I like to add that SXM tests your patience on a new level when it comes to M and L planes but as for some folks who appreciates lovingly rendered work that is rich in detail, this airport is a bliss.
7 Likes
My opinion with all airbus wide-body airplanes except for the a350 and a380 is that what you earn with those airplanes is almost similar to the values you get with the M planes. For example, the a300 pays the same or less than a b737 max and the a330 200 in some cases pays less than an a321 nx also my sincere opinion for what the a300 family represents, a330 and a340 should have similar values when earning wollars to the boeing 787-8 -9 -10 for the similar number of passengers they carry
5 Likes
That’s not a hot take lol
5 Likes
whoops
1 Like
My spicy take: The current game ATC and plane sound is the worst big part of the game that the devs have yet to do anything about (other than fix the weird counting thing from way back). ATC dialogue doesn’t line up with aircraft actions, and the plane sound should have Doppler effect, not just get louder or quieter.
8 Likes
My Hot Takes:
-
Chucking B77Ws around is boring. I appreciate contract partners who send some variety even if it’s less efficient.
-
SXM is the best airport the devs have ever made – great scenery, a UNIQUE taxi experience (to get it to flow well takes much skill here in choosing when to land and pushback planes), and some of the best liveries in the game
-
S planes are most fun to have in a fleet… so much variety and who can seriously hate on props?
7 Likes
The handling staff limit is the thing I’d mention.
The only occasion I don’t have to worry about this is LHR. In most airports this would be inadequate.
Looking at many planes waiting to be handled for minutes or even an hour is weird for me.
6 Likes
Tbh I agree with the 3rd one
1 Like
More hot take(s) (as I was reminded in the Syd M gate thread)… B752s should be L aircraft for all intents and purposes due to their length. They borderline fit M spots and are preventing devs from making some “S” gates M even though IRL they are. At 47m, it’s the longest M plane by 1m (A321 is 46m, and even that’s a hefty boy, followed by B739 at 44m, etc.). It also has the largest wingspan of the bunch.
Following suit, I think aircraft should be measured as a total component for size, i.e. wingspan + length. Some aircraft are much longer with relatively short wingspans, while others are nearly square. With that, I think XS should be added as a category, especially if they’re still going into the corporate jet realm, as XS could include CRJ2, DHC6, SF34, etc.
1 Like
Whenever the 753 gets added, this discussion will probably become quite an interesting one. 
Although, a hot take here, is the concept of replacing the aircraft tiers with stands purchased for use of said aircraft type and smaller, therefore blocking off the stand to aircraft which are too big and not because of category, I mean a Q400 doesn’t fit into the F stands you start out with at SYD because it’s too long.
2 Likes
Aircraft are classed based on wingspan, that’s why 757’s are in M not L
5 Likes
An interesting option the devs could opt for is to revamp aircraft size categories with the FAA’s Aircraft Design Groups, which breaks aircraft sizes down into 6 groups instead of 4, based off wingspan and tail height.
I’d think this might be the best way to solve the in between aircraft like the 757-300/A300/A310 etc and also could allow for easier integration of small GA aircraft.
7 Likes
Right, which is why I’m suggesting the cumulative measuring for stands as opposed to just wingspan, because measuring many aircraft, the length tends to be the value that changes most while wingspan doesn’t as much, although clearly it still matters for stand assignment as well.
Do you know if the devs builds the airport stands (ignoring actual gates) based on wingtip clearance guidance of 15ft for S/M, and 25ft for L+? Because it seems they’re pretty conservatively placed, sometimes at the expense of losing gates like at NGO and SAN.
2 Likes
Idk if this is a hot take because most people will agree but devs REALLY need to stop removing old airline liveries from the game. Ik it doesn’t sound like a big deal but it really affects the realism aspect of the game since a lot of irl airlines(Air Canada, Emirates, Lufthansa, Aer lingus, United, and Qantas are a couple examples) Are operating with still a handful of their fleet operating in their old livery and some airlines like condor still have three different generations of their livery operating.
12 Likes
Nope think we all agree
Not a hot take, and I totally agree.
I really think this would be a plus, and it would have some other benefits, especially at airports like BRI and SXM that have unused stands that could fit a twin otter or Saab but not a CRJ… this would allow those stands to be used! I’m sure there are more airports than just these that it applies to.
8 Likes
No don’t use jetbridges for them, make them walk to the terminal, done it elsewhere at SYD.
2 Likes
Q400s should absolutely be using jetbridges. Don’t know about Saabs or the other small aircraft like it though
4 Likes
Saab can use it but it aint pretty
Ofc its a U.S. airline(northwest regional) 
2 Likes
