ORS 99 now impossible on older (or slower?) jet aircraft ... ???

English Boards General
1

I submitted the following as a ticket to AS. It is really disturbing and unsettling that right now you can not achieve ORS 99 with B737 classics or MD80s. I guess the same would go for MD90, B717, etc.

My ticket (in italics):

I would like to ask if there has been any change to ORS methodology of rating calculations in the past 2-3 days.

Because right now I am unable to get ORS of 99 on 737 classic or MD80 aircraft, the best I can gets is 98 in business class (even the best suite seat and best service and 50% price gets me only 98 ORS).

(NOTE) In other words, if I put luxury suite, best service, and charge 50% of price, e.g. on route between 400 km and 1500-3000 km in Y, or any route in C, I cannot get 99 ORS rating, only 98. Again... Luxury suite, best service, 50% of default price, and ORS is still 98. This was tested and confirmed... on a  flight of 600, 1700, and 2300 km length. ORS of 99 is only possible to achieve on the mentioned aircrafts in Y class on flights of less than 400 km, or 1500 to 3000 km.

And in economy class I can only get 99 on very short flights (up to 400 km) or flights between 1500-3000 km.

But on flights between 400 km and 1500 km I can only get ORS 98 even with the best seats available and full service (maximum possible service for the class).

I know I could have gotten ORS 99 before, because I was checking C class lie flat 140 about 3 days ago, and I was able to get ORS 99 rating on Boeing 737 classic.

Right now, Boeing 737 classic only can get 98 ORS rating, but Boeing 727 can still get ORS rating of 100. Only other mainline aircraft that can get ORS 99 right now are B737 NG, A320 series, E-jets and CRJ-700/900 jets.

I would like to know if this is intentional or if it is a bug. I see this happening on both Fornebu and Nocosia.

Additional comments:

What is interesting that a 17 year old B737-300 right now cannot achieve ORS 99, but an 18 year old B737-700 can. Tried and tested. This leads me to believe that the age is not an issue, but rather the speed of the plane is having some more important role to play in ORS calculations.

But if AS made any change to the methodology of ORS calculations, we the players should have been informed in due course. Just days ago I was playing with Lie Flat 140 in C class and I can attest that at that time the B737 classic could get ORS 99 on any route (under 800 km, 800 km to 1500 km, and over 1500 km) with no problems.

I am now finding the "first" ratings same as before, but the "overall value" rating now only 98. E.g. a route where I tested couple of days ago and I got ORS rating of 57/99, now I only get 57/98.

Again, this is quite disturbing and unsettling.

2

since you already submitted a msg to the support, wouldn't the appropriate thing to do be to wait for a reply?

edit: grammar

3

Disturbing and unsettling? No offense intended, but are you sure you have your priorities in life straight?

4

You are somewhat correct. Speed does have an effect on ORS, in that it takes a shorter time to fly, and shorter times = higher ORS scores. I'd doubt it's anything other than that.

Next time, maybe take a moment, breathe, and wait to post a support ticket in the forum until you've had it addressed or answered. Maybe there was an oversight? I seriously doubt there was some kind of re-calculation or re-formulation without some kind of update, but maybe someone made a mistake? Dragging it out like this and calling it "disturbing and unsettling" is, in my opinion, a bit overboard. Finding out a murderer lives next door to you is "disturbing and unsettling." This is a one point drop on an online aircraft business simulator.

5

The reply was that there was no recent change.

Those who replied ... I think you misunderstood my point. I did not post the ticket here for any other reason other than to get some discussion about what can be causing it.

If I used "disturbing and unsettling" ... I think you put too much stress on those three words . It is disturbing and unsettling in a point that there may be hundreds of players who may have had their ORS dropped by one point and it can make strategic difference on certain routes. For highly competitive trunk routes with lots of O/D traffic, this may have a serious impact in drop of bookings at the time of demand calculation. (or maybe it is just me that I have so "bad luck" to have strong competitors that always go for 99 rating... because truth be told I checked some huge airlines on the servers where I play and they manage in 85-95 rating scale).

And as I mentioned, the "first" ORS rating that has impact on connecting traffic (it is a known fact that connection rating is taken from the "first rating" numbers of connecting legs plus the total travel time factored in), remains unchanged. Again, I think caithes and (especially) Cookie took the "disturbing and unsettling" in a completely different meaning that what I meant.

