth will be smaller than with other aircraft and eventually you will lose out.
*
Purpose of the airline was immediately clear for me. Amazing, that it took somebody 6 hours to report you... "Waiting" was well choosen. <_<
The good thing: AS police is working.
Did you inform AS team about your little test with 40 LET's before you started?
I did not inform them, looking back I should have.
Would have been better... :-)
Any penalties?
I personally do not think there should be any penalties in this case as the LETs are flying to very small airports, plus there is probably not much money to be made with the high landing fees in Munich in the first place.
I am just curious what happend and how the procedure of reporting works. (I have never been reported so far.)
Nothing happened, I was not notified that I was reported. I just noticed that on my info page, it showed "company has already been reported." However I checked yesterday and that message was gone, and I was able to be reported again. Low and behold, this morning the same message is back, so the local Airlinesim gumshoes are back on their beat. They are trying to keep the world safe from the LET invasion. Maybe they should have Trump build a wall around UHE to keep them safe. :P
And Rubio, I changed the name of my airline, so that is not the reason I was reported.
So it seems that the AS team processed the report, saw nothing wrong with it and therefore removed the remark. Some players seem to think differently about that…
(By the way, congratulations for your billionth passenger on Gatow, that’s quite impressive…)