DaviiB

The barriers to entry in NYC would be the fact that it's a mature market. Tons of well established players, clients that are happy where they are and difficult to sway....... And you're coming in there with no reputation and no established clients. I have a bunch of ideas for what you're thinking of, but I'll get to those in a bit. DB

Unless you're the only game in town, not having sales people/account managers (or someone in that role) is a really bad idea. Even at a mom and pop outfit, someone is building and maintaining relationships with their clients. Even if the owner, pilot, maintenance guy and account manager are all the same person. Operators like the ones in Flying Wild Alaska and Ice Pilots are well known outfits in small communities and have been around forever. Even then...they have someone who's role is client facing....for quoting...paperwork etc.....managing those accounts is part of that as well. That bit never makes the final TV cut though. Once you move beyond the mom and pop outfit....if you're a pure charter operation, then having someone responsible for sales is essential to grow the business. Again, it doesn't have to be a dedicated role but moving into larger, more mature markets, the competition can be brutal, so just sitting around waiting for business to come to you is a bad idea. This person can still be one of the owners, pilots, or a high-level manager...typically at the turboprop / light jet level with a couple aircraft in the fleet. Moving up into the larger jets and fleet sizes (> 2-3 jets) is a whole different ballgame. Companies have teams dedicated to maintaining client relationships and generating new business.....this includes charter as well as aircraft owners (for aircraft management contracts). Once you get to a company the size of Net Jets or VistaJet, their sales and account management teams can be massive (in comparison to the rest of the market). DB

I also forgot to mention another factor you can add. The total market for charter is usually stratified by aircraft category depending on location. (Piston Single, Piston Twin, Turboprop, Light Jet, Midsize Jet, Super-Midsize, Heavy Jet, Ultra Long Range Jet, VIP Airliner) For example, in a small, rural town, the demand for charters on small piston aircraft (Cessna 172, 206, 310, 421 / Piper Seneca / Beech Baron etc)....would be greater than the market for Turboprops, Light Jets, Midsize, Heavy etc... This is due to the nature of the charters.....fishing trips....cottages....local businessmen etc. In a larger city, the demand would be weighted more toward the jets. Some places have a mix of both because of local factors (e.g. Calgary is a major city, but is a huge jumping-off point for turboprop charters into the nearby oil patch) The VIP Airliner category (BBJ, ACJ, Lineage) is something you only see a demand for in the major $$ hubs - Dubai, Moscow, Hong Kong, Beijing, Geneva, London, New York (less than you think). In Dubai and Moscow there is basically no demand for turboprops. It's mostly Heavy Exec Jets and some Mid/Lights. DB

Yes, Yes and No :biggrin: Cheers,

Not necessarily.....in a VA setting, the system would have to be set up based on a larger client base and large fleet (every VA pilot would be another aircraft in the fleet) .....so multiple trips would be generated per day. They can just be put up on a flight board...up for grabs by anyone who wants to fly a trip that day. If a trip doesn't get assigned to a VA pilot, then it gets "sub-chartered" to another company. (Technically this happens in real life.... if there's no crew availability, then someone else gets the business) That's a pretty good idea if it keeps things simple. Would you be looking at some sort of interpolation based on distance from the aforementioned airports? The limit for pilots is 1200 hours per year, but an aircraft can keep going indefinitely (as long as you meet the maintenance schedule). Yearly utilization on a private jet can be anywhere from 100 to 1000 hours per year depending on who owns it and how it's used. If you were to add up the total number of hours flown by every private aircraft based in the New York area, you would probably find that the number was a bit higher than 40,000 hours per year. The "market" would be the total number of flying hours up for grabs for every charter that will fly in a year. if you had 5 aircraft in the fleet, each averaging 50 hours per month, your company would be doing 3000 hours per year. This project is definitely worth discussing further. Cheers, DB *edited twice due to my inexperience with the forum system...

Why not just have a fast-forward button? If I finish my 2 hour flight and feel like being assigned another one, I can just hit fast-forward to jump ahead to the next charter that comes up. At first, it might skip to being a week later in "game time" (or spreadsheet time), but as the company grows, the frequency of available charters will increase as well. Thoughts?

