Once again ... one bar is what the passenger expects, 5 green bar is what in his mind is absolutely a top product for this class. So why should by there any adjustment?
I’m not discussing rating, but capacity. We can’t reproduce anything near reality with these seats. I think aircrafts are too narrow, as Wright and smoku said.
I think that 3-4-3 in a 777 should get one or more red bars for anything but short flights, this configuration is absolutly cramped and even peoples who have no clue about aircraft types etc. notice it. I know many airline are putting this configuration in their planes, but I will only book it if there is a significant difference in fare to an airline with an other type or 3-3-3 configuration. So actually the configuration seems to be correct.
Ok, but then the punishment for keeping the old system should be harsher.
Old seats have much better ratings than any other option for economy class.
Edit: Also, being good or not, we should be able to reproduce 3-4-3! It doesn’t matter if this is a crappy configuration.
In case of the 777 it is obvious that no realistic configuration is achievable with the current cabin editor. Many airlines (AA, AF, EK,...) put 10 seats (3-4-3) in one row in the economy class. These seats are certainly not the plainest and cheapest available! But in AS, you have to take Slimline HD if you want a 3-4-3 configuration! I suppose that the AS equivalent for the seats of Emirates, for example, would be Leisure Plus which is the cheapest seat that has a one green bar rating on a 10.500 km long-haul flight.
The editor has already been changed to accomodate 2-3-2 Leisure+ or Comfort seats in the B767 and 2-4-2 seats in the A330/340. This is a perfect solution and reflects the reality! But now, the B777 has a great and unrealistic disadvantage due to her shorter cabin! Just compare the A340-600 and the B777-300ER: After the patch, you can put 408 Comfort seats (2-4-2) in the A340-600, which is certified for 440 passengers, while the B777-300ER can carry only 384 in Comfort seats (2-4-2) although she is certified for as many as 550 passengers! This is highly unrealistic! The 777-300 may be somewhat shorter, but her cabin is also 58 cm wider than the A340-600 and NO 777 operator has less than 9 seats per row in the economy! In a 3-3-3 configuration she would carry 432 passengers, at 3-4-3 480 passengers.
Or 340-600 vs. 777-200: Both certified for 440 passengers, but the 777-200 carries 96 pax less!
So, in my opinion, the editor has to be fixed to allow 10 Leisure+ seats per row, 9 Comfort seats per row or 8 Comfort+ seats per row in the 777!
although she is certified for as many as 550 passengers! This is highly unrealistic!
I actually think it is quite realistic. I'm only basing this on what I have from Wikipedia but I can barely find an Airline that puts more than 300 seats in a 777-200ER. (Okay I found two with above 300 seats , 341 Saudi Airlines and 307 Air France)
You can actually recreate the configuration of Singapore Airlines with Open Suite, Lie-Flat 160( or 140 dont remember) and Comfort seats....SK wrote he focused a lot on the 777 because of some galley location stuff...cant quite remeber. I doubt he made a big mistake here.
PS: Best example is the 737-600. It's certified for 149 passengers but you just cannot fit them in because of missing space
You can not compare 333 / 343 / 772 with 773 and 346
Just it somthing wrong to A 340-600 has got more seats than 777-300. It is no realisitic. MOstly airlines use 3-4-3 or 3-3-3 , 2-3-2 in Economy premium. Nowhere is 2-4-2 !
As I said :
NOW -------------- Suggest changes
3-4-3 Slimline 3-4-3
3-3-3 Standard 3-4-3
3-3-3 Leisure 3-3-3
3-3-3 Leisure + 3-3-3
2-4-2 Comfort 3-3-3
2-3-2 Comfort+ 2-3-2 or 2-4-2
------------------------------------
In addition there are somthing wrong as well at 737-300 and 737-700. This aircraft are that seme , only differents is epoch . But now in AS 737-300 has got more seats than 737-700. There are missing one row.
I actually think it is quite realistic. I'm only basing this on what I have from Wikipedia but I can barely find an Airline that puts more than 300 seats in a 777-200ER. (Okay I found two with above 300 seats , 341 Saudi Airlines and 307 Air France)
You can actually recreate the configuration of Singapore Airlines with Open Suite, Lie-Flat 160( or 140 dont remember) and Comfort seats....SK wrote he focused a lot on the 777 because of some galley location stuff...cant quite remeber. I doubt he made a big mistake here.
PS: Best example is the 737-600. It's certified for 149 passengers but you just cannot fit them in because of missing space
I referred to the 777-300 which usually carries more. But we are not talking about total capacities with regard to luxury seating in first and business classes, or the galley stuff, but the cabin width and the number of seats in one row in the economy class! Since the 777 is 58 cm wider, ALL major operators put a least 9 seats (3-3-3) in one row and many put 10 (3-4-3). The last one is only possible if you use Slimline HD but it does not reflect reality. If one green bar is what passengers can expect, as SK wrote, Leisure+ is the worst seat that is reasonable on >10.000 km long-haul flights. This seat would reflect the configuration that airlines like Emirates use in reality (3-4-3)! Some airlines offer more comfort with a 3-3-3 seating - that would be the Comfort seat in my suggestion. On the current state, the 777 is greatly undervalued! This could be corrected by the following changes:
NOW ------------------ My suggestion (little different from smoku's)
3-4-3 Slimline HD 3-4-3
3-3-3 Standard 3-4-3
3-3-3 Leisure 3-4-3
3-3-3 Leisure + 3-4-3 ("Emirates")
2-4-2 Comfort 3-3-3 ("Qatar Airlines")
2-3-2 Comfort+ 2-4-2
If the team fixed the 330/340 to reflect reality, why the 777 should stay behind?
