Would it even be possible to make an alliance type maintanance party, giving MRO to the whole alliance and all partners bare the cost per aircraft they own. So that it would be equal to all.
Perhaps the best way to modify this would be to approach it from the opposite end, where an airline flying one type of plane (I am thinking of the Easy Jet/Ryan Air examples) would achieve efficiencies vs some of the older legacy carriers with much more varied fleets.
If you fly only one type of plane you only need to store one type of parts, train one type of mechanic, have one set of tools etc...
As you add other types it makes sense to have increased costs associated with additional parts, training for mechanics, tools in the repair facilities etc...
Another way to look at it may be to have the increase in fees associated with the use of aircraft at airports. What I mean is lets say I have 1 airbus 320 and 1 boeing 737 and 1 Cseries 100. If I fly all three from Frankfurt to Berlin and this is my only route then all three require maintenance at FRA and TXL - so i have to have parts, mechanics and tools for all three types at both airports to service them. More complex and should be more expensive.
However lets say I fly only the airbus out of Frankfurt and all my flights out of FRA are now Airbus 320s - the cost and complexity should go down, now that I am flying only one type from this hub.
I can move my Boeing and fly them exclusively out of London and My Cseries are moved to fly out of my Moscow hub.
AS long as they do not cross paths they should receive the lowest costs for maintenance/servicing since i only need one type of parts/mechs/tools in each airport that they would be receiving servicing.
That way an airline could fly multiple types of planes
I noted an earlier post about the current iteration preventing large airlines buying up all leased planes. Perhaps explore a new feature that prevents this, this type of thing would add additional costs, and if all they did with the older fleet was park them somewhere then charge parking fees that exponentially increase as you fill parking spaces.
Just some random thoughts, but it would be nice to have a better modeling of servicing in the game, and reward players who want to explore the EasyJet/Ryan Air type models. I see with the new passenger types this is coming soon :)
Cheers
Your response of "Why? It is a challenge but that's the game." reeks of things can not change in the game.
Dealing with smaller aircraft in large airports was a challenge, and was part a part of the game. That is no longer the case.
How do I become more than just a "newbie"? Do I have to post more stuff here?
The OP is absolutely correct regarding the 15% penalty not being realistic. Not sure how difficult coding would be, but a more true to real life model might look like this:
You would have two different maintenance options and could freely choose either for each of your AC types at any given airport/maintenance location.
Option A: Outsourced Maintenance
1) only hourly+parts (or per maintenance block) charges
2) no 15% penalty
3) per aircraft costs are higher than in the following "in-house" model
4) this option will make sense for starting airlines and/or singe (or small) AC fleets
Option B: In-house Maintenance
1) the 15% penalty is non-existent and is replaced by each AC maintenance type having a relatively high fixed costs (to cover parts, type specific training,...). This "type overhead cost" would of course vary depending on the type. E.g. a B777 or A380 overhead would be significantly higher than a LET or ATR overhead cost.
2) individual per-aircraft maintenance fee then on top of the overhead fee
3) mechanics would be treated and paid just like your other staff... thus their salaries would affect their morale... thus affecting quality and effectiveness
4) this model will make sense for fleets with larger numbers of AC, and would be quite cost prohibitive for singe (or small) AC fleets (especially larger jets)
This then allows for further development of the maintenance model by adding features such as:
1) Maintenance contractors (for outsourced maintenance) are airport specific (smaller airports may have limited choices, varying prices,...)
2) Hangar/shop leasing - in-house maintenance would then be possible only at airports where you have leased space to do it
... 1&2 lead to a more realistic airline behavior (e.g. discouraging aircraft being left overnight at just any random airport for a "maintenance block". Instead have an incentive to set your flight plans such that they return to airports where maintenance is possible / or cheaper.
3) Being able sell/do maintenance for other airlines (if your capacity permits)
... Leading to a scenario where e.g. your parent holding company or one of your subsidiaries or airlines has one set of shops/employees/parts... and is able to service your fleets across all your subsidiaries.
4) Scheduling of annual/hourly/cycle inspections requiring AC to be pulled out of service for a period of time at regular intervals (necessitating the need for stand-by aircraft or pausing of service if none available)
5) Random mechanical problems requiring unscheduled maintenance resulting in flight delays. Their frequency/severity would be proportional to the age of aircraft and quality of scheduled maintenance.
(My apologies for the lengthy post, but I do believe the maintenance aspect of the game has a huge potential for improvement and added depth.)