I kindof see what you're trying to do now. Are we talking about a physical boardgame, or a computerized one? Using chance (dice alone), would possibly require a whole lot of dice, but it's doable (and would need to really simplify things). I'd say it's possible to simplify it by using moving averages and proportions (computerized), as well as chance (rolling dice) Here are some factors to consider: *Please note all the numbers I use below are for example only and would have to be re-worked to make everything fit into a playable game. Size of Market - Total number of clients and total hours per year of flying available. This would proportionally affect everything below and would set the tone for the rest of the game (fleet size, aircraft types etc). Let's say the max market size is 40000 hours per year and 1000 potential clients**..... you could randomize the market size according to homebase location...so if you start in New York, you get 100% market size, but if you start in Lincoln, NE, you get 10% market size. **In the real world, the top 10% of clients would account for 70+% of the flying if not more. Your Company Reputation - This can slowly increase with time (every year of operations) and also proportionally affect everything below. (That would account for word of mouth....making it easier for your salespeople to find clients...and better clients...more flying etc). Just add a multiplier.... Number of new clients per month, per salesperson - This can vary depending on the amount of money you spend on each salesperson, and also would vary randomly between a low and high every month. (This is overly simplified, but basically, some months are better than others). This could be affected by market size and reputation. Average amount of flying per month, per client - Better (more expensive) salespeople will bring in better clients, with more flying per client, per month, on average. You can maybe assign a rating to each new client that comes in....higher rated clients would fly, for example 10-15 hours per month, versus...let's say 8-10 hours per month, or 2-5 per month for low rated clients***. ***In real life, many clients only fly 2-5 hours per year It would be your choice on how to manage this. You can keep track of each new client that comes in and have a moving average of the amount of flying based on the mix of clients on the books. ....you can then apply a monthly variance to the whole thing (to simulate crazy busy months and slow months).....or..... just keep it simple by having a fixed monthly average per client... Average number of new clients gained through marketing spend - This is relatively easy. The more money you spend increases the likelihood of new business coming in the door. Your sales team is still going to be the primary source of good clients, so you won't get the best clients through marketing spend, but occasionally you hit the jackpot from an online inquiry or call-in. So let's say at your maximum marketing spend, you get 2 new clients per month on average, and these clients will be more likely (70% chance) to be 5+ hour per month clients. At lower marketing budgets, you can scale back the above proportionally. Then, there can be a (very) random event of getting a great client (lots of hours per month) through marketing. - Also, since marketing helps your salespeople directly...you can just add a multiplier that ties your marketing spend to the number of new clients your salespeople bring in per month. Eg... More spend adds up to 10% more clients per salesperson per month etc etc Attrition - You will always lose some clients off your books per year...some companies go out of business, some jump to other charter companies, some finish the project that required the charters, some restrict travel due to budget cuts. The only thing you have some control over is the ones that move to other companies...and this will be related to the quality of your salespeople (account managers)...the rest could be just a random average of your total number of clients at the end of the month/year. I'll stop there as it's already getting really complex, but there are quite a few other factors that would make this interesting (multiple markets / bases, accidents affecting reputation....the whole side of managing the aircraft etc...) I'd be happy to help dive deeper into this...but just wanted to make sure I wasn't way off base with what you're trying to do. Cheers, DB

Something I always say is that you should always have one of the following when starting any charter company: - Deep pockets (someone to bankroll the venture until you have a steady client base.....for a private jet/turboprop charter, management fees for the owners are often the primary source of income, with charters used to offset fixed maintenance costs etc.) - Existing contracts (I don't recommend to anyone that they purchase an aircraft, or move one into a new market unless they have a commitment of 30-60 hours of flying per month depending on the type) - First mover advantage (If you see a gap in the market, where there's a genuine need for the service you're providing) In the charter business, getting new clients isn't exactly as random as just rolling a die. Typically, customers who charter often (more than once per year), will have a preferred company they go to, and will not likely shop around (online or otherwise), unless there is no availability (and their supplier isn't smart enough to sub-charter someone else's aircraft). New companies are not usually re-inventing the wheel, so they're not likely to open up the market to first-time charterers either. New charter companies will usually have to actively target clients who charter (cold calling, local trade shows etc...) to gain the business. Most have a dedicated salesperson or sales team focused on generating new business. Typically, online marketing through (Google...SEO...etc), will pick up the people who have never chartered before (and rarely have any idea how much it costs), or charter rarely and shop around to the entire market when they do (not the ideal type of client)....or brokers (who can be a decent source of business, but shouldn't be relied upon as they tend to be low margin). To be fair, there is some business to be had here and unless you're in a very small market where everyone know's you, you will need an online presence. Word of mouth is huge on the private jet side of things, as people who charter usually have friends or colleagues who charter. Doing a stellar job can often lead to recommendations...and easy business walking in the door. Things are a little different for larger groups, as the number of companies are comparatively less than with executive charter. This type of business uses larger regional turboprops and executive airliners to move the bigger groups around (sports teams, orchestras, incentive groups, oil rig crews etc). In this type of business, you have to invest the time to build a relationship with the organization before you even get the chance to bid on the business. These types of charters happen less frequently (usually once per year), unless you get a contract to move a sports team or work crews around (jackpot). So it's not really about how much money you spend, but how good is your sales team? Expensive marketing is helpful, but not nearly as effective as a persistent, dedicated sales team, good word of mouth, or getting to know the right people. The rate of return is not directly measurable against the amount of money you spend on marketing. I would set an annual budget that would attract good salespeople, add a bit to build and maintain a decent website and include little bit of marketing to help your salespeople do their job. Hope this helps. Cheers, DB

