Why I think the Saab 340 should be classified as A as it’s also closer to the DHC6 than the DHC8 and ATR 42
3 Likes
Aircraft in the game is based on Wingspan classification, the Saab 340 has a wingspan of 21m while the I Class is 15m under
Yes and a twin otter’s wingspan is almost 20m and it’s A class, when it should be B, and yet here we are…
6 Likes
…and the Dash 8’s wingspan is actually C class (28 m), so that explains the error on that. But the DH8D in particualr has a very good reason to be misclassified, because if it were to be correctly classified as C, it would be almost useless in the beginning stages of INN, where it would disrupt the entire gameplay for everyone. The SF34, though, has no such reason to have the wrong stand class, being “common enough” to give an advantage to it over other true B-class aircraft. The DHC6 doesn’t have such a problem because it’s only really obtainable at SXM, where Twin Otter contracts should be promoted. Also, it would look very weird to have a stand class that no aircraft in the game can use, which I imagine is the reason of the misclassification on that one. But now that we have such an aircraft, we don’t need a wrong class on any more.
1 Like
I see your point but In cases like SYD, at the F stands where REX park, Now in the game you can’t park 2 SF34 next to each other at F10/11 because those can’t accommodate planes bigger than B next to each other. But that shouldn’t be the case with the SF34. I don’t see the big deal since there are already multiple planes that are mis-categorized (like the Dash 8’s and ATR’s) for convenience, and I just think the SF34 can benefit from this possibility in the game, at least until some other workaround is possible.
And just because the DH6 is only obtainable at SXM doesn’t take away from the fact that if it were also a B plane, it wouldn’t be able to park at certain stands either that are only for A planes.
I don’t really think if the SF34 were an A plane it would matter that much cause it would be able to park basically anywhere and wouldn’t hinder anyone’s playing experience
Again this would only be a temporary fix because eventually with the realism the devs are going for, the size categorization is going to need an overhaul down the line
3 Likes
True, I completely failed to consider SYD here, and we do really need a better system for it. It definitely could benefit from it, but the question is, should it benefit? Having many SF34 contracts would save you tens or even hundreds of thousands of wollars in the beginning stages of SYD, for example, but I don’t see why it’s so foundationally important for any in-game airport to deserve a buff like this.
2 Likes
Well most local contracts at SYD are SF34 and they’re all free so it wouldn’t really cost anything, and some of us wouldn’t care about that, so I don’t see an issue with that.
1 Like
make sure you Actually read the things before spreading false information!!!
HKG Gate Estimates
Open in a new tab for the best viewing experience
22 Likes
This will be a game changing airport for sure!
4 Likes
HKG is a very large airport, my question is how all its runways will work, maybe new functions will arrive with it, it will be interesting to see.
5 Likes
T2 alone baffles me on how large it is, can’t wait!
5 Likes
I can already hear my phone crying for mercy
9 Likes
I saw an image indicating that the Terminal 2 could feature shared stands. But I don’t have any specific idea in relation to that.
7 Likes
At the moment, 07L/25R is used for arrivals, 07C/25C for departures, and 07R/25L for both. This is the current operating mode without the new terminal in operation. I’m hoping to see all 3 runways in mixed mode after the inauguration of the new concourse in real life, but that is really unlikely unfortunately
11 Likes
#buy a new iPad/iphone for this new update
2 Likes
This thing called money🤔
1 Like
Does anyone know or remember how many GP are needed to purchase the LHR premium pass?
80 GP I think
3 Likes
If….If I’m not wrong, it’s 80 GP… If I’m wrong plz rectify me
1 Like