My private thread

This is my private thread where I will post my replies in English to discussions in German forums. I hope that everybody who was complaining about me first using Google Translate (yes utter fail), then complaining about just simply replying in English, will now be satisfied, as I will be only posting links to this thread and appropriate post, when on German forums.

In response to http://community.airlinesim.aero/topic/8963-dynamischer-turnaround-quimby/page-3#entry76610

Well, XRunner, of course everybody would want the new features, but not if they affect the existing airlines in such a way that they require huge time investments on player's side to manage entry of such feature.

For example, when new cabin config was introduced, it was not a problem - because it did not affect slots and schedules. Yes, players had to think of what they will use, but they did not have to reschedule anything.

It's the same thing as when you change service profile - it's changed and that's it, aircraft and schedules remain the same.

With the introduction of 6.2 the interface changed and the way to schedule and view booked flights changed, but it did not affect slots.

The problem with Dynamic Times it's that there is no way to make your old schedule times, and maintenance breaks, at the same time, simply by the way the new turnarounds are split into pre-flight and post-flight.

The issue is two-fold

- fitting of slots (impossible with new DTA, because you simply cannot make 60 minute TA time, maybe with no service and no cargo, and remote parking, but the whole business models go down the drain), plus there are many airports that have 45 minute TA times in legacy worlds, there is no way to fit them. Plus, you might get a 60-minte TA on 73G/319 but if you use 739/321 there is no way to turn it around in 60 minutes - it takes 75 to 90 minutes.

- fitting of maintenance breaks - with the current DTA split of turnaround into inbound and outbound block, you will lose maybe 50% of your currently scheduled maintenance blocks. You would need to change your scheduling, if you have 6 hour waves and have mx breaks, this would be impossible. You would need to schedule the whole nature of your wave scheduling and your business model. You would need more aircraft because existing flights would not fit on current aircraft.

So in some cases you might fit slots, but your maintenance break will be ruined. In other cases you may keep the maintenance breaks but will not be able to use slots. At the end, it is practically not possible to "rearrange schedules". It means complete schedule deletion, everywhere, and starting from scratch.

Trust me, I have been there, seen that, and it was PITA to reschedule just 400 aircraft, and create completely new schedules for them, and that was in a place where slots were doubled and virtually 95% free and had a ton of spare aircraft lying around. It was still something that took me good 2 weeks’ time to accomplish.

It is for this reason that I will vehemently oppose DTA introduction in "dynamic form" into legacy worlds (the static form as indicated by Martin is OK) - because I am one of the very few who have had experience and seen first-hand what utter chaos it brings into existing running operation.

Edit 27/10/2015

see sample flight plans below

So here are sample flight plans compared side by side:

oVStB2T.png

vs

aYgLXfw.png

 

Z5DUIkZ.png

vs

zKSWtLL.png

Now, where new times can work are for back to back schedules which had initially gaps, such as this one, and one single large maintenance window, such as the one below.

pgRONzG.png

and

tGKGxMX.png

Where it does not work, is for rather tight schedules which are split (with 2 or more maintenance windows). And from my experience most players do split schedules, it is even suggested in forums frequently to do split schedules (2 or more maintenance breaks per day). With split or tight schedules, the new maintenance times simply do not work.

Here is another one, a back to back schedule, but without gaps at destinations.

In the third example below, the service profiles was even completely removed one 4 flights, but flight overlaps would still be present.

XI65egt.png

vs

UPbd2kt.png

vs

NO SERVICE PROFILE WHATSOEVER

UfClCma.png

 

Sample long haul flight conflicts:

Mwta6oL.png

vs

wOyT9Ba.png

Another long-haul example, on 788

XU3rBup.png

vs

yxqQTNe.png

Now, what about some regiojets?

Here is an E195, with NO CARGO+Avoid bulk using DTA

CuJZZI0.png

vs

Za9k8BL.png

And now, what about Q400?

I cannot fit the legacy flight plan with dynamic times, even with NO SERVICE onboard!

KdF3TQS.png

vs

with NO CARGO(+avoid bulk)

ehJzfo3.png

and

with NO CARGO(+avoid bulk) + NO SERVICE PROFILE

CI8e2qI.png