Bruno\'s Request on changes

[EHM-0948 Bruno]

Dear pilots,

Since we are working on the projects that you know, and we want to finish them around the end of this year, we already planned one big project for the next year.

We would like to see your opinion about the current issues:

1. Do you think the ProPilot system could be implemented on all the VA and we could diminish to "zero" the offline flights, but only if the Flight Logger could work decently by saving PP flights to send later ?

2. Do you think the ProPilot system should be upgraded to:
  a) Economical factors like start having money transactions;
  b) New features like failures, more navigational information to configure and more decent FAC;
  c) What more features you would like to see on ProPilot?

3. Would you like to see a special feature or improvement implemented on EHM?

4. Imagine that we design a complete new site, what is the best things that you would like to see there?

5. Do you like to see a different fleet? In what way?

6. Is important that our fleet is 100% FSX compatible?

This feedback is important for us to decide some things. So please give your feedback.

You can also give feedback about other topics that aren't listed there.

Regards and thank you one more time.

[EHM-1821 Javier]

1) Not quite sure what you mean by that Bruno, but about the saving part, it would be a good thing!

2a) Not a priority, but it would be a nice feature

b) I'm all for failures, just had a landing gear problem yesterday using FSPassengers, quite a nice challenge As for the FAC, probably a new system that doesn't give 0 for a perfect flight :] As for the navigational Info, it would be useful feature but i don't think i'll be using it much.

c) When i hit the stop log button, could it be made so that it does not stop the engines in FS? That emergency i had yesterday with FSPassengers, i hit the stop log button and it shut down my engines, at about 5000ft and 165 knots! (I had to keep that speed as my gear wouldn't retract, if i went over 180 i might just damage it more)

3) Some way to make sure planes don't stay at remote, non-hub airports for months or even years at a time as no one is flying it back to a hub

4) Everything i can think of is already present, so i'll have to do more thinking :]

5) I'm happy with the current fleet, I do welcome any changes too

6) Nope, i'm sticking with good old FS9 for a long time...:]

[EHM-1507 Manuel]

Hello Bruno,

About the first issue, I´m not sure how this is meant, too. But I hope, we could fly our flights offline just as now.

2. a. I don´t want to earn money for the flights. I just want to fly and don´t think
about economic things.

2. b. Failures only as a optional feature. Because If you have managed to have two or three hours a week spare time to do a flight, its very frustrating if pherhaps after one hour a serious failure forces you to land or makes you crashing the only flight you could do that month.

2. c. I don´t have any ideas, I´m very pleased with ProPilot.

3. same as 2. c.

4. useful informations are the latest forum posts and the "flights being made right now"
and the latest pireps, these sections I´d like to see in the future, too.

5. I like our fleet! (But give me my AN140 back )

6. It´s not necessary, but would be nice.

[EHM-0975 Ragnar]

1. Do you think the ProPilot system could be implemented on all the VA and we could diminish to "zero" the offline flights, but only if the Flight Logger could work decently by saving PP flights to send later ?

Not as PP works today - I think the liberty of flying any flight is important. One way to go around this is to book to fly a flight, and ignoring the aircraft locations. In our imagined world all the flights on the timetable are of course being flown all the time, by virtual pilots when no physical pilot is available.

This can then be tied in with individual planes if so wished: (Plane SE-EHM is bouncing around a weekly schedule from its' hub ESSA, and I book to fly ESSA-ENGM scheduled Wed 0800-0920. I can finish the flight whenever I wish within, say, 48 hrs before the plane is supposed to land. If I crash the plane it can be removed from traffic until replaced, by a script, a week or so later, canceling all flights that it should make during that time, including those booked by others.)

2. Do you think the ProPilot system should be upgraded to:
  a) Economical factors like start having money transactions;

No. Not worth the work in my opinion. (The tours, badges and other awards are more important, when I'm in the mood for collecting stuff.)

 b) New features like failures, more navigational information to configure and more decent FAC;
c) What more features you would like to see on ProPilot?

Route planning, fuel planning, multi-hop planning and booking, tighter integration with IVAO and/or VATSIM. (If you can build in help to fill in the flight plans in those systems, it might help people get online more, there is a lot of tech stuff on those that can be provided by PP/flogger.) Failures must be optional. Better FAC, yes.

3. Would you like to see a special feature or improvement implemented on EHM?

I like EHM a lot as it is! Personally, I would want to use the UNHCR-painted aircraft on relief flights. Being able to do some bush flying within EHM somehow, maybe... Good and up-to-date EHM AI (with the new schedule of course). Keep it moving, keep the dynamic up, and never set undue restrictions on the pilots.

4. Imagine that we design a complete new site, what is the best things that you would like to see there?

KISS- Keep It Simple, Stupid. Don't go overboard with graphics. Use (X)HTML and CSS standards, never make anything browser specific. Look through the menu hierarchy (should Screenshots be under Company?). I like all the 'current', dynamic stuff on the first page except maybe daily fly-in and hub stats.

