[RFD] Airports: how is they constructed? by modules or fixed

[Zuu]

As the "[FRDF] Who builds airports?" thread has become overcrouded with discussions about how airports are constructed (by modules or not, which modules etc.) , I have created a dedicated thread for discussions on how airports are constructed. A topic that can be quite big. As if air transport should be as intresting as railways we certanly have to have somthing more than TTD had.

Some word definitions:

• Airport: a station for aircrafts where they load/unload cargo/passengers
• Fixed airport: an airport that has a fixed size, and all buldings/modules are always placed in the same way.
• Modular airport: an airport that is built by several modules. Where a module can be a runway, or a terminal for example.
• Terminal: a place on the airport where aircrafts can load/unload
• Passenger terminal: a terminal only for passengers.
• Goods terminal: a terminal for all cargo exept passengers.
• Airport layout: A template that tell how an airport shall be constructed. (The actual data may varry between modular airports and fixed airports.)
• Airport designer: a tool that can be used to create airport layouts. The tool may be integrated with TEmpire.

My post:
To make airports possible to expand, we need to make airports so easy to build, so that they can be expanded in the game, or the airport layout must include data about how it can be extended. Having expand data will be pretty advanced, I think.

Or maybe not. Make a layout of a big airport, and then select which part is the core, level2 upgrade, level 3 uppgrade, etec. But that requires that you have acess to exact the right land to be able to expand.


If we only have fixed airports, we can afford to make them more complex, as they will then be desgned in the Airport desgner, and the avagere user does not need to understand how to do that.

[Zuu]

from http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?t=13137

I wrote before that cargo bays could be built on a empty corner of the airfield terrain, with an auto-runway function setting up a runway to it i.e.. It doesn't seem wise to have expansions be build outside the reserved terrain.

Ah.. you think SimCity, reserving a field for an airport. But use less than all at start. And when needed you build more stuff on the reversed area.

[Hyronymus]

Yes, that's the best solution I guess.

[PJayTycy]

If we use modular pre-designed ones (eg: level 1, 2, 3 upgrades), I agree with the "reserved area" approach. Otherwise there will always be one little house that blocks the expansion.

The other valuable option is:

using really modular ones: the player adds terminals/runways/taxilanes where he can fit them. Terminals should be connected to runways by taxilanes.


My preference is the second option.

[Hyronymus]

In essence there doesn't seem to be a big difference. Pjaytycy's prefered approach might also prevent problems when more modern airport constructions are required. They would never fit in the reserved airport terrain for the earliest airports. When larger aircraft appear you are bound to replace the airport if we go with the first option. By allowing extensions to be build seperately this would become 'more flexible'. Only downside is that probably a part of the city has to be demolished for expansions. Should that be expensive and only payed by the company or does the city cover a part of the costs too (they also benefit from it)?

If we choose for the really modular approach then we need at least one basic version for the very first airports of a type (i.e. small-large-modern small and modern large). It's probably wise if these basic versions are build on a certain distance of the city center. Using a feeder service to serve the airport would be a really good solution then.

[Steve]

We could use semi-reserved spots around the pre-made modular airport. So, in the spot where a terminal or second runway could sit, only certain houses can be built. No skyscrapers, industries or other stations.
We could give the airports some flexibility by making sure the parts of the aiports follow some rules. Such as: all runways join together before joining the main taxiway (on both ends, unless they are just takeoff/landing). Terminals then branch off out of the taxiway.

I don't think it's unreasonable to presume airplanes can "book" a terminal as they enter the landing list. That way, some aircraft will have to wait before they can join the landing queue if there are no free spots, to prevent gridlocks. As long as the airport is set out as suggested above, planes will always be able to follow the main taxiway and find their terminal.

[Zuu]

Steve, so the airplanes will follow the attached sheme. Perhaps when a terminal becomes avilable the airport will give that terminal to the first plane in the landing queue, that is allowed to use that terminal. If no airplanes in the queue passes the recuriments, the airport shall wait untill a plane arrives that passes the requriments.

If a company owns a terminal, only that companys planes should be allowed to use that terminal.

