putting a smaller plane on the route, etc.

That's what I mean, though you are right that the return leg could potentially be difficult to coordinate when you are flying the same route ten times a day and have competitors doing the same.

Are PMDG group pro-americans/illuminati ???

I'm surprised that they allowed the flight to depart. Shouldn't there be a load factor minimum value (e.g., 67%), so airlines are able to maximize efficiency and save fuel?

 

Also you would be causing problems for the passengers who are booked if you cancel a scheduled flight in addition to causing other issues such as aircraft positioning.

Also you would be causing problems for the passengers who are booked if you cancel a scheduled flight in addition to causing other issues such as aircraft positioning.

I meant to suggest condensing two relatively empty flights into one or switching the original aircraft to a smaller one. The flights I was referring to were flights such as RCTP–VHHH, which are flown upwards of ten times per day by a single airline. Obviously what I was suggesting would not work as well with less-popular routes.

I meant to suggest condensing two relatively empty flights into one or switching the original aircraft to a smaller one. The flights I was referring to were flights such as RCTP–VHHH, which are flown upwards of ten times per day by a single airline. Obviously what I was suggesting would not work as well with less-popular routes.

 

Sometimes you do not have a different plane on hand to substitute or the type rated crew isn't available, changing planes is a bit more difficult than simply swapping them at the gate. Also if a pax booked to fly at a certain time they have to arrive on time so by condensing you may cause pax from the earlier cancelled flight to miss their connection or if you cancel the later flight the inbound passengers may miss the earlier flight.

Sometimes you do not have a different plane on hand to substitute or the type rated crew isn't available, changing planes is a bit more difficult than simply swapping them at the gate. Also if a pax booked to fly at a certain time they have to arrive on time so by condensing you may cause pax from the earlier cancelled flight to miss their connection or if you cancel the later flight the inbound passengers may miss the earlier flight.

True—it is all very complicated, but I still think that there must be some way to utilize aircraft capacity better. I just checked the Cathay Pacific web site, and it indicates that Cathay Pacific flies 19 times from Taipei to Hong Kong every day, using the A330, B747, B777-200, and B777-300. I do not know how airlines organize flight schedules, but I think one could condense the 19 flights per day into 15 or 10. Customers probably wouldn't mind if the flights were spaced, say, an hour or so apart from each other. Plus, when you have competition from China Airlines and EVA Air, price will probably be equally as important as departure time, especially since you already have so many flights spaced together.

No, PMDG should make this bird instead:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL_M-15_Belphegor

 

Sure the most interesting agricultural airplane ever.

No, PMDG should make this bird instead:

 

Okay, that has to be one of the strangest a/c I've ever come across. I mean Soviet a/c are unusual to begin with, but really? A jet-powered cropduster? I'm sure it was fun to fly at least...

http://en.wikipedia...._M-15_Belphegor

The main image on Wikipedia is such that the wing supports of the aircraft looked like part of the fuselage. When I first saw it, I thought it was some sort of U-Haul trailer with an aircraft nose and wings. . . .

True—it is all very complicated, but I still think that there must be some way to utilize aircraft capacity better. I just checked the Cathay Pacific web site, and it indicates that Cathay Pacific flies 19 times from Taipei to Hong Kong every day, using the A330, B747, B777-200, and B777-300. I do not know how airlines organize flight schedules, but I think one could condense the 19 flights per day into 15 or 10. Customers probably wouldn't mind if the flights were spaced, say, an hour or so apart from each other. Plus, when you have competition from China Airlines and EVA Air, price will probably be equally as important as departure time, especially since you already have so many flights spaced together.

 

If they make 19 flights the demand is probably there on a normal basis and given that CX doesn't operate smaller aircraft they have to use widebodies, airlines do cut unprofitable schedules.

I'm not sure why you put (J/K) behind that sentence. Ryanair's CEO has seriously suggested flying with only 1 pilot on multiple occasions.

 

Nope... he has never seriously suggested flying with only one pilot, neither has he ever seriously suggested upright "seating" in his 738s. I could say that I was going to personally buy DL, AA, UA and then BA/IB, AF/KL and LH and merge them all into one airline, and it would have about same degree of reality. Only nobody would listen to me, because I am not a CEO of a major LCC.

 

All these stories about what he supposedly wants to do serve one purpose only - get Ryanair into news. Free publicity equals free advertisement. That is a good deal. Of course he knows noone will ever certify a 738 of his for more than 189 places and he knows noone will allow one of his pilots to go work the trolley, (and even if they did, he would save nothing, cause he would still have to keep 4 FAs there on TO and LDG, when the pilot guy is up front)

Simply because that bird would not fit in any computer or any eyefinity / nvidia surround

 

Nope... he has never seriously suggested flying with only one pilot, neither has he ever seriously suggested upright "seating" in his 738s. I could say that I was going to personally buy DL, AA, UA and then BA/IB, AF/KL and LH and merge them all into one airline, and it would have about same degree of reality. Only nobody would listen to me, because I am not a CEO of a major LCC.

 

All these stories about what he supposedly wants to do serve one purpose only - get Ryanair into news. Free publicity equals free advertisement. That is a good deal. Of course he knows noone will ever certify a 738 of his for more than 189 places and he knows noone will allow one of his pilots to go work the trolley, (and even if they did, he would save nothing, cause he would still have to keep 4 FAs there on TO and LDG, when the pilot guy is up front)

 

Yeah, you're probably right .

A PMDG Antonov-225 would be the best cargo plane in FSX ... the an-225 is soo sexy and has enormous capacities, 10000x better than boeing cargo planes.

 

 

 

Why are they always making american planes ? Why not making the AN-225 ?

 

Are PMDG group pro-americans/illuminati ???

 

Before going for some oddball russian plane, there's much more flying stuff commonly used by airlines around the world that deserves to be modeled first:

ERJ, CRJ, Airbus family, Q400, ...

Then the business jets.

 

So, no support for the Antonov idea from my side, sorry.

Before going for some oddball russian plane, there's much more flying stuff commonly used by airlines around the world that deserves to be modeled first:

ERJ, CRJ, Airbus family, Q400, ...

Then the business jets.

 

So, no support for the Antonov idea from my side, sorry.

 

Well Q400 is already coming from Majestic in extremely high quality... FSLabs will likely make rest of modern Airbus family.

 

I think PMDG should make classic 747, one of the most important planes inhistory of aviation and still widely in use today.