5. Do you like to see a different fleet? In what way?

One of the best things about EHM is, and has always been, the fleet! I like it when you try to find aircrafts that are not just Boeing or Airbus. We are not limited by contracts and/or spare part issues - keep the russian and other planes coming! I also liked the giant Antonov

6. Is important that our fleet is 100% FSX compatible?

Not today, but probably tomorrow. I think recruiting will suffer as long as there are so large holes in the FSX compatibility.

[EHM-1597 Dan]

Personally, I do not fly Pro-Pilot (yet) as to "0" offline Flights, when or if that day arrives, I and likely others will say"so long".
I do fly online when time permits, but only with VATSIM and in
North America.

Euroharmony remains one of the top VA's on the Web, it is the main reason I came here. The Fleet is top notch, always on the leading edge with lots of flexibility and thoughtful planning.

As is stated many times, "if it's not broke, don't fix it"---This V.A.
is not broken, it may need some new help to replace those who have moved on, but please think very carefully before implementing drastic changes to the status Quo.

[EHM-0948 Bruno]

I will take that in mind Dan ... wise opinion. But, if we want to improve, change is needed.

We are thinking about a big plan that we already decided to move forward. And it will change the way you look at our VA. I know that some VA's went down the drain when doing such changes, but we promise you that we will always have in mind the main objective of EHM: Fun!.

Also, when the time comes, all of you will be consulted about our ideas and thoughts, so when we started it, all pilots will be envolved on giving some feedback about our strategic ideas.

Regards,

[EHM-2360 Lee]

ive only just started flying with ehm recently but i love it i would maybe suggest a definate lean for fsx as well as fs9 as i know alot of people have fsx and there is definately demand for it so why not  try and plug that gap and be better than we already are  cheers

[EHM-2272 Callum]

I think that maybe to progress like other virtual airlines our livery should maybe be futurised a bit, although that would be hard to implement on every aircraft so that would probably be a no no.

The website is very nice but at times feels a little bit crowded as there is so much information and it sometimes gets too hard to interact with so maybe a slight tidy up?

Just my two cents, apart from that though, EHM is looking fine to me

[EHM-2288 Glenn]

1. Do you think the ProPilot system could be implemented on all the VA and we could diminish to "zero" the offline flights, but only if the Flight Logger could work decently by saving PP flights to send later ?
Yes

2. Do you think the ProPilot system should be upgraded to:
a) Economical factors like start having money transactions;
Yes, that would have been really great

b) New features like failures, more navigational information to configure and more decent FAC;
I'm just thinking about the pilots which fly online, and if you implent even more failures, it can be difficult for online pilots, when ATC commands us to do something else.

c) What more features you would like to see on ProPilot?
Would like to see ProPilot compatible to start up from a remote PC through WideFS/FSUIPC


3. Make the route schedule complete. Ex. when the tours ends at an airport. There is no possible flights out of this airport. Very important for pilots like me, who like to fly from A to B, and continue from B to C.

4. I'm in love of statistics. And think that maybe you can take it all out. Implent everything that we are logging in Flight Logger, such as how we land Visual/ILS, landing touchdown, and so on. But I don't like the new menu system, the old one was much better, it's difficult to manage through the sides with this new menu layout

5. I'm a big Short 360 fan, but this new aircraft is not working like a real Short 360. You can't take off this aircraft, only with the use of trim. Please fix the aircraft back to the way it was. I know that Short 360 don't have that big engines, but it has the possibility to takeoff without the use of trim.

6. It's not important to me, but maybe for other pilots

[EHM-0948 Bruno]

Hi mates,

The idea that we want your feedback for point 1, is about the following approach:

All flights except the tours and fly-ins are made using the Flight Logger. This means that we will need to improve the flight logger in order to have offline (not-internet-connected-flying!) flights.

The Dynamic Flight Timetable (locking airplanes and moving airplanes to airports) will be used except for the contexts described on the previous point, but there will be a possibility that the pilot can choose if he wants to fly as ProPilot or only as DFT.

So, practically we will have the following options:

If you are flying a normal flight,  not being a Tour or Fly-In:

1. You select your flight;
2. After you select your flight, the system will ask you if you want to use the ProPilot system or not;
3. If you say "yes", it will be a ProPilot + DFT flight;
4. If you say "no" it will be only a DFT flight (no FAC).

If the flight is a Tour or Fly-In than these situations don't appear.

Feedback please

[EHM-2288 Glenn]

From my point of view, and I know many pilots fly the same way as me, the point number 3 in my above post is very important. Or else it will be difficult for me to complete many of the Tours of Euroharmony.

Tour of the Danube
Scandinavian Tour

On this tours there is no flight in or out of the starting/ending airport of the tour on our normal schedule.

My solution to this problem is one out of two.

1. Add flights inn and out of first departing airport, and last arriving airport at the tour.
2. Change the schedule of the tour, so it always starts and ends at a HUB or other large airports who EuroHarmony normally has flights too.

This is my Christmas Wish. Bruno/Matt: Be Santa Claus this time, and change it abit, please