Hi!
I've started a new airline on Aspern. Upon using the Aicraft Type Evaluation tool, it came up with some very strange, variable figures. All of the sudden, the 737600BGW can bring more profit than a 737700BGW.
Can someone explain what makes these huge differences?
Oh and, also, when using the ATE tool, even if the aircraft's capacity is 150 pax, it shows only 146 pax available.
- Some fuel figures have changed on the new server, so maybe because of this the Boeing 737-600BGW can bring more profits as the B737-700BGW (although this might depend on the route and on the amount of seats)
- If on a given route a specific aircraft has not the full range and/or the runways are too short for take-off or landing you have to operate with payload penalties, that's why it might only give you 146 seats, meaning you can only load 146 passengers on that route.
Hope this helps!
The new Server comes with some new Features as you can see in SK's post here. Click on the PDF's and you can see the changes. Additionally there has been modifications to the Landing fees.
I have read that post several times. To be honest, the new cabin configuration system and the changes have made the ATE tool completely useless.
All of the sudden, the 737-600BGW can bring more profit than a 737-700BGW
Such a discovery would please most Boeing 737-600-operators in real world :P :lol: .
To be honest, the new cabin configuration system and the changes have made the ATE tool completely useless.
I agree. Completely useless in the new GW. What I have done was this:
created a certain config, calculated Y C and total seats, then in ATE calculated total cost and then divided by my seat config (number of seats). Manual calculation, yes, but the best that can be done until AS guys change ATE to reflect the new cabin config.
Is it me, or are more players having a hard time figuering out a profitable configuration? On the "old" servers I have a certain formula (aircraft/seats/price) which works just fine, but I can't put that tactic in use on the new server... On the other hand, it is more a challane now.
Edit: I was wrong, see post below for initial comment and AS response.
I'm not sure if it's intended or not, but the 736 and 737 now have the same capacities (used to be 132, now 149, still no cargo). With the fuel consumption changes to the -700 only, and the increased seats in the -600, the -600 will come out on top. (no mention of changes to the -600 in the PDFs)
Also not sure if it’s a mistake, but the -700ER(Winglets) has the same cargo capacity of the -600 series (i.e. none) instead of being consistent with the other -700 models.
So, it isn’t a bug.
that's right and based on direct data. The 737-600 is indeed certified for 149 passenger. The 737-700ER has no cargo and additional fuel tank instead.
Sorry its a bit off-topic. I was reading what is new in airports around the world. http://www.simulogics.net/sk/datapatch2013/Data-Patch_2013-Fixes_Patches.pdf
What does it mean " jetways added "?
Jetway/jet bridge - however you call them - are increasing the comfort of the terminal building. So if you want to built up a new terminal to improve the comfort of boparding/deboarding compared to the other airlines at the airport, you should built at least a 4-star teminal.