Coverage area of airports

[Transporter]

Due to the fact that (big) cities have airports in the suburbia the coverage area shouldn't be centered around the airport but to be determined individually in a certain radius around the airport so that you can realize a realistic distance to the city.

[LordAzamath]

Realistic distance? What about making it more realistic and adding busses to take ppl to airport

[FooBar]

You should check out CargoDestinations (see Development forum), now THAT is realistic, as the passengers decide where they want to go, and not you. [0]


[0] Actually, passengers only go where they can go, and ultimately you decide where they can go...

[Zutty]

Realistic distance? What about making it more realistic and adding busses to take ppl to airport

Yeah this! ^

Just use feeder services. That way you can have coverage over 100% of the town going to the airport via shuttle buses.

[Hypolite]

Yes, I would like the airport to have small to null coverage (catchment area), but it would only be interesting with cargodest project, so I think my suggestion will become dead letter....

[DJ Nekkid]

well, some people do actually drive to the airport

[Hypolite]

Of course, but doesn't catchment area supposed to be the farther distance from where passengers come by foot to the station ? It's the way I imagine them, as there is no car at all in TTD.

If you introduce car, which would be great but complicated, you would have also to manage traffic jams in crowded town...

[SirkoZ]

As DJ Nekkid said - people do travel to airports with cars, but I don't think adding cars to OpenTTD is necessary.
I agree with topic starter that airport catchment would be better if it was more centered in town with the actual airport being out of town,
however - this all is available now:
a) through great feature of station extension/station walking (station spread under Configure Patches menu)
b) through another great feature (recently included) - distant joining of stations which helps quickly achieve point a).

So - nuff said.

[Qu@rks]

AND through cargodest. Assuming they do not drive to the airport, most of them probably wouldn't walk. So with a tight bus network inside a town and an airport in the middle of nowhere with buses (or trains) connecting it with the city, you have a (almost) realistic catchment area. I wouldn't wanna walk 20 miles now since my favorite airport that used to be like a mile from my house has closed down...

[atalantino]

But if the airport is far from any city it won't accept passengers. All big cities have tha airport far form town(NY exeption).

[Hypolite]

But if the airport is far from any city it won't accept passengers. All big cities have tha airport far form town(NY exeption).

You've got a point, but if one can make airport without any catchment area, one can make them always accepting passengers, right ?

And the problem is voided with cargodest, again, as the airport would be a transfer station between the feeder service and the other airports, without needing to accept passengers in the middle of nowhere.

[Wasila]

But if the airport is far from any city it won't accept passengers. All big cities have tha airport far form town(NY exeption).

London Heathrow is actually in London

[atalantino]

London heathrow is in Heathrow, not London!

[belugas]

And the problem is voided with cargodest, again, as the airport would be a transfer station between the feeder service and the other airports, without needing to accept passengers in the middle of nowhere.

Y9 do not need cargodest for that. Airports are capable of doing the same magic right now.

[Hypolite]

And the problem is voided with cargodest, again, as the airport would be a transfer station between the feeder service and the other airports, without needing to accept passengers in the middle of nowhere.

Y9 do not need cargodest for that. Airports are capable of doing the same magic right now.

Yeah but it's easier with cargodest, as the normal order is "transfer"

[belugas]

Right... It's just a click more.
silly me

[Lord_BoNes]

I think that the coverage area of airports should be determined by feeder services (only without the extra vehicles)
EG: you have a bus-stop attached to the side of the airport, with road into town, bus-stop in town, the coverage area of the airport should be changed to include the route that the "buses" would take, just without the buses actually being needed.
I think that the same thing could apply for trains, but only while the track is within the radius of the town it's in.

Doing it like this would be complicated for the person coding it, but it would make airports far more useful. I know that I don't use road vehicles once I get trains/planes, so this would actually make the the road stations useful again.

[Wasila]

London heathrow is in Heathrow, not London!

London Heathrow Airport or Heathrow (IATA: LHR, ICAO: EGLL), located in the London Borough of Hillingdon

[atalantino]

I tell you Wasila! Heathrow is a town of its own, I have some friends that live there.

[Wasila]

Could be, but Heathrow Airport is within the boundaries of Greater London.

Ask your friends which area they're in. Hillingdon, by any chance?