Maintenance cost 20% higher on Ellinikon ... ?

English Boards General
1

While replying to this thread

http://community.airlinesim.aero/topic/7191-superjet-vs-embraer-fuel-burn/

I created a test account on Quimby, as Ellinikon is full.

I noticed that maintenance cost for the plane on the same route (Teheran Mahrabad to Dubai) is about 20% higher on Ellinikon than on Quimby/Aspern (and about 25-27% higher than on older game worlds).

If that is true, then, basically, we have:

- Higher landing fees (starting with Aspern)

- Higher maintenance (starting with Ellinikon)

- Less revenue from business on short/medium haul (which is 80-90% of the traffic) (starting with Quimby)

with a result: much, much less profitability.

Conclusion: Play on the older game world :)

Any input on this from AS please?

Why was the maintenance cost substantially increased on Ellinikon? 20% more in maintenance cost is no spare change ...

EDIT: I forgot about the "lousy" price of some maintenance providers and considered default maintenance pricing.

2

What aircraft exactly did you compare? I found no difference.

Are you sure, you picked the same maintenance providers for your comparison?

EDIT:

And looking and landing fees, they are not higher in general, it's just a new balancing. You can also find examples of lower landing fees.

3

Yeah you're right, I "forgot" about the different maintenance cost, I was comparing default Amethyst, looks like the player in question was employing Helvetic as his maintenance provider.

Though I do not play there, I am glad that the maintenance cost did not increase in general on the new world...

4

I found default prices of routes in ellinikon much lower. When i was playing in croydon default fare between LHE and KHI was 142 in economy and 708 in first class and in ellinikon it is 118 in economy and 375 in first class. Means less profit.