Aircraft Information Review
#31
Sorry, but even the DC3, DC8, etc is still in charter service.
Reply
#32
Yes we shouldn't keep a plane just because we like it. I would LOVE to have a 747SP to be honest, but I'm saying it's time for it to go.

The DC-8 is not in commercial passenger service, although one is in service as a freighter which doesn't really count.

The DC-3 I'm more than willing to keep, it's still in commercial service let alone charter. Although I don't believe we have it - we'd have to add it.

DC-9 and MD-80 families are both still in commercial service, so they should be kept in-game.
[Image: 75T19MV.png?1]
Reply
#33
I think instead of removing them completely, a better way to handle old aircraft would be to substantially reduce the rate at which they show up in the used aircraft market and substantially increase maintenance costs on aircraft that went out of production long ago to make them less game-breaking. I would also suggest maybe connecting the number that appear in the used market to the number that were built in reality- not directly, like only ever having 13 Concordes show up, but it shouldn't be possible for players to build the most successful airline in the game on the dozens of Il-96s that show up in the used market right now (only 30 were ever built and I believe only three or four remain in service, all with Cubana). For players who want to mess around with the dinosaurs, I think keeping them is fine, but the meta shouldn't be to buy up as many DC-8-73s and 747-200s as possible.
Reply
#34
Ah that's a good idea, but some aircraft, like the Concorde and the VC-10 are not able to be revived IRL by airlines, so it's a little silly to let them by revived in-game.
[Image: 75T19MV.png?1]
Reply
#35
Put Environmental tax on the old fuel guzzler aircraft's. I mean make them available, but operating them must have high cost implications.
[Image: 5c8e979304d3a9.30032592_enmlkpiohjgqf.png][Image: 5c740c1c9424c0.52772645_fkephgnmqljio.png]
Reply
#36
But that is just making it even less realistic Big Grin
Reply
#37
(04-17-2019, 04:45 PM)Anzatax Wrote: But that is just making it even less realistic Big Grin

Speaking of realistic, they shouldn't be available at all now.  Big Grin Big Grin
[Image: 5c8e979304d3a9.30032592_enmlkpiohjgqf.png][Image: 5c740c1c9424c0.52772645_fkephgnmqljio.png]
Reply
#38
Some should, though. And a tax won't be realistic. higher maintenance costs and decreased efficiency will, however
[Image: 75T19MV.png?1]
Reply
#39
(04-18-2019, 03:23 AM)Zortan Wrote: Some should, though. And a tax won't be realistic. higher maintenance costs and decreased efficiency will, however

If you are not aware. There is such a system in EU

https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets_en
[Image: 5c8e979304d3a9.30032592_enmlkpiohjgqf.png][Image: 5c740c1c9424c0.52772645_fkephgnmqljio.png]
Reply
#40
The EU is not being realistic!

Just kidding Big Grin
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Airline Enterprise

Welcome to the official message boards of Airline Enterprise. Feel free to join the discussions, ask for help or just browse!

              Quick Links

              User Links