Propilot v2 - What would you like to see on it?

[EHM-0975 Ragnar]

First I'd like to second Marianos' ideas about graphical interface (or at least a very improved interface) for finding stranded aircrafts.

Planning tools to plan several hops, and change aircrafts along the way (without needing to lock all the flights). Would save at least me a spreadsheet.

Visibility of the status of awards - ("You are missing 2 countries for silver european award, press here to plan flights to them now"). Would save me another spreadsheet.

I'm totally against putting any hard constraints on the flying such as forcing to return to hubs etc. For me at least I'd stop using PP if that came into place, since I fly casually, when I have the time and I like bouncing around, changing aircrafts as often as possible and not visiting hubs too often. What keeps me coming back to EHM is the lack of constraints of when and whereto you fly. Set it as an option when planning the flights instead. (Maybe return aircraft automagically to the hub after 2-3 months or so, if the aircraft model is missing at that hub).

Failures should also be optional in my opinion. Mainly because if they are really realistic thay will be too rare for anyone ever really noticing. If set so everyone will have failures now and again it can get extremely annoying. Personally I would probably not use failures - I usually manage to screw things up all by myself. (Maybe have the realistic as a forced standard setting and the more often as an optional.) If implementing, have some sort of notification on failure - I might assume that something was wrong with FS or my computer and restart the flight.

Change the way the altimeter penalty is 'awarded', I've had it hit me when flying in low pressure conditions and watching the altimeter closely trying hard to get it right. Tolerances really needs to be changed on that one. Also tolerances on the lights as has been suggested.

[EHM-0948 Bruno]

Hi mates,

Very nice! I am really happy to see so many suggestions!

The new ProPilot system will started to be built on January/2009, along with a mega-project that we will have, so keep giving your ideas.

I would also like to "hear" what do you think about having some extra features, like a real airline operation regarding to ticket prices, pilot's salaries, etc ... do you think it's worth to have that on the new system ?

[EHM-1671 Ben]

Originally posted by EHM-0948 Bruno
ticket prices, pilot's salaries, etc ... do you think it's worth to have that on the new system ?

Sounds cool but what would they do?

[EHM-0948 Bruno]

haha!

Well ... I don't know .. More real airline simulation ?? :o

(Where are my tutorials Ben? .. Don't tell me you can't write them in Europe!) LOL ... No need to answer here, ok ?

[EHM-1704 Leon]

If we can earn V-money, we would need something to spend it on, no?

Perhaps pilots could save up for one of the VFA aircraft for personal use...I've always wanted to loop the seneca

Alternatively, pilots could choose to lend their v-money to poorer pilots. Other pilots could then invest in the returns from these loans with their own v-money. Then, when the poorer pilots fail to repay their loan, we can have our own virtual credit crunch!

...would make it more like real life...lol  

[EHM-2310 Mark]

I was at another VA that had quite a complex financial system.

Pilots got paid for flights and as staff members. You could spend your money on all sorts of stuff like cars and houses and the like. And there was a sophisticated investment program where you could buy stocks in the VA and the aircraft. Stock values would go up and down depending on how many flights the VA was doing and all sorts of factors.

It was good and added some realism... but ultimately it was all a bit pointless. Pilots had millions in their bank accounts and  just spend it for the sake of spending it. It meant nothing really. However, if you could use the cash to buy custom aircraft, or custom paintjobs. Or to buy your way into elite clubs that offer things like member-only flights and tours, for example. Unlocking or buying something special that you can actually use would be something to aim for instead of just random virtual junk.

Of course, the big danger with this kind of system is those flights that don't pay as well will not be flown as often. You'll get people grinding the money flights. It'll be like WoW with wings lol

Dunno, just thought I'd share that with you all.

Mark

[EHM-2387 Eric-Jan]

In my short EHM "career", my biggest PP frustration was the landing lights penalty. Especially when you fly short hops with class 1 planes at relatively low altitudes it is unreallistic to switch them off for those 5 minutes you reside above FL100. Then, of cause there was a setting that switched LL of together with landing gear retraction (it does not do that anymore; don't know what I've changed...). That would make a rather rediculous looking flight, with landing gear down up to and down from FL100!

As a more sophisticated rule, I would suggest LL need to be "on" from take-off 'till at least alt=2000; then the limit could stay at 2000 untill 8000 is passed (or another number), at which point the limit to turn them back on on descend is set to that value. I don't know if there are real life values. The above are just my examples.
A simpler rule could be LL "on" when airborne AND below 2000; LL "off" when above 10000.

Note: high altitude airports should be compensated for, so altitude is Above Departure Airport Level altitude. Maybe there's the difficulty withthe current system?


