what should be done next? (client)

You are missing something, or have a cool idea for us ? Tell us here !

Moderator: FSAirlines Staff

I want...

a improved failure-system
a module for direct access inside FS
to be able to do refuel-stops
the ability to resume flights after system-crash
more rating criteria ( beacon, \strobe, ... )
a chat
something else (please make a post with a description)
Total votes: 73

User avatar
FSAirlines Developer
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Munich

what should be done next? (client)

Post by DaKurt » Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:04 pm


I have to decide what I should work on next...so here comes a little poll

# Pilot comments
# Improved failure-system
# module for direct access inside FS
# refuel-stops
# Ability to resume flights after system-crash
# Some output in the FS-line
# more rating criteria ( beacon, \strobe, ... )
# Chat
Claudio - FSAirlines Programming


Post by FsNovice » Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:18 pm

DaKurt, i voted the last one so i could make a point as two of the things you put on the poll list i would like

The ability to do refuel stops
the ability to resume flight after system crash; this would be so helpful until i get a new system of my own as the one i'm on at the moment can be tempermental some days.


User avatar
FSAirlines Developer
Posts: 2452
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
Location: KSFO

Post by joefremont » Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:26 pm

Improve security.

Marc Joy

Post by Marc Joy » Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:36 pm

I don't know if it's the right place, but I didn't find any good answer for the PMDG compatibility with flynet.

If there is a step to follow post, tell me, if it's not working together, tell it clearly. I don't have a PMDG plane, but some of our pilots have the 747 and don't want to fly here because of the conflict.
So if it still is a conflict, it could be a good idea to solve it.

If someone fly PMDG please tell me how to do it


User avatar
FSAirlines DB Admin
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:23 pm
Location: UK

Post by Quantum » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:01 pm

Anything else :

My first choice is Maintenance to be 'hours based'


· Maintenance to be ‘hours based’
· Pilot able to make comments on post flight client report - now implemented
· Pilot able to divert without penalty and then continue flight to original destination after refuel/weather clears etc
· Failures to be optional, and those that opt for them do it for the ‘challenge’ without affecting VA reputation.
· Disable ‘unlimited fuel’ option in Flight Sim
· ‘Fly Booked flight’ to give you a refuel option as now plus a ‘restrict payload option’ where you can reduce the amount of passengers/cargo. This
will need to be implemented before the MZFW becomes active. See point below.
· MZFW has some meaning. Where MZFW not known then a ‘Max Payload’ weight of pax/cargo can be used. See above point
· Upper limit for landing lights on/off to be scrapped.
· To be able to recognise an aborted take-off without incurring taxi speed penalty


· Option to customise features for ranks and pick a rank ‘title’. Allows for ‘non-americanisms’.
· Ability to send a ‘batch’ of flight plans as well as add/edit single plans - now implemented
· Pilot status on VA overview page – green/amber/red with booked flights showing on the pilot info page - now implemented
· ‘Send a message’ button alongside pilot list on overview page - now implemented
· Pilots able to make personal Type Ratings active/inactive in order to focus on flights available for a specific aircraft type when booking a flight
· Flight plan page to have display options before it ‘loads all’. By Airport and aircraft type options. - now implemented
· Flight plan page map zoom
· Airport search function by ICAO or IATA codes, we’ve got them, lets use them
· Are you sure buttons
· Fix the Transfer Aircraft calculations so that it works with all aircraft types - now implemented
· Traders list to remain as a selling outlet for the VA’s to dispose of unwanted aircraft. A new ‘Brokers’ list for out of production aircraft as per
Manufacturer’s format - now implemented
· More info on Flight Monitor ticket subs.
· Remove ‘quit’ option for CEO’s. CEO to ‘apply’ to FlyNET to quit.
· Larger entry fields for Route and Remarks on flightplans
· Finance page to have info buttons next to each transaction to link to appropriate page. Maintenance ‘Bill’ will need to be made to accommodate this - now implemented
· Fares need revising upwards as well as first class fares. Also need some sort of fare structure to allow bizjets to be able to operate profitably
· Aircraft profile picture to be variant specific rather than ICAO specific.