How do I get a sideways silhouette like you have?
Probably by uploading a pic in that format
How do I get a sideways silhouette like you have?
Why do you hijack a thread to ask that silly question? You have uploaded a photo so what is the point to ask how to do it?
I would love a new dynamic economies of scale to be introduced to the maintenance. Effectively it would cost more to have 1 of each aircraft type than 20 of the same type but I wouldnt even know where to start in doing that.
Sorry for giving a note to a reply posted over 1 year ago... but i just want to post some of my thoughts
The OP is absolutely correct regarding the 15% penalty not being realistic. Not sure how difficult coding would be, but a more true to real life model might look like this:
You would have two different maintenance options and could freely choose either for each of your AC types at any given airport/maintenance location.
Option A: Outsourced Maintenance
1) only hourly+parts (or per maintenance block) charges
2) no 15% penalty
3) per aircraft costs are higher than in the following "in-house" model
4) this option will make sense for starting airlines and/or singe (or small) AC fleets
Option B: In-house Maintenance
1) the 15% penalty is non-existent and is replaced by each AC maintenance type having a relatively high fixed costs (to cover parts, type specific training,...). This "type overhead cost" would of course vary depending on the type. E.g. a B777 or A380 overhead would be significantly higher than a LET or ATR overhead cost.
2) individual per-aircraft maintenance fee then on top of the overhead fee
3) mechanics would be treated and paid just like your other staff... thus their salaries would affect their morale... thus affecting quality and effectiveness
4) this model will make sense for fleets with larger numbers of AC, and would be quite cost prohibitive for singe (or small) AC fleets (especially larger jets)
i like the ideas so that the maintenance would be part of the game, but i kind of doubt the solutions would introduce maintenance in game like what happened in real life.
First of all, TechOps/Technik is part of the airline, but also not part of the airline. You don't really mange these companies the same way as how you mange an airline. It's not just hiring the mechanics, you also need engineers to support the company, and it's not just one engineer. The game already missing engineers in FlightOps departments, but it is not a large amount, so i just assumed it's already part of departments already put in in game. However, you can't ignore these 'other personals' in TechOps, because there are too many of them in the company. I also don't know how are you going to count the amount of people who also work in workshops and other places. The problem for the solution suggested is that it might be too easy for airline to introduce a maintenance department, while in real life you won't build a TechOps unless you have enough resource and a large fleet. To make it easier, some research probably needed so the game can estimate the amount of employees needed for each a/c type with an estimation of salaries.
I do like the point of discouraging leaving aircraft at random airports; i would even suggest for these very random airports, e.g. those Farm track airports, should not even allow any large maintenance because simply this is what happening in real life. This is also related to a/c type, as part of the original post suggested, because it is probably easier to find a place to fix a PC12 than a 747, with a hope that this won't encourage slot blacking. Aircraft should be only fixed up to a lower level, less than 100%, to reflect the fact that these airports won't provide you enough resource to do a large maintenance. It should be also accumulated so that you have to schedule a maintenance at a larger airport with enough resource, e.g. first day you can get it fixed up to 95%, then 90% second day, then 85%, etc. i know this will probably destroyed a lot of airlines using wave system, including some of my owns, but if we are getting into maintenance business, we should make it right.
There is also the issue of engine maintenance: you always treat the engines as a separated thing on the a/c than any other parts of the a/c. The game is already disregarding the performance change based on different engines, but for maintenance, it is very important because you might have situations when you have different types of engines in your fleet for one a/c type. It won't be an issue if you are ordering aircraft as new since you can choose the engines, but if you are using used aircraft, you probably will run into this issue very quickly. Maintenance cost will go up no matter whether it's in-house option or outsourced option, so it would be two a/c aircraft types in total: one for the aircraft which is already used in game, and one for the engines. It's also not a multiple case as you can have same engine used on different a/c types, e.g. CFM56 on A320s and B737s. I know they are still different variations, but the cost difference shouldn't be as large as compared to a completely different engine. This also means data about engines on used a/c in AS needed to be collected, and i understand it's not a fun work.
Overall, i like the idea a lot, and it's a very good start. I believe something is better than nothing.
I think i would end this post as the original post:
(My apologies for the lengthy post, but I do believe the maintenance aspect of the game has a huge potential for improvement and added depth.)
AS is slow with new features so this will be on the list but when?.. nobody but Martin knows.
