I think ORS rating should have differentiate a via flights and a connecting flight. If I understand correctly, currently both kinds of flight can only obtain a maximum of 75 rating as of a one-stop routes. I think the via flight should not have any kind of discounts in terms of rating, as it has been penalized by rhe flight time aspect, which in turn already affected the rating. There is a major difference between the types as the via flights will not require passengers to leave the plane and board again, while connection flights requires, and also troublesome immigration and security checkings in some context. Thus the ORS rating should have a differentiation between two.
Second suggestion is adding a function to add a tech stop for the flights. Currently a via flight will allow passengers to embark and disembark the aircraft. The suggestion I make is to only allow refueling at the tech stop. Thus the aircraft can get an extended range from the origin of the flights. Again, the ORS rating should not have a ceiling of 75% as it will already be penalized by the total flight time. The tech stop I think should obly be confined to cities which your airline have traffic rights.
Third, I think the real aviation allows quite a lot of 5th freedom flights. To make the game more realistic, maybe we should start to introduce it. We can base on the real life bilateral arrangements that we cureently have, for example HKG based airline can only get 7x weekly 5th freedom flights between Canada and US. While China can have 14x weekly from Canada to other parts of the world. There is alot of other examples like recently Emirates got athens-JFK, or AirAsiaX got KIX-HNL. Who can get the traffic rights will be base on auction. Like the current aircraft auction, who pay the higer price can get the right. The airline with the right should be use within three days. If the 5th freedom flights is dropped for more than 3 days, the right will be in the market again for bidding. It can be set to be only for sale for certain airline basing in different countries. But I think.it takes time to create a database of current and possible 5th freedom flights with restrictions.
There is a major difference between the types as the via flights will not require passengers to leave the plane and board again, while connection flights requires, and also troublesome immigration and security checkings in some context. Thus the ORS rating should have a differentiation between two.
Second suggestion is adding a function to add a tech stop for the flights. Currently a via flight will allow passengers to embark and disembark the aircraft. The suggestion I make is to only allow refueling at the tech stop. Thus the aircraft can get an extended range from the origin of the flights. Again, the ORS rating should not have a ceiling of 75% as it will already be penalized by the total flight time. The tech stop I think should obly be confined to cities which your airline have traffic rights.
Third, I think the real aviation allows quite a lot of 5th freedom flights. To make the game more realistic, maybe we should start to introduce it. We can base on the real life bilateral arrangements that we cureently have, for example HKG based airline can only get 7x weekly 5th freedom flights between Canada and US. While China can have 14x weekly from Canada to other parts of the world. There is alot of other examples like recently Emirates got athens-JFK, or AirAsiaX got KIX-HNL. Who can get the traffic rights will be base on auction. Like the current aircraft auction, who pay the higer price can get the right. The airline with the right should be use within three days. If the 5th freedom flights is dropped for more than 3 days, the right will be in the market again for bidding. It can be set to be only for sale for certain airline basing in different countries. But I think.it takes time to create a database of current and possible 5th freedom flights with restrictions.
The issue with via flights is that they are not always that hassle free. If your aircraft is refuelling often times passengers need to deboard the plane for safety reasons if no fire truck is avaialble. When crossing international borders there are requirements for security and immigration checks. For instance flights from Europe to the Pacific such as Air New Zeland's LHR-LAX-AKL or Air France's CDG-LAX-PPT require passengers with continuing service to deboard at LAX clear full CBP inspection and then wait in a special transit area.
Personally I remember using KLM's AMS-JNB-CPT service in the early 2000s. While we didn't have to leave in JNB we had to wait for 2,5 hours onboard without air condition or drinks.
Offering a limited amount of 5th freedom flights will just create another sacred resource associated with uproar among the community.
I believe the US are a special case where you always have to go through immigration, even though you don't want to stay in the US at all. In most other cases, you don't need to go through the immigration hassle, while you sometimes even can get into the transit area and do some shopping.
I do agree that simple via flights should be slightly better rated, just to make this a bit more attractive.
Actually a bit off-topic, but: does anyone know, why the US process transit passengers? They are the only country in the world doing so. And: it makes a lot of work, costs a lot of money they spend on people who do not enter (and do not want to enter) the US. And it is a big disadvantage for their airlines.
I can only assume that it gives them the chance to control all pax that pass by. You could catch a wanted person, you get to collect their fingerprints, collect their travel patterns, etc.
The government doesn’t care if it’s a disadvantage for the airlines.
It isn't just the US, Canada also makes you go through immigration and security again at most airports here. Off the top of my head, I think it's just YYZ and YYC that have facilities for international-international transit. YYC's international facility only opened a couple of months ago.
I don't believe it's a matter of data gathering, but more a function of cost and the lack of exit controls. It's cheaper to build an airport that doesn't require a segregated section for international passengers - especially as most passengers within the US are flying to a final destination within the US.
Maybe its a good idea to open limited cities' 5th freedom to everyone, just like current open sky countries but without the need to establish a new subsidiary.