Last edited by Quantum on Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CEO - Classic British Flight Services
Classic aircraft on Classic routes

User avatar
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3045
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:49 am
Location: Lancaster, Texas, USA

Post by CAPFlyer » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:13 pm

John's list is the one I came up with but he posted first... :)


Post by FsNovice » Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:03 pm

I would also like to see the 24 hour booking rule scrapped as i dont see its prupose.

Marc Joy

Post by Marc Joy » Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:28 pm

Not following you on this...

If you have real multiple pilots on an airline, you definitely don't want to be stucked with no plane left for a flight as people book flights and don't do it...

I'm following on the maitenance according to flying time, and put a limit on the vertical speed on landing. when this limit is passed, then you add additional damages, but as said for some planes, like BAE146, are much stronger than others, so let you ( well informed pilots here... i'm always impressed with all your knowledge and feel as a big time rookie here...) decide what limit should be there...


User avatar
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3045
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:49 am
Location: Lancaster, Texas, USA

Post by CAPFlyer » Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:32 pm

Then you're one of the few who don't.

Try this - you book a flight but for some reason you can't fly it when you booked it. You go off and do whatever and then forget that you booked it and 3 days later you finally remember.


You don't forget but you have so much going on and your schedule changes and you're not able to get back to cancel the flight or fly it.

Well, as long as that flight is booked, that means that no one can fly that flight nor that plane that's booked with it until you cancel. What about other pilots who have time that might want to fly that flight? Should they be forced to wait several weeks before they can fly that flight? More improtantly, why shouldn't the pilot be penalized for failing to fly the flight in a timely manner? That's the purpose.

Safari Air
FSAirlines DB Admin
Posts: 569
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:58 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Safari Air » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:22 pm

(client)I think that the 24hour rule should be reduced to take off within 3 hours, that way the aircraft will be free for as long as possible.
(website) I know that this has been mentioned alot but a loan feature is needed to help the new airlines and established airlines that are looking to expand to long haul aircraft as these are expensive.

(client)I also think out of the above poll options i prefer:
Improved failure-system
module for direct access inside FS
Ability to resume flights after system-crash
more rating criteria ( beacon, \strobe, ... )
and Chat, i think it would be great to have a chat to pilots on our travels in real time


Post by HS1 » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:59 pm

I think that the current 24-hour rule should be customisable in that the airline management should be able to set the maximum time limit; thus suiting indivudual requirements.

Marc Joy

Post by Marc Joy » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:51 am

Simple, but that's a good one...

I agree with that as this rule doesn't semm to please everyone...



Safari Air
FSAirlines DB Admin
Posts: 569
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:58 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Safari Air » Sat Oct 21, 2006 3:57 pm

i like the customisable but prehaps a max of 24hours, then other pilots get the chance to fly and the aircraft aren't booked up


Post by PlutonianEmpire » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:31 am

I voted for "resume flights after system crash", mainly because since I've installed the client about a week ago, i've gotten the Blue Stop Error Screen of death (all while the client was running), and have had to cancel and re-book flights because of it.

Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 11:41 pm
Location: Athens, Greece

Post by Ionathan » Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:18 am

I have also voted for the "resume flight" but I have some additional suggestions in mind:

- Add a "grounded" flag for each pilot. When a pilot crashes he is automatically grounded until the CEO or someone from the VA's managerial staff removed the restriction from the pilot. This will protect VAs from happy crashers, either by lack of slills or by intention (...)

- Insurances. A CEO should have the option to insure an aircraft and if he chooses to do so, an amount, depended on the aircraft's size will be subtracted from each flight's profit.

- The "maker" of the VA should not be possible to be kicked by another member who also holds the rank of CEO. Maybe introduce another rank or review the ranks.

- The CEO should be able to define different salaries to the pilots and staff based on their rank in the VA as well as pay performance bonuses.

- Some change to make VIP flights somewhat profitable (also mentinoed by other members).

- The tickets provided by the member's profiles "Buy Ticket" option are to high compared to the standard prices (I think).

- Individuals should be able to buy private aircrafts from the Traders' Market as well and also to interact with it in terms of leasing.

- Loans (also mentioned many times). However, some thinking is necessary here as to not "hit" the heart of the aircraft's leasing market.

I have a lot more ideas to make FlyNET more interesting but I think they are of a less priority than the above.
Ionathan Airlines


Post Reply