I know for a fact that touchdown is actually a bit awkward in real life with the Q400. Landing the Dash 8 series of aircraft has always been described as like trying to make a smooth landing with a shopping cart. You need to keep power on through the touchdown otherwise you will fall out of the sky in very short order. If the power is pulled back prior to touchdown, you first lose the lift from the prop wash over the wings, then get a ton of drag from the props themselves, followed by a very abrupt arrival. The long fuselage doesn't help much either. It's certainly quite different to your average turboprop and requires a specific technique to get it down. (Really fun to watch the Porter guys (and gals) do this on a gusty day into the 4,000 ft runway at YTZ) As for the bank....I think it feels more fluid than any other turboprop addon before it. To me it feels less like it's on rails and more like a long tube with wings sliding through the air. The only thing that makes it a bit awkward for me is the fact that my joystick (X52) is quite loose, and I know for a fact that the control forces on the real aircraft are higher (read: stiff), so it's easy to over-control and often difficult to be precise. Cheers, DB

The SRL switches aren't labelled well. They're on the left console just below the temp test switch. They're in the off position by default (fully up) and need to be flipped down to the middle position (Norm). Once that's done the lights should extinguish above 80% RPM. Hope this helps. DB

Nice! Good luck with the Metro. I've heard that the power rarely comes up evenly on takeoff....and the nosewheel steering is too sensitive to be useful, so be prepared to pull power off on either side to keep it straight. Also, apparently it's really pitch sensitive in the flare, so keep the control movements small. I'll leave the rest to the captains. Cheers!

That's awesome, congrats! Green tail or Red tail? DB

Thanks for the heads up. I just double checked those things.... - My door controls are definitely not working properly....as they both open / close the main door only (still not a big deal) - You were right about the SAS...I was definitely missing that button.....tested and working just fine now...the stick pusher is just as terrifyingly forceful as I'd expect. - Also right on the fuel gauges. It was my error assuming that they would be tied to the battery switch only. - My GPS is definitely not working. None of the knobs or clickspots turn it on. Cheers, DB

