Fleet commonality?

Is it important per the model? Do I suffer a lot if I had Md80s, 737s, 320s in the fleet like in the real world? Does the software simulate this ?



I‘m not sure if I understand your question right… but I assumed you mean the maintenance category?

You can have 3 different maintenance categories in your fleet and pay the „normal“ fee for the maintenance.
For every additional maintenance category you have to pay 5% more maintenance fee.


Isn’t it 15%? I’m pretty sure it is.

15 percent is the rught figure.

You are totally right. It is 15%.

I am not sure if I understand the maintenance category you talk about. I thought I could pick one Mx supplier. If by maintenance category you mean aircraft type then I can understand that.
Let’s get back to my original question:
In real world airline management it is really cost prohibitive to have multiple types of aircraft in your fleets. Different types mean: different parts, different crew training , different of everything. This creates a lot of overhead that destroys the bottom line. I was wondering if this simulation looks at it that way or not.

That’s what the answers say. 3 types are OK for the simulation, every type more makes maintenance more expensive. 15% for each additional type. That’s how the simulation can work with it.

You take one maintenance contractor. And can have up to three Maintenance category in your fleet with no penalty. Every additional category makes it 15% more expensive. The maintenance category for every aircraft you can found in the technical specifications.

And, as @highscore2 already mentioned, that is how the game works with the real world problem you mention.

Every plane has a maintenance category it belongs to. The maintenance category for each plane is displayed on the plane information page. It’s in the “Technical specifications” section.

It’s just a number. The Airbus 321-100 standard is maintenance category “9”. I believe the Boeing 737 family is a “1” for maintenance category.

That’s the maintenance category they refer to when they say you can have three types without penalty.

thank you… I didn’t know any of this. Your post helps a lot.

Have a good day

1 Like

https://www.asroutemap.info/tutorial.asp 23
AS for beginners - an attempted blog

You may find more very useful tips and explanations in these 2 tutorials.

1 Like

Does the penalty count also for subsidiary company?
I mean, if parent operates 737, 787 and CRJ, and daughter company operates A320, A350 and EMB190, does the maintenance penalty apply to any of them?

No it does not. You’ve got higher overhead costs though, but I can’t judge how it balances out.

Agreed with @TheThomate , I don’t think so, it’s just the issue of fleet addition and expansion will be tougher with split incomes…


Can actually a leased plane from the holding be transferred to a newly formed child? Despite many years around, I only flew with holdings so far…

Leased planes cannot be transferred as long as one of your companies own those planes.

I think what you mean instead is if the parent company leases a plane (from the ATO) then if that lease can be transferred to the new company - in which case, no. Only planes outright owned by your company can be transferred between enterprises.

I used to do this and it worked great. Although I would think a bit about fleet composition if I were you. Try not to operate multiple airlines with similar aircraft types. For example, if you want to operate both 737s and A320s from the same hub then do so in the same company as these aircraft fill the same role and it would get really confusing if you start splitting them up. Same thing with 787s and A350s.

There are 2 easy ways to go forward with this model. Either you have a “regional” or “long haul” specific subsidiary handling that segment or you make sure to overlap in the business segments but use different hubs (ex. using 737s in one company and A320s in the other but at different hubs). The only increased costs I found from this are the extra interlining costs that you will need to pay but in my opinion you will save more than enough on maintenance to justify it.

Some examples:

  • In the US I operated one “mainline carrier” with A320s, 777s and 787s as well as a subsidiary with A220s, CRJs and 737s. I made sure to use different hubs and it all worked great. With smaller companies it was even easier to manage them. Although the subsidiary was way smaller than the mainline.

  • In Indonesia I operated a mainline with A320s, A350s and A380s as well as a domestic feeder with A220s. This also worked great and I was able to utilise the smaller A220s to fly a lot of point to point to help with the over congested hubs of the mainline.

  • In Europe I operated a mainline with A320s and 737s in the same company operating completely interchangeably. While I had a dedicated long haul carrier with 757s, A340s and A330s. This was one of the best systems I have had as it allowed me to easily implement a specific pricing model for the long haul only carrier. Basically these two carrier were very different and both were perfectly suited to where they were operating.