Service based failures / Maintenance

[andy81le]

It just occurred to me that it would be nice to have some failures based on the hours I have already flown in the aircraft. Simple such as after a specific amount of time the probability for failures would increase if the aircraft has not properly maintained.

Implementation of some maitenance module would be required and recording of the hours etc.

Would that be difficult to implement?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Travis]

Not difficult at all, the logging of hours is already being done... but we've decided that something like this should be best addressed initially in our "company-based" application.

The feeling is with FSCaptain, anyone can fly anything at any time... whereas the new application would encourage use of type-capable aircraft... if not the same aircraft over and over again.

AAMOF, I've ran tests over the past few years where for a new flight I would check my FSCaptain logs for the past [nn] days. Each time that I flew the same type of aircraft (C208, B738, etc.) I would tally one "wear point" and if I flew the same tail-numbered aircraft, I would also tally one "extra wear point." I'd also give myself extra wear points if Dutch had managed to taxi on the grass or perhaps damage my aircraft on the rare occasions that I would allow him to perform the landing.

I would then take my total points and adjust them by a vague "factor" that I would continually adjust to give me what I thought would be a nice level of wear & tear.  Then apply the end numbers to the built-in FSCaptain numbers and go for my flight.

The biggest problem that we saw was in how to adjust for your airline's maintenance level. Put simply, there's no reason today to not have excellent maintenance. And even with the "economy mode" of FSCaptain, it doesn't account for maintenance.

But the "company" application would, so that's where we've talked about including wear-n-tear. It would (in effect) perform similar adjustments that I've tested out and adjust FSCaptain on the fly.

Plus, I'd like to see a slightly deeper "failure model" in FSCaptain that would take advantage of such deviousness.