Hi All, I just wanted to chime in with my thoughts on the Razbam Metro. Please note that this is more of a first impressions blurb than an in-depth review, so take it with a grain of salt. A little background on my experience.....I'm a real world (low time) commercial / multi / IFR / instructor rated pilot and have been simming for about as far back as I can remember (FS5 I think...). I own the Majestic Q300 and Q400, Flight 1 King Air, Airbus X, as well as quite a few PMDG products, NOT including the JS41. As such, my knowledge of the operating characteristics of Garrett engines is limited at best, but I do know a bit about RW operations and procedures. At times, I use FSX to keep my head in the IFR game.....VOR/ADF navigation, holds, raw data approaches etc, so it was with that use in mind that I purchased the Razbam Metroliner. Up in Canada, these aircraft are used on milk runs between smaller airports in Northern Ontario with shorter runways, terrible winter weather, hand flown non-precision approaches to minimums etc, so perfect for what I'm looking for. In short, I'm really enjoying this aircraft so far. It's been quite the learning curve, as the entire operating philosophy of the Metro was alien to me. There are quite a few systems that I've never come across before and the aircraft itself is really quirky, with weird system logic and controls grouped in unfamiliar ways across the cockpit (that's putting it politely). The design philosophy really shows its age (also putting it politely). As a result, the aircraft is quite challenging to fly correctly, and can be a handful if you don't stay far ahead mentally. Hard to believe that these aircraft are certified for single pilot operations.....it keeps me quite busy flying it. There are a few bugs, which I will mention later, but I'll go ahead and state that for my purposes, none are show-stoppers for the type of flying I'm doing. As for the sounds, I find that they provide a very convincing atmosphere and are quite well done. I know a couple people who fly the Metro and they always mention that the constant buzz will either deafen you or drive you crazy after a long day of flying (noise cancelling headsets are a must). My only reference to real world experience was spending some time in a Cessna 441 Conquest (Garrett engines). Based on that, I'm convinced that the included soundset is realistic. The Metroliner has very small wings and control surfaces, and as such the flying characteristics are quite stiff. So far I've only taken the aircraft through the normal range of speeds and configurations, but it feels just like I imagine the real aircraft would.....stiff (that's really the best word I can find for it). I get the impression that the control forces would be really high if you were hand-flying it (they are). On approach, you really need to keep the power up, like most turboprops, but this aircraft makes me afraid to pull the power back too far on final. It's difficult to describe, but the aircraft really gives you the feeling that you will fall out of the sky if the speed bleeds off too much on approach. Maybe it's because I think those tiny wings will suddenly just give up and go home. The aircraft's handling at heavy weights is quite telling, with noticeably longer takeoff runs and lower climb rates. I haven't taken it into hot weather yet, but I fully expect to be watching out for tall trees, towers and hills on climb out. I have yet to try to operate in/out of a 4,000 ft runway, but I can already tell it will be challenging....One Metro operator I work with has to run the numbers every time I ask for a charter quote into a 4,000 foot runway. More often than not, the answer is a flat-out no, or a yes with a (very restrictive) temperature limitation. Cruise speeds and fuel burns are accurate from what I can tell (~800lb first hour + 700lb per hour after that). Landings are relatively simple once you manage the approach properly. It does have very firm landing gear, so I wouldn't describe it as forgiving, but it's not as difficult as the Q400. Without making any conclusive statement about the flight-dynamics (due to my lack of RW experience with the airplane), I'd say that this aircraft flies exactly like one would imagine by looking at it....thin wing + tiny control surfaces + tall stiff landing gear = fast and rigid in the air. The in-sim load manager is a nice feature. It lets you add / remove passengers, cargo and fuel in real time on a live weight and balance sheet. The passengers and cargo appear / disappear from the visual model in real time as well....which is a nice touch. As expected, the aircraft's suspension responds to the changes accordingly. I know lots of folks want to know how the systems are simulated. Again, I am not too familiar with the specifics of the Metro's systems (yet), so I can't give a definite answer on the realism, but I will say that the majority of systems seem to be simulated and functional. I have yet to start fiddling with things to see how the aircraft responds...basically just trying to break the airplane to see if it's simulated correctly. Otherwise, for normal operations following the checklists thoroughly will get you in the air relatively easily. The autopilot is also very basic (many Metros don't even have one in the real world). Now I don't have the best system, but the external model and VC are very well done on this aircraft.....maybe not quite at the level of the Q400, but still easily keeping up. Documentation is.....adequate.....with system descriptions, as well as a full set of normal checklists. What's missing is performance charts (which are available on the Razbam forum), flight profiles and non-normal checklists. As for the bugs...I'm running FSX (sp2) on a modest system and have come across the following issues (many of which have been acknowledged by the developer, who is working on fixes): - GPS doesn't turn on (wasn't using it anyway....will throw in the RXP 430 if I ever need one) - Cargo door button on the payload editor doesn't work (Shift+E+2 works just fine) - No annoying beeping sounds when the trim is running (I hope this stays broken.....most Metro pilots would agree) - Fuel gauges indicate zero until the engines are running (fuel is still loadable on the payload manager) - Starter light doesn't extinguish (until you hit the start button a second time) - Pitot heat light logic is reversed (lights should extinguish when Pitot Heat is on) - I can't seem to get the SAS (Stall Avoidance System) working (could be my fault....needs more testing) - Can't change the Vertical Speed on the autopilot (only ever used in cruise anyway for ALT hold) Overall, like I said, I'm really enjoying the Metroliner. It's a really hands-on aircraft, with very little in the way of automation and is almost perfect for the type of flying I'm currently doing - hand flying non-precision approaches in crappy winter weather. Far removed from the (comparatively) fast, silky smooth, automated experience on the Majestic and PMDG birds. The real Metro is apparently a pain in the @$$ to fly (for various reasons), and you get real a sense of that with the Razbam Metro just from the way it flies, the engine management etc....oddly even some of the bugs seem to add to the experience. I feel like I'm flying an aircraft that's been MEL'd a few too many times. Can't wait to start freight dogging around the Midwest and into the Caribbean with this thing. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask. Cheers, DB

Regarding the Carenado 850..... Just a quick note.....the real TBM 850 will hit it's maximum cruise speed at FL260 (~320 KTAS). Above FL260 you lose airspeed, but become more fuel efficient. Cheers, DB