AS 6.2 suggestions (2)

English Boards General
1

1)  Inventory -> View in Market Analysis

offer Group by Flight option as well

Edit: This has now been suggested by another player here as well http://community.airlinesim.aero/topic/8058-62-feedback-route-management-ease-of-use/page-2#entry68352

2) Inventory -> View in Market Analysis

substitute "0" for "FB" or "FB 0" for better clarity and easy recognition of fully booked flights.

Combined with (1) above will make the Market Analysis page much more clear and readable.

3) Scheduling -> Flight Plan: the purpose is to declutter this page

a) place Aircraft Info on the top as it used to be in the old interface

b ) either create new tab for Settings as it used to be in old interface or make settings visible/invisible by a checkbox

c) Place Transfer Flight box on the bottom if Settings get its own tab (old tab back); or if using visible/invisible checkbox, make it appear/disappear along with the Settings

4) Aircraft Info:

Add the following information to "Aircraft Info": Cabin Configuration plan name and Seat count

e.g.

Domestic   120/15/0

5) Under Leasing, 30 aircraft are displayed per page, then you use 1>2>3 etc. to navigate to subsequent pages. Please provide "show all" along, which would display all aircraft. I do not refer to "show all" that is under the lease filter which removes the filter, but rather to show all aircraft instead of 30 per page (using filter or not).

2

Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong, but on the Scheduling page for an individual flight number, down by the price adjustment sliders, where is the "Copy price settings for return route also" button? It's just a little thing but it was much more convenient before, now you have to check back to see what the prices are for the first leg and go individually change them for the return.  

3

Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong, but on the Scheduling page for an individual flight number, down by the price adjustment sliders, where is the "Copy price settings for return route also" button? It's just a little thing but it was much more convenient before, now you have to check back to see what the prices are for the first leg and go individually change them for the return.  

You do that in Inventory and there you can apply price settings for the return flight as well. In old UI you either changed the price on individual flight number, route, or route+return. Now you do the same, but you change route price or route+return price under Inventory.

Basically,

Change price for route: in Inventory

Change price for route+Return: in Inventory

Change price for Flight: in Flight Number Management (FNM).

you can access the FNM by clicking the flight number anywhere within AS.

P.S. Please people, do not hijack, get your own threads for your issues.

4

Any thoughts, Martin?

5

Any thoughts, Martin?

I afforded the luxury of a week-end, so sorry for only replying now ;)

Re 1.) Just posted my thoughts on this on another thread: http://community.airlinesim.aero/topic/8058-62-feedback-route-management-ease-of-use/page-2#entry68362

Re 2.) Isn't the bigger issue to differentiate flights that have exactly 9 seats left from flights that have more than 9 seats left? Although I get what you're saying, I'd just rather wait a bit until I have a better idea of how to deal with 1.).

Re 3.) Others like the idea to have the settings next to their schedule because they have the remark/name in sight while planning. So a simple "disable option" wouldn't do, there's need to be an in-place toggle or the option would have to allow to toggle between settings form on the aircraft page and a separate tab. Quite a bit of work for such a tiny detail. Concerning the aircraft info: You mean a bar that shows the information in a line rather than in a box? I get why this is preferable, but once again, think of the mobile devices: The "line" would have to collapse into a "box" once again, which would be above the scheduling and the flight plan. Ergo, extra scrolling.

Re 4.) Still on the aircraft page I guess? Or do you mean somewhere else?

Re 5.) There is a reason to the limit. How many aircraft per page are we talking about in your case?

6

1-2... will post some thoughts later

3 - if it is not possible to "hide/unhide", then a different location maybe? On the bottom of the scheduling page maybe?

4 - yes the idea would be to have the information about seating config in the aircraft info box (see 3). Right now it says: seats OK or X. It could say the seat count e.g. 100/10/5 and underneath it could have one entry which would say Seating Config which would say the name of the config as listed on the Cabin Configuration page (taking the variable -name - from the seat config DB)

5- if the filters under Leasing cannot be made working properly on the fleet types I mentioned in the other thread, I would prefer to have "option" to display all aircraft. When I was buying some planes I was stuck with either buying through fleet sort and clicking several times with multiple timeouts after buying, or finding out the registration number, not using filter, sorting by reg.no. and somehow navigating to the sub-page that had that reg.no and buying there (no delays and purchase without any issues).

7

Part III:

Showing 9 or "more" free seats is basically not a relevant consideration, what difference does it make 9 or 10 bookable seats?

Now of course 9 and 30 available seats on a 50 seater is a difference, but then we would need market analysis to show those 30 seats, which is not a good idea. But we could display 10, 11, 12... or not. Where do we cut the line?

My suggestion in (2) was meant to quickly show fully booked flights - a visual differentiation, something that can be quickly spotted. In old RM there was "fully booked" entry in red, which was immediately noticeable and obvious. In the new market analysis, even an entry that would say ***0*** (with the asterisks included) in bold red would suffice as well :) as that would be a visual differentiation from other numbered entries.

The rest is copied from my reply in the other thread:

With the market analysis, we can start by grouping by flight number :)

After all, regardless if in the future there are more booking classes, they can still be grouped by flight number.

It will be in the future to decide whether to show them as the service class grouped together, or individual booking classes, but this has little to no connection/relevance to the current page layout.

I consider "grouping by flight number" a visual aspect, not a game feature.

In other words, grouping by flight numbers makes the page less cluttered and easier to understand, rather than behave in a different way game-wise.

That is the main point, even if booking classes are used, they can still be grouped by flight number. If they are not use don market analysis, service classes can still be grouped by flight numbers.

The consideration is to make the page easier to read, understand, and make quick sense of. Grouping by flight number can be a quick fix for now.

Part II:

In order to really come up with long-term solution for what the market analysis should display, it is necessary to actually understand what the fare buckets are supposed to achieve, what will be their function and how will they affect demand and bookings. Only after we specify the purpose and desired outcome, can we move into visual display of it. Questions like "will premium economy be a separate demand category" or "what advantage will using more booking classes within one service class bring to me as a player", etc. We must understand that many fare buckets / booking classes in real life deal with advance purchase, minimum stay requirements, miles redemption, some booking classes are specifically targeted for connection passengers etc. We do not have most of these considerations in AS to think of.  Only after we define the purpose, execution, and outcome, will we be ready to translate it into visual display. This is not something that can be decided in one or two days. It may take some time, but by then, players need some decluttering of the market analysis page as an interim measure, the fix mentioned above could be implemented in the meantime.