6

I would like to say "No" to this, as my Boeing 727-200 aircraft have gotten 99s before, they are (avg) 35 years old and not popular, how is your service faring, which server are you on? Are you charging higher prices than everyone else. The 733 you mentioned is less PAX popular than the 737-700 (Passengers like it less) proof: http://croydon.airlinesim.aero/action/enterprise/aircraftsType?id=11000 look at the bar, only +3 for the 737-300, while the 737-7 :   http://croydon.airlinesim.aero/action/enterprise/aircraftsType?id=11700 has plus five (5) bars, and the MD 80s have +2 and +3 bars across the line, I think that that plays a part in this.

The ORS system doesn't discriminate against aircraft other than age and pax popularity(that I know of) of which a 35 Y/O 727-200 (-5 bars on age)(-3 bars on type) http://croydon.airlinesim.aero/action/enterprise/aircraftsType?id=9800 can still get an ORS 99 or 100, I think there is another factor that we all are missing, including me.

7

I guess you'll have to copy/paste the 737-700 link, I could not fix it, sorry.

8

Loki please do not take this in a bad way, but in the future please read more carefully.

I wrote I put deluxe suite (best possible seat in AS), best possible ever service (the most ever expensive and comprehensive service possible), and set rate to 50% of default. It never can get "better" than that for a test. An ORS still came up as 98.

Edit: And I also made a test with a "regular" service and comfort plus/recliner LH seat on a 35-y/o 727* with popularity of (minus) three RED bars, getting an ORS of 100. Both seats are much less luxurious than a luxury suite, and "regular" service is much inferior to a "maxed-out service" I tested on a 737 classic, and both age and popularity are much worse on 727 than on a 737 classic. So age and popularity is not a problem in this case and seat and service type is only partially relevant.

* That's why I wrote that a B727 can still get ORS of 100, because I tested it myself.

9

I think it is because it all comes down to Popularity with Passengers rating of the plane, IF all the other factors are the same between 737-300 and 737-700, Moreover 300 is slower, which we know is an very important factor as 10km/h is difference between 100 ORS and 99 ORS. 

So I see no mistakes or bugs here. Those limitations on ORS are well known and 98 ORS is super good rating.

 

10

I believe you're taking this simulator a little too seriously.

11

I agree with Caithes, and I don't know what is going on then, as I've managed to get an ORS 100 on a 727, i just dunno.

12

Loki please do not take this in a bad way, but in the future please read more carefully.

I wrote I put deluxe suite (best possible seat in AS), best possible ever service (the most ever expensive and comprehensive service possible), and set rate to 50% of default. It never can get "better" than that for a test. An ORS still came up as 98.

Edit: And I also made a test with a "regular" service and comfort plus/recliner LH seat on a 35-y/o 727* with popularity of (minus) three RED bars, getting an ORS of 100. Both seats are much less luxurious than a luxury suite, and "regular" service is much inferior to a "maxed-out service" I tested on a 737 classic, and both age and popularity are much worse on 727 than on a 737 classic. So age and popularity is not a problem in this case and seat and service type is only partially relevant.

* That's why I wrote that a B727 can still get ORS of 100, because I tested it myself.

Oh, and I agree, I do need to read more carefully.

13

I thought it has been proven that the speed of the aircraft can affect ORS ratings....that's why you can only achieve 99 on a 737NG whereas you can get 100 on a 727...and 787/747 etc of course.

14

Hi,

popularity and age of the plane have nothing to do with it. They are both image factors.

Your overall airline image is a product factor. But that is the total image of all your flights. If you have 99 old planes and one shiny new plane, you will have a low airline image. But the new plane will get the same "penalty" as your old planes. And if you have 99 new planes and one crappy old plane, you will have a high airline image. In this case that one old plane will receive the benefit of the 99 new planes.

If luxury suites, top notch on-board service and cheap tickets give you an overall rating of 98... it means 98 is the maximum rating you can get for a plane with that speed.

I am not sure, but I seem to remember that I (several years ago) have operated planes with maximum ORS rating of 98. Perhaps players who operate slower jets can shed a light on the issue.

Anyway, Calvin is right. Overall ORS rating = product rating * speed factor. I am unaware of other factors between product rating and overal rating when you talk about direct flights. Unaware means that I don't know  ;-)

Jan