so, the CS100 has been introduced on AS. First of: Well done on the timing in accordance with Swiss' first commercial flight :)
Now as for AS: I see it is classed as a "narrowbody" rather than a regional jet, yet -at least on legacy worlds- it has no cargo capacity.
So it combines the two negatives (no cargo on regional jets on legacy servers, and larger category with longer production times).
There ought to be a mistake here, no?
I understand the classification as a narrowbody, due to its size and actual cabin width. BUT I don't understand why there is no cargo capacity given to it. From the servers with the new system, we know that it has capacities, and they aren't that tiny either.
Maybe someone from the DEV-team wants to double check/cross-reference the data?
It is a mainline aircraft which means that it is not a regional jet. The A318 and 736 does not either have any cargo capacity on legacy worlds. Personally I am very happy that it does not carry cargo because it would cut my profits needing to pay almost redundant cargo controllers, especially as I will use the aircraft for my tightest demand routes and for opening new routes.
At first, we thought about it as a regional jet as well, to be honest... but later we had to come to the conclusion, that it wouldn't be right.
Regarding configuration and capacity, we have similar aircraft categorized as narrowbody: A318, A319, B736. B73G, B717, C27...
So there wasn't much choice left and we had to put it on the same level... also already keeping in mind the CS300 (would be very annoying to have different turnaround times for different CSeries models, I'd say).
Me personally, I am more disappointed in the performance. As it should be better than B737 or A319 or E195, the difference is just not there or very minimal. Anyone else feels the same?
The CS-100 is competing against the E95 and A318 (and maybe the CRK). It's quite better than those on flights >1500 km, but in the <1000 km range it comes up short.
It's the CS-300 that will be competing against the A319 / 737-7, as although the 100 has much better fuel consumption, it's low capacit makes it not really a good alternative.
At first, we thought about it as a regional jet as well, to be honest... but later we had to come to the conclusion, that it wouldn't be right.
Regarding configuration and capacity, we have similar aircraft categorized as narrobody: A318, A319, B736. B73G, B717, C27...
So there wasn't much choice left and we had to put it on the same level... also already keeping in mind the CS300 (would be very annoying to have different turnaround times for different CSeries models, I'd say).
Agree. Specially if the CS-500 comes up later on. A plane that can fly up to 5000 km or more isn't really a "regional jet".
As it is actually at the Boeing 787-8 and -9? THIS is really annoying!
I know, but it's not that easy to just put a whole family of widebodies in one category...
Regarding CS100 performance:
It's really depends on your personal comparison, the evaluation tool might sometimes be a bit misleading (for range, cabin size or maintenance differences you don't see there).
And then there's the range - that other aircraft simply don't offer.
Me personally, I am more disappointed in the performance. As it should be better than B737 or A319 or E195, the difference is just not there or very minimal. Anyone else feels the same?
Maybe there will be adjustments at a later stage? In reality, the CSeries (like all new aircraft) has to show their abilities in real ops and the numbers could change (in a positive or negative way).
Personally I am very happy that it does not carry cargo because it would cut my profits
There should be IMO an option for cargo versus no cargo. The lack of lifting cargo alongside baggage on aircraft like the CSeries, Fokker 100, Dash 8, or MD-83 is unrealistic. Even small turboprops are able to carry additional cargo in real world. Nevertheless I am also happy that the CSeries is available here in the simulated aviation world. I will probably try to use them as 50-seaters. :ph34r: ;)
We are planning a change to the maintenance system, that allows us to adjust maintenance cost parameters. This was originally intended to allow us to reduce costs for widebodies, but it shall also bring a maintenance cost reduction for the CSeries (as this is a selling point for the CSeries in reality as well, but currently not reflected in the game).
If you had a good price E95s and replaced them for brand new CS100, well your flight cost will be higher. CS100's operational cost (combining leasing an fuel) is higher than E95, but lower than 736/318.
Trust me the CS300 is better, way better than the CS100. CS100 is just the warm up, the real thing is soon coming, finally a worthy 737 and A319 replacement.