Thursday, December 8th 2011

As you’ve probably noticed, the network maps went online this morning. I spent a bit more time this morning to get them to render faster and I hope they are working as expected. Note that the maps might get cached by your browser for performance reasons, so if the image doesn’t look as expected try hitting F5.

Other than that I’m at work on the aircraft performance system and the configurator. Don’t get your hopes up though, we are still quite a bit from being done. This is what the roadmap looks like right now:


[*]Get the final bits and pieces of the core performance system done (namely take-off and landing performance)

[*]Let an aerospace engineer do a check of the finalized system to ensure it makes sense

[*]Prepare guidelines for collection and quality assurance of the new data that needs to be collected

[*]Start data collection effort to get all current aircraft models up-to-date


In parallel to these more or less data-centric tasks I will continue finishing the aircraft configurator and all parts of the game that are directly affected by the new system. When this is done and the data is ready, we will look for a way to deploy the new feature asap, adding additional features and effects the configurator allows for later on. Of course you’ll find any new and noteworthy stuff on the dev-log!



9 MRD AS$, Cheater… :D

Topic: I don’t know how much of a difference it would make but I have a larger list (it’s not finally done yet) with engines + aircraft with list of which engines they can probably get if wanted. I saw Trent 550 and thought, “nah, Trent 556, Trent 556A2, Trent 560 are possible!” Of course for a start it would be enough and the list isn’t finished - as mentioned - 'cause not any information platform offers any datas of any engines and any aircraft so you have to collect and compare what’s right…

I think besides HGW, IGW, extra fuel tank a engine with up to 20% more thrust will make a large difference but I didn’t study this stuff so… Just an offer. :)

EDIT: And aswell: I don’t know how you could integrate them. :P

Is that a suggestion to have an "engine option" option? e.g. Choosing between IAE 2500 and CFM56 for 320

My thought was:

Let’s say you have an Airbus A330-300 and you have already decided to take Rolls-Royce Trent.

There would be the option to take the A330 in the standard version with the smallest engines available, in this case Trent 768 (301.30 kN). If you want to have some extra fuel to fly longer routes and increase your MTOW (A330-300X) for those A330 you need you would run into bad performances with those engines. So you could take Trent 772 (or if this feature will come 772B / C will make sense for high altitude airports (btw most airlines use B & C for there A333X). A Trent 768 burns less fuel - I think, don’t exactly know - as it has less power so that would be nature if it would burn less…

If you don’t need an expensive Trent 772 for your whole fleet you could take some A330 with Trent 768 and less MTOW, safe money & fuel (you will love this possibilty when the fuel price rises and rises! :D).