Another suggestion:
Make the penalty rules easier to find; when I did not find them soon enough I just switched off my LL 15 min in flight at alt=8000; "Landing Lights not turned on at take off"; arghhh. I wouldn't call that take off anymore. Not that those 100 points amounts to much with all the rough landing penalties I got so far

Instead of deducting points for bad airmanship, could we not hand out pints to quickly forget the mistakes we made?

[EHM-2387 Eric-Jan]

Just thought of another one:

When I flew the SU-80 to EHAM, and landed on RWY18R, the taxi to GA took me about 1/2 hr. When filing the pirep, it gave an error: "more than 25 minutes between touchdown and engines off. PIREP cannot be submitted". Argh!
I re-did the (short) flight, and took out the GPS to monitor my GS. Kept it at around 20 kts all the time, except for sharp turns. Still I needed 18 minutes to taxi. If this were an online flight, I would probably not have been alowed to race across EHAMs taxiways. Or at least not all the time.
Anyway, what I am trying to say is that it is pretty tight at EHAM (and I imagine EGLL and other large airports will have the same thing) to taxi fast enough from one end to the other, without exceeding 25 kts of cause. Perhaps this time requirement should be loosened a bit. Wouldn't like it if this happened after a long haul...

[EHM-1001 Robert]

I do not know if it was mentioned before, so excuse me please.

I would like to see a "respawn" feature. We are loosing too many aircraft from the fleet. I would put them back "alive" to the departure point if it was proven from ACARS that a system crash had happened during the flight. Penalty points would remain, but the plane could be available again.

Another thing is the balancing of award/penalty points. Currently you can ~10 times easier penalized than awarded. This will lead to GIANT negative points. I would divide penalty points by 10 to have a better balance among the scores and to give more smile to pilots

[EHM-1749 Hector]

Due to the length of this issue I would like to wrap up my suggestions:
1.- Put more weigth on both the on-line flights and PP events in the FAC algorithm. No doubt that both activities need much more attention to the pilot.
2.- Make compulsory for the pilot to fly the return trip allowing for a reasonable time for doing it. This will avoid the high number of planes left on the airports all over the world, If the plane is not flown back and not an explanation is sent to the hub's manager, a penalty should be applied.
3.- Fuel management should also be part of the FAC
4.- Allow ProPilot for stop overs in long range fligths no longer than 24 hrs.

[EHM-0948 Bruno]

Keep posting guys!

[EHM-1829 Trevor]

A positive score (of sorts) recorded after every landing, even if the passengers prefer to return by ship.
In the event of a crash, the points deducted are enough to respawn the aircraft back to it’s Departure Airport and save losing an aircraft and it's history. (See Roberts input above)
Reset the Pilots crashed aircraft list to zero, 490 crashes in 3 years is bad publicity.

[EHM-2416 Arron]

I agree with the Landing lights penalty. 100pts is alot for lights! I was descending below 10000 from 12000 and at about 10100 i went to turn on the landing lights before i knew it i had a penalty at alt 9998 c'mon abit harsh!! Should have a 1200 +/- range before the penalty kicks in!
Also like the idea of random failures, maybe add an option to have random failures turned on. And if you do select this the rate would be roughly that of real world rates so it will likely not happen but could! These could also range from very minor to major!
And penalties should end at 0 and not go into the negitive.

[EHM-2155 Mariano]

Originally posted by EHM-2416 Arron
I agree with the Landing lights penalty. 100pts is alot for lights! I was descending below 10000 from 12000 and at about 10100 i went to turn on the landing lights before i knew it i had a penalty at alt 9998 c'mon abit harsh!! Should have a 1200 +/- range before the penalty kicks in!
Also like the idea of random failures, maybe add an option to have random failures turned on. And if you do select this the rate would be roughly that of real world rates so it will likely not happen but could! These could also range from very minor to major!
And penalties should end at 0 and not go into the negitive.

Mmmm the lights penalty has like a 1000 feet forgiveness... Up and down... It seems to me your altimeter wasnt in the correct setting
But thats also a shortcoming of F-logger cos it always considers the altimeter has to be STD below FL180, which when flying online, it's not...

[EHM-1882 Gian]

Hello,

I have read all the commments and suggestions and fully agree with them: we should implement actions which would encourage all of us to fly more on pro-pilot. I'm not saying that penalties should be reduced or modified, but at a certain point in time, maybe once a year, all the counters should be restarted, keeping track of the best pro-pilots of all times on a separate records. It is indeed very difficult (impossible) to reach a reasonable classification after a crash because of the "poor" reward you gain after a zero default flight...I'm sure some arrangements will be made... In any case, I fly as much as I can on PP, as I find it challenging, even too severe sometimes.
Gian