I think a realistic model could just be that you get a discount for operating large fleets of the same aircraft.
The first aircraft you add of a fleet type, the maintenance cost could be 20% or 30% higher than otherwise..
And diseconomies of scale could start sinking in after some point…
It could be little more advantageous to large players and little more challenging for new players, but that is the real world..
Maybe first 5 weeks of business, you get a government-aided maintenance-package with a 30% discount… That could be real…
Or the maintenance company offers first 2 weeks free for trying out their services.. Hehe
One idea that I though of is adding a penalty for operating small fleets out of different cities. Real airlines don't just operate a few of every aircraft out of all of their cites, they create bases. City A might be an 787 base, while City B might be a 777 base, and City C is a 747, 777, and 787 base. This makes it easier for scheduling pilots, but also makes it cheaper because you don't need parts for every aircraft at every hub. So say if Airline A has a hub in JFK where they operate 100 737s and only 2 787s then the maintenance cost percentage per aircraft would be higher because of the little number of them.
On one thread you rant of lack of game updates, on another one you would want implemeted such changes that would have zero effect on game advancement and would be a waste of developer’s time…
On one thread you rant of lack of game updates, on another one you would want implemeted such changes that would have zero effect on game advancement and would be a waste of developer's time...
Hey, I was just posting my opinion in regards to an idea. If I read my post correctly I said I had an idea in regards to a topic, I never said the devs must add this in.
Ok
I think most people responding here are not trying to grasp and understand what the poster said, they are just here to antagonize him. I agree with the poster!
If an Airline has a fleet of B777s, B737s and Q400s, the addition of a new type of say CS300 should NOT make the cost of the previous fleet (B777, B737, Q400) go up by 15%! That is unrealistic and almost seems to be intended as a punishment!
I think the implementation of a better model could be a lot simpler.
I am of the opinion that the newly introduced type should carry a penalty and be more expensive to maintain than it would normally be - by say (15% to 20%), however the original fleet should remain unaffected. This makes the decision to operate a new type one that requires operator to consider the added cost of maintenance. The entire airline fleet should not be bearing that cost - that is what makes it unrealistic!
I find that most of what we know about operating a 4th type of plane (more than three family types) is based on personal opinion and experiences.
I think it is important to find out what the official position on this subject is - I tried to find information on the subject in Wiki but found none.
So, my question to A/S officials is - What exactly happens when you operate more than 3 types of plane??
How much of a penalty is placed on maintenance, if any? Is the penalty on the entire fleet or only that particular (4th) aircraft type??
Matth, I will appreciate your input. Thank you.
In terms of maintenance there would be so much to do, as this is quite a complex subject. In real life, you normally distinguish between line and base maintenance. Line is done on the tarmac while the aircraft is between flights. Base maintenance is scheduled and normally takes a few days to several weeks and is done in hangars. Add then also the overhaul of items to this, which basically brings used items back to new level.
Now AS simplifies things totally. There's only the 2 hour time slot minimum for maintenance. That covers basically just line maintenance. AS doesn't have any base maintenance, as it would require to stop your aircraft for a certain time. You'd have to transfer flight plans back and forth between aircraft, which would be very tedious, unless there was an automatic assignment feature.
While operating an additional type of aircraft certainly increases the complexity and the cost, it will affect cost for other types only marginally. I'd assume having a few aircraft is more expensive than if you operate 100 aircraft of the same type/model. Question is also, if you do the maintenance yourself or if you outsource it. Doing it in-house is probably only feasible if you have a large operation (like Lufthansa, Delta, etc.).
From what I undestand, the 15% in AS are a feature to "punish" bigger airlines to a certain extent to make it easier for small/new airlines to compete. It is not so much to do with reality.
Ok. Thank you Matth.
What I was just trying to clarify is that there is an actual penalty for operating more than 3 Aircraft family types (cos A/S Wiki doesn’t mention it anywhere). So, having clarified that from you now, what I will like to know is - does this 15% penalty cover only the maintenance of the extra type (4th type) or does it spread over the entire fleet?
Only additional categories.
Ok. Thank you Matth.
What I was just trying to clarify is that there is an actual penalty for operating more than 3 Aircraft family types (cos A/S Wiki doesn’t mention it anywhere). So, having clarified that from you now, what I will like to know is - does this 15% penalty cover only the maintenance of the extra type (4th type) or does it spread over the entire fleet?
To my knowledge it applies to your entire fleet.