Before a plane is placed in the landing queue the airport should check that it is allowed to use the airport at all.

[jfs]

I wonder, would it be any help to this discussion having some maps of real-life airports to refer to?

[Steve]

Here is an example airport layout. Grey lines are taxi ways, with blue being the acutal terminal sections. We could have different shapes of terminals for some variety. The dotted grey path shows where a taxi way would run if they wanted both take offs and landings on the third runway.

I suggest the main taxiway to be automatically segmented somehow, to allow the maximum number of moving planes without collisions. Terminals could just allow 1 plane moving at once for simplicity. The pink dot is a control tower.


Edit: Bit of a google, real airports look similar to mine but with more pointless taxiways and death traps from crossing runways

[Zuu]

Wasn't the proposal I made (ask the town to buy an airport at your company's expenses) just as close as we can get? If we want to play truly realistic we must add a wealthy goverment and investment groups and that's unrealistic I think. About placing terminals (again): each airport terrain has pre-designed slots where expansion buildings can be built. I.e. terminals are build on 1 of 4 slots in the center, hangars on 1 of 4 slots in the upper left corner etc. This would automaticly limit the maximum numbers of companies to 4 which could be fun.

Do you think airports should have a fixed outer size, and then buildings can be appended inside that area on predefined places?

Or maby we can create bigger modules that can be connected togeather like a puzzle. These modules either contain runways, or terminals, or hangars. Tommorrow, I'll look into it and see if that can be use as a hybrid.

[Hyronymus]

A fixed size with the exception for additional runways (as in reality I think).

[Zuu]

A week or so delayed, but anyway..

The imge contains two 5x5 loding area modules and one 10x5 runway module.
* All modules should be rotable.
* The loding area modules should probably have exits and etrances, to make the airports less messy.
* The loding areas does contains terminal buildings, and gates.
* I think you should be able to build lose taxi that is not a part of an module, especially if modules can be roted in more than 4 directions.

Note, alltroght I wrote take off on the runway, I think that there should only exist one type of runway. That can be configured to alow take off only or landing only or both. In most cases you should not need to set that, as landing plnes or perhaps the queue should check if there are any taxi way from a runway, before it allow planes to land, and runways that an't connected to the entrances wont simply be found by the on ground pathfinder.

[Zuu]

What do you think? Can we get some discussion here at the forum or shall we get another 5 hour long meeting?

[Steve]

What did we decide in the first meeting?
Perhaps someone should of gone through the topics and added the relevant decisions?

[Hellfire]

Actually, this topic is to be decided on in the next meeting. And I think we should use the meetings for decisions. We can use the forum or the wiki for the relevant discussions.

[Grunt]

I personally think that a good way to go would be to make the airports fundamentally module-based but provide several template airports of appropriate sizes - this way we get the best of both worlds. What does everyone else think?

[Zuu]

I personally think that a good way to go would be to make the airports fundamentally module-based but provide several template airports of appropriate sizes - this way we get the best of both worlds. What does everyone else think?

I like that idea.

But, we have to consider to make airport modules simple enoght so that they can be built by players, perhaps after that they have watched a prebuilt airport.

[Hyronymus]

I suggested something similar to SGrunt's idea a few times before . Anyhow, a basic template seems to be favourable indeed. It should consist of (at least) 1 terminal, 1 landing + 1 take-off strip, 1 taxi strip, 1 hangar and a main building. All other parts should be optional but only allowed on pre-set spots on the airport terrain. That way you prevent the AI building a terminal next to your hangar. In other words: you favour construction of terminals and hangars next to eachother.

[jfs]

I like the idea as well.

[Steve]

Meeting Decisions:

- Modules.
- Templates, that contain many modules but in a set pattern for easy use. Editable.
- Once you've made a design, you could save it as a template.
- Town airports: Town makes the template with players just taking up set terminal spots.
- Large airports could have pre-set sections that can be built in the future, if required.

Revote decided for "Who builds airports outside towns?". Decided the initial vote was wrong.

Status: Not sure if this agrees with views posted here. Open to finalisation.