Archive > ProPilot Main Forum

New FAC algorithm to enter as soon as possible.

<< < (4/15) > >>

EHM-0948 Bruno:
hhmmm... I don't agree Willem.

Looking deeper on the new algorithm you notice that only 70% of the extra penalty is being considered. Also, 90% of a bonus is given if you fly online and the total penalties mantain as it is.

It's true that some of us will have negative values, but negative doesn't mean we are bad pilots :) ... It's just a value, like others will have positive values, but not too high.

If you put yourself on our side, you'll that it's hard to arrange a formula that will be accepted by everyone, and you don't know how much months were we actually thinking about arranging one that could be more fair to all of us.

So, if you have a better idea, please propose it and we will glady hear it and analyse it. If not, than accept this one because it's the best that we can do :)

Regards,

EHM-1703 Philip:
OK, at the risk of adding fuel to a fire here is my input.

Firstly, I agree, long haul flyers do have a tendency to overnight and leave the controls, but if you do that on PP you do so at your own risk, too many variables can occur that result in crashes and or penalties. Also you would not leave your cockpit for that long if you were on VATSIM or IVAO would you? Why should it be that someone who spends 7 hours flying across the Atlantic setting up the flight with correct procedures observing NATS and monitoring all situations should get the same score as a Pilot who flies 20 minutes from Zurich to Geneva and doesn't even make it to transition altitude let alone FL180? In my opinion, this is a no brainer, of course, the longer you fly and the more hours you invest, the better your score should be! There are many ways of cheating the system if you so desire but flying only short 20 minute flights on the current system offers too much of a benefit. It's horses for courses guys, at the moment, there is far too much of an advantage to flying Short flights on PP, this has to be addressed for those who prefer medium and long haul this does not make it advantageous to fly long haul, it evens the score up, you spend 7 hours long haul you get a fac that represents 7 hours of work. You fly 7 one hour flights you get the same or even better score as there is a division by total number of flights as well.

Remember we force no one to fly on PP, if you feel the system is unfair or you don't like the suspension then you will not utilise PP. Currently on average, less than 25% of EHM flights are done on PP. This says to me that only 25% of our pilots like the current system, this is not enough for the scope that this system offers. If this figure does not improve after changing the FAC system then we need to look at other areas or go back to the drawing board, if it does then we have achieved our goal. I guess what I am saying here, is vote with your flights, if you like it, then use it! If not we will continue to try to develop a system that you enjoy using! Please don't immediately criticise an idea before seeing it in operation. We are a dynamic airline and we will adapt to what our pilots want and the way I see it, PP is not being fully utilised so we need to adapt and develop it further.

Thanks and good luck!

EHM-1749 Hector:
I am 100% with Phil and with most of the previous opinions.
I always thought that there was something missing in the way the FAC is calculated.
Please don't get me wrong, but just seeing a guy like Bruce with 1200+hours ranked behind another with much less flying time kept me thinking about it. I am glad the subject is now on the table.
Longhaul fligths I do a lot and NEVER EVER leave the cockpit unattended just because on what Phil pointed out. It is not easy though. Whenever I leave the cockpit (and never longer thant 30'),  I post a message to the FIR I am flying at showing the Zulu time out and the Zulu time back.
Also the longer the flight, the more exposed we are to penalties, specially the overspeed one. You never know when the wind is going to shift against you.
Flying larger planes should also be better rewarded for the complexity and attention they demand.
Please don't missunderstand me, but I believe that the penalties in PP should be applied according to the rank of the pilot. In other words, the penalty for forgetting to turn the landing lights on before take off by an ATP pilot should be higher than for an FO pilot and so on.
Although it is not my case, I recognize that for most of us this is perceived like a game but even when playing games we humans strive for continuous improvement and always look for more.
If Microsoft had thought of FS as a simple game, we would still be flying a little Cessna 172 out of Merril Meigs like most of us did back in 1984. From Sub-Logic. Not Microsoft.
I congratulate Management for making this step to improve this important issue.
Regards,
Hector

EHM-1657 Jay:
I have to agree with everyone, I think it is a great step towards more fairness and equality

EHM-1947 Miko:
I think there are two questions that are discussed here at the same time:

1. How to improve objectivity the PP average score

2. How to increase the flight hours in general and in special online.

PP is an interesting software good ideas included - in my oppinion at the beginning of developement and in need of improvement in many aspects and not made for people with a sensible feeling of fairness and objectivity - there is a lot of potential in it - but it is not a "medicine against everything".

Of course the typical PP-Pilot wants to be successful and member of the top 10 list. So he will elect his flights under the aspect of easy Propiloting:

- "Online? No thanks" (ATC is more a burden to a PP pilot than a help)

- Easy Approaches (it is interesting that most of the "stars" in the top 10 list are unvisible on a dangerous tour like "Dakar 2007"  -  here are "front pigs" who you will normally find in the 200-300 score lower middle class - are they worse pilots?)

- Easy Planes (Yes: to land a PMDG 738 with autoland in EGLL is easy and no large risk - wheather after 1 or 8 hours)

What I want to say is that PP does encourage the opposite of what it is supposed to do. It is not realy the means to influence the number of online or long flights.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page