Can a low cost airline work in this game? Could someone replicate ryanair? Slim HD seats, 50%-70% prices? Fleet of 737-800s? Fly into 2nd airports ?
with no connections, almost certainly not. The -800 is not the most economical aircraft in AS either
I did it with some success. Key is to be more Southwest than Ryanair using connections
Stay away from -800, they are not very good in this game.
why does 738 has such a terrible fuel consumption? Isnt AS based on real life stats?
why does 738 has such a terrible fuel consumption? Isnt AS based on real life stats?
Except for the Sky Interior the 737s are pretty much rubbish. Boeing would just have been dreaming to present these figures:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx5RzGbb8Sg
Except for the Sky Interior the 737s are pretty much rubbish. Boeing would just have been dreaming to present these figures:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx5RzGbb8Sg
If the 737 is "rubbish" in real life what does that make a A320?
http://leehamnews.com/2013/06/14/comparing-the-737-and-the-a320-the-story-continues/
"We’ve written many pieces that airlines tell us the 737-800 and A320 are within 2% of each other on cash operating costs, favoring the 738."
Airlinesim has dropped the ball with performance aspect of the 800 in this game.
And posting an Airbus press conference as proof to your point? Yea, that is really an objective source.... :wacko:
Isnt AS based on real life stats?
Not even close in this case.
Not even close in this case.
Does that explain why the A320NEO is sold in a ration of 2:1 contra the 737 MAX?
Reagarding the discussion of A320 vs B738 in AirlineSim... just look at the numbers. They are very close in terms of financial performance and the B738 is in fact ahead right now.
2074
Reagarding the discussion of A320 vs B738 in AirlineSim... just look at the numbers. They are very close in terms of financial performance and the B738 is in fact ahead right now.
As AK would say, that depends on your own configuration, because there are very many confguration splits where you actually cannot get one additional row of seats in 738 compared to 320 (maybe 50% of time). In that case 738 BGW is worse off than A320 light enhanced.
Also over about ~2800 km you actually have to use HGW version of 738 which is more expensive than A320 light enhanced even with additional row of economy seats.
If 738 or 320 - I guess you won’t get bancrupty by operating one or the other.
Does that explain why the A320NEO is sold in a ration of 2:1 contra the 737 MAX?
Since the discussion was about how the 737-800 compares to the A320 in real life vs this game, I am not sure why the sales figures of the NEO or the MAX is relevant here. Last I checked, neither the MAX nor the NEO is in service in real life, or have been introduced into this game.
As an aside, the MAX vs NEO split on firm orders is 60/40, not 2:1. The amount would no doubt be closer if the aircraft where launched at the same time vs a 8 month lead for the NEO. Neither aircraft is "rubbish", and to say so is just foolish.
Actually, if you look at the bottom charts, that 60/40 order ratio remains even when adjusting for the earlier start, and in fact the difference actually increased in 2015. And there are quite a few more airlines converting from the NG to the NEO than from the CEO to the MAX.
I agree though that neither aircraft is rubbish. That said, Airbus has clearly won the narrow-body war this time (with wide-bodies it’s quite the opposite).
Nobody has yet mentioned the inability to charge supplemental fees to account for the revenue shortfall of selling cheap fares. Not that it makes much of a difference, as the full-service carriers (at least in North America) are also charging the exact same fees on top of their already high fares. (Yes, I’m looking at you, Air Canada. With your fees to check a bag, a seat assignment, six tortilla chips and tablespoon of salsa, and the fee that is greater than the actual fare that offsets your revenue shortfall due to currency fluctuations that was mysteriously renamed from the original ‘fuel surcharge’.)
But to get back on topic:
why does 738 has such a terrible fuel consumption? Isnt AS based on real life stats?
The aircraft specs (things like size, weight, speed, etc.) are based on real life stats. Other things like fuel consumption and maintenance costs are, I believe, estimated based on these. Because you can't calculate and input exactly how much fuel every single airplane consumes at 500 km, 1000 km, 2000 km, 5000 km, etc. and every possible distance in between, for the hundreds of airplanes in the game. So what we have is a system that roughly estimates this based on the airplane's specs. Sometimes the calculation may be a bit off from reality, such as the 738.
But to get back on topic:
The aircraft specs (things like size, weight, speed, etc.) are based on real life stats. Other things like fuel consumption and maintenance costs are, I believe, estimated based on these. Because you can't calculate and input exactly how much fuel every single airplane consumes at 500 km, 1000 km, 2000 km, 5000 km, etc. and every possible distance in between, for the hundreds of airplanes in the game. So what we have is a system that roughly estimates this based on the airplane's specs. Sometimes the calculation may be a bit off from reality, such as the 738.
I would rather call the basic data "guesstimating".
The performance system had been in the works for several years now and is nowhere near completion.
O/T
... fee that is greater than the actual fare that offsets your revenue shortfall due to currency fluctuations that was mysteriously renamed from the original 'fuel surcharge'....
This one made me laugh out loud. Just had the same experience when booking Bangkok Air from Yangon (Myanmar) to Chiang Mai (Thailand). The price jumped from US$99 to US$ 159:
Luckily I spotted the difference and aborted the booking before my credit card was charged with an extra US$41 fuel cost and taxes not explained (what the hell is a "C7" or "E7" tax???). Nok air (albeit with a change of aircraft in Bangkok) provided the same transportation for less than US$ 99.
Needless to say that since this happened, I am avoiding Bangkok Air like the plague.
This is just simple price gauging, with crude being around 30 USD, which is as low as it could have gotten in the past 10 years (and with inflation offset, probably the lowest in the past 15-20 years), airlines are still charging fuel surcharge. Same as in the pump, gasoline prices are not going down as low as they should. Now, when crude will be back to 100 dollars in the future, we will be paying more than double (in gasoline, fuel surcarges, etc.) than we used to pay when crude was at 100 dollars 2 years back.