Once again ... one bar is what the passenger expects, 5 green bar is what in his mind is absolutely a top product for this class. So why should by there any adjustment?
Well, SK, because of this:
Ok, but then the punishment for keeping the old system should be harsher.
Old seats have much better ratings than any other option for economy class.
It's not a matter of how many bars you get. I don't care if I get 1 or 3 if it's a level playing field. But if I can get 3 and someone with an old config can get 5 it's completely unfair.
Just give one or two weeks and after this period change every old config with standard configuration, problem solved. Player who do not change in two weeks its their fault and that it. Airlinesim is advancing and I support new features and the old ones have to be forgotten.
@Wright: Have you ever flown in a 10 abreast(i.e. 3-4-3) 777? If not let me tell you it's NOT what you can call comfortable, it's really cramped and I avoid flying on 3-4-3 777 if possible and I know other people who do the same...to have a 3-4-3 Leisure or even Leisure Plus seating would be highly unrealistic, because 3-4-3 is less than what most people would expect, i.e. less than one green bar. I agree that the 777 economics in the game are a lot worse than in reality where it is still one of the most economic long range aircraft - but this should not be regulated by making an unrealistic seating possible, better adjust fuelburn or other factors
For what it is worth. I believe the new system is a step in the right direction.
However, a few tweaks are in order. The best suggestion i’ve seen so far was to create an adjustable seat width option.
It seems both realistic and practical. Aircraft seats are tailored to specific aircraft types. It makes sense to give airlines the same option that real operators have.
The problems current users are having is that they do not have the flexibility in seat options that real airlines do, even with the new system.
You are dealing with variable cabin sizes and many fixed seat sizes, so naturally you will have problems on a per aircraft basis.
Essentially some particular wide body aircraft, because of their specific widths, can not take advantage of the ORS ratings associated with particular seats (profitably).
In any case the complaints do have some legitimacy, and I hope the AS team can resolves them after enjoying the remainder of the Christmas break.
Edit; grammar
Btw, anyone successfully operated a profitable B777?
With this structure cabin , no !
Hi I would like to add my two cents here.
I have started to refit my aircrafts a few days ago and I noticed something really odd.
Some of you said Comfort is equivalent to the old EcoPlus, but I am afraid that is not the case.
I used EcoPlus / Business Premium / Diamond Class across my whole fleet (inc. 737s and 787s), and now I have switched to Comfort Plus and Full Bed, again across the whole fleet.
I have noticed that when you click into the details page of a particular flight, and check the flight ratings, there is something odd in Y class. Under "Product Factors", my New Y has lost a bar on "Price" despite there is NO CHANGE IN Y CLASS FARE.
I have checked both short haul and long haul flights (CLT-JFK vs. CLT-AMS) and both Y class lost a bar on price. So I wonder, if even Comfort Plus is not the true replacement of EcoPlus, what is? And more importantly, what is the incentive for us to refit our planes now?
Calvin, comfort plus is NOT replacement of EcoPlus... Comfort is replacement (rating-wise) of the old Economy seat (and 1 or 2 points better in ORS). But Recliner Shorthaul is what is replacement of EcoPlus.
http://community.airlinesim.aero/topic/5654-size-of-the-new-seats/#entry44859
check 737 space ratios for the seats (not 777 as the new seats do not fit 777 well).
Calvin, comfort plus is NOT replacement of EcoPlus... Comfort is replacement (rating-wise) of the old Economy seat (and 1 or 2 points better in ORS). But Recliner Shorthaul is what is replacement of EcoPlus.
http://community.airlinesim.aero/topic/5654-size-of-the-new-seats/#entry44859
check 737 space ratios for the seats (not 777 as the new seats do not fit 777 well).
Thank you, I guess I was mistaken then.
That brings up another question, how are we going to do business and compete with the "old configurations" when:
1) we lose so much seat density on a plane just to keep the rating
2) we cannot increase the fare to compensate the loss of seat density - in order to keep the rating
I would appreciate any enlightenment, especially from the AS team.
But that IS the task you have to face in reality and in AirlineSim ... otherwise it would be to easy ...
But that IS the task you have to face in reality and in AirlineSim ... otherwise it would be to easy ...
Well... yes and no... in RL airlines can put up new seats even if the competitor does not refurbish his fleet. Then, if those airlines find out new seats are not working for them (e.g. more comfy seats but they cannot increase the fare and have to compete against other airlines with older seats but same or lower fare) they come to a conclusion that with the old config they were financially better off. So they revert back to the old config (actually in RL they test try new config on part of the fleet and if it does not pay off they do not continue changing the fleet). We all know that economy class passenger is price sensitive to a certain degree and price elasticity is much lower in economy class than it is in first and business class - and this is understandable, economy pax usually pay for their travel themselves while business travel is paid by the companies and first class travel by the trust funds.
So to make this current situation more RL, I would suggest that airlines on existing worlds can apply old config back ... not creating new config with odl seats, but only being allowed to apply old config to old aircraft already in their fleet (no new deliveries).
I see the problem with the wide body A/C, but on the narrow bodies it isn't that bad? My excisisting airline on Kaitak is actually doing better (more profitable by 8%) with the new seating despite the little bit lower ORS rating on the seats. I was able to raise the price of C class seats without pricing muself out of the comeptition. And to be honest, it is this "tweaking" of your airline what makes it fun for me.
The long haul flights do have a problem, it is much more difficult to get full planes and make profit. In real life the long haul network is what is making money at the big network carriers. Although in RL they will have to settle with a profit of 5-9% a year instead of a week ;-)
Hi,
I would not allow airlines to go back to the old seat configurations.
However, one could decrease the rating of the old seats. AS could announce that after a certain date, all old seats will have a 20% lower rating.
Jan