Jump to content


Patreon Supporter
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About erroneous

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Awesome. Everything seems to be back where it should be for me. Thanks a bunch!
  2. We know that intercity demand in ASW is based largely on population within a certain range of the airport. The details are not super important for this post, because the numbers for Buenos Aires are so far off that I don't think they matter. Here's the thing: Buenos Aires is the second-largest metro area by population in South America, with around 15 million population. So we would expect the overall demand for airports in the metro region to land somewhere between that of airports in the largest metro area in South America, Sao Paulo (22 million), and the third largest, Rio de Janiero (13 million), probably closer to Rio. Let's do a benchmark. We'll pick a point pretty close to equideistant to those cities...Cali, Columbia (CLO) is 2883mi from EZE, and 2878mi from GIG. Since Buenos Aires is slightly bigger than Rio, we'd expect slightly more demand. Actual demand from CLO to GIG is 11,881, but actual demand from CLO to EZE is only 626, less than 5% of demand to GIG. So, we have equal distances and equal populations, but maybe language or culture or something is factoring in? Let's compare EZE to the main airport of the next biggest Argentine city, Cordoba. Cordoba is about 1/10 the size of Buenos Aires, with a metro area of around 1.5 million. Again, we'll pick an equidistant city, Fortaleza, Brazil (FOR), 2492mi from EZE and 2526mi from COR. Actual demand from FOR to COR is 442, and actual demand from FOR to EZE is only 172, so demand is 1/4 for a city 10x the size. Well...maybe EZE is in a bad location? First of all, well, NO, it's not, it's smack dab in the middle of the greater Buenos Aires metro area: Second, Buenos Aires is a big city, and it's served by multiple airports. So, let's check them all from some big hub, like JFK. JFK-EZE generates 2,111 demand. JFK-AEP generates 2,069 demand. And EPA, although it has commercial service, isn't represented in game (but there's another thread for that). Again, compare those numbers to Rio, a slightly smaller and closer city (GIG: 40,767, SDU: 40,406) or Santiago, Chile, a significantly smaller and further away city (SCL: 19,788), and it should be clear that there's something very wrong with demand in Buenos Aires.
  3. And another plane failing to scale correctly for inflation...Boeing 727-100 base price is $34.7m (seems about right) but the only engine variant's price is $4.25m.
  4. Thanks, that'd be great! Forcing a recalculate is per route, right? Or do I just need to open and save the plane's schedule? Either way is much better than changing every flight. https://play.airsim.world/airline/1082/
  5. Ugh. Any chance we can get a "shift schedule" command to move an an entire a/c schedule at once then? Really not looking forward to manually rescheduling 1092 flights.
  6. @sviridovtStill seeing the same thing.
  7. Leave it be for now. It's probably just off by 5 hours due to this bug. Early flights on Monday might not show up in the scheduler, but they're probably still there...check in the All Flights section of the route, at the very end (after the Sunday night flights).
  8. Thanks! Two little things to report after the update...the L-1011-100 is showing a good base price now ($112m), but the L-1011-500 is still showing very low base price ($23m), although the engine option price is correct. And, conversely, the HS 748 shows a correct *base* price ($15.3m) but the only engine option still shows the old price ($1.6m), and that's what you actually get charged if your order one.
  9. The Aircraft Explorer says the L-1011 will also release at its un-adjusted 1970's price in a few years, so it's probably worth looking at it too, even though it's not available ingame yet.
  10. I believe prices are supposed to be inflation-adjusted, but some of them don't seem to be. The Trident series, for example, seems to be selling at its unmodified 1970s price (which I've seen quoted as $7-8 million in period documentation). Scaled for inflation that would be ~$40 million, which is a lot closer to what its American competitor the 727 is selling for. The DC-9 probably needs to be checked too...the DC-9-10 is currently selling at what Wikipedia claims it sold for in 1972, without inflation scaling. Not that I'm really complaining...super-cheap Tridents is awesome news for my airline!
  11. @Air Australia - are you planning to participate in A II? If so, when can we expect an ingame alliance to be set up there? If not, can you appoint a second leader or moderator who can start one there?
  12. As one of the world's largest operators of 752s, I've been looking into what I should start ordering once they go out of production. Boeing seems to recommend the 739ER, but the data here has a major hiccup. Airsim lists the cabin length of the base 739 correctly, at 37.11m, but the 739ER seems to have a typo, at just 17.11m (which is much shorter than even a 731). Any chance we can get that corrected before they become available for order?
  13. I don't know if this is the case for anyone else, but I'm encountering what I believe is a bug while trying to join the alliance in the sim. I reported it at https://git.sviridov.us/sviridovt/AirSimWorld/issues/102
  • Create New...