I would suggest a way when managing many airlines to see all messages within a single inbox. It is painful receiving a message for each airline and having to check every single airline’s inbox to check or delete the similar notification.
Regarding IL and alliance: would be nice to vote for an alliance poll with all our current airlines within the alliance. Having to do so with each of them is combersome especially when owning many little ones.
Any news on the C919 ? Any way we’d get an approximate model with an educated guess (say less efficient than A220/Neo/E2/Max but cheap, which is what is expected of them being heavier than their counterparts) ?
A last one: is it implemented fuel consumption is inversely proportional to speed ? I’d love to use my flights with extra time on maintenance by flying them slowly to save fuel, for example the last return flight of a tight day.
Finally could it be feasible to have a custom plane template for private worlds ? One could imagine having one or X private planes in the private world, say anticipating new planes, recreating older ones? Could be as simple as using another plane’s template and modifying a few parameters only.
Finally as admin for a private world I’d find funny having the option or not to assess according to âge fleet and maintenance quality how likely a crash happens and its repercussions (say a special loan at high interest and temporary drop In image). Admin control of Load Factor
Oh and, I don’t know if it is done on purpose, but the type rating for 777 pilots and 787 pilots are technically the same. also I am unsure why the 767-400ER TR is different and merged with the 777’s (I only know of the 787/777)
Edit: and finally for real: any plans for Ancillary revenue ? To simulate a LCC you’d go lower price but expect sales. You’d sacrifice image for more revenue per flight (bags, food etc) making a good LCC model with full Y seats work; after all the most profitable airline per dollar invested is SWA !
The 764 has a different Cockpit compared to the other 767s and is based on the 777s Cockpit. With very little training the pilots can fly the other type.
I am absolutely with you regarding the first two points, especially. It gets tedious very quickly.
Fuel is a constant cost from what I have understood, regardless of speed and definitely regardless to LF. Usually airlines load less fuel if there’ll be less payload (less pax/baggage/etc) but this is not simulated in-game.
The one downside about this new ASTD is that most improvements, code effort, etc will be done for that, and rather than improving the existing user experience. Which is ok, but limits what would be “realistic” additions. I’d expect just a few QoL stuffs (like the quietly-rolled-out “best start” feature) and airport updates (hopefully!) rather than large changes in how the game runs and stuff like this.
As far as I know this is true, but trust me (as a pilot myself) the screens matter very very little, what matters is the systems and as far as I know the 767 400ER shares the type rating with the other 767s since the 2000s. In the same fashion, the 737 Max has the screen and a lot of buttons coming from the 787, but the systems and importantly the whole overhead is the same as before so the TR stays a 737-300/-9 (the legacy 100-200 are excluded and are their own type rating with minimal training). From a legal perspective, my paper allows me to fly any plane from the 300 to the max-10 when it’s out. There has been a mandatory short trainin, very controversial due to recent events, and to be frank it’s just to please the media because it lasted 2h per crew + only difference training, because at core the plane is the same. So the training between 767 and 777 400ER are shorter, but the type ratings are not the same. Also, the most important aspect in the game is that it means if you have 767s and want the ER, it means new maintenance cost over 3 types, which makes little sense. Hence why my quick question regarding the common TR being with the 777 when the plane is different ? In fact the 400ER did not sell well because it is not a 777 and the 777-200 stayed a better proposition (albeit less cheap than the newer 400ER).
In the same vein, the 330 and 350 are considered the same type rating only in EASA, so there’s some inconsistency on this as well. Either we go the commonality route and 787 and 777 are the same TR, as well as the 330/350, or we don’t (FAA, or even australia style where every single variant of a plane is a TR including GA airplanes like a cessna 172 instead of a Class Rating). In the EU switching from 330 to 350 on a daily basis is possible with 1 rating because beyond the screens they are similar planes (it’s important because you can legally only have 2 active TRs, and for example TUI has pilots operating the 787 in winter and the 737 in summer with 2 active TRs, so they technically could have them operate also the 777 during winter if they had some). In fact 330 to 350 is shorter than 777 to 787 despite the legality of the paper. I mean the 787 has lots of little tech quirks like engine starting on elec only and system differences which push the ATOs to make the 777 to 787 transition usually longer than legally required.
It is nitpicking but it surprised me a couple times when I wanted to expand my fleet and forgot the 400ER for intends and purposes is a little 777 in Airlinesim
EDIT: also according to this logic, the 737-200 (and 100 if available) should not have the same type rating, if you check how the cockpits and overheads are, you’d quickly get why you’re not allowed to fly one or the other without them counting as 2 type ratings
Yes I understand the fuel consumption rules could be a bit tedious, but it literally could be made in a few lines of codes (when the flight starts, the speed ratio vs normal speed would apply with a quick math expo rule on the fuel consumed for the flight, and same for the weight, a simplified ratio could be implemented). It’s just a quick suggestion on something that in itself could be simple to implement, at least for v2.0 if this comes out! I’d happily propose my own formulas if needed
As for deeper modifications I totally understand it could be complicated. QoL would be nice though, account or server wide settings / messages, alliance/IL control, stuff like that would be well appreciated for people who are power users !
