[Discussion] The state of VAs

Firstly apologies for the overuse of ‘state’ in my titles. It is a great word though.

I want to get some community input on some of these questions. No polls, I want to gauge how people feel about some of these questions. VA owners, staff, members as well as non-VAers please contribute.

  1. Are there too many VAs?

  2. Do you think there should be a limit on the amount of VAs people can make?

  3. Should duplicate real-world VAs be allowed? When can a new one be made?

  4. Are people making Airline groups (Taking up 2+ airlines as their own as part of a group) fair?

  5. How do you feel about non real world VAs?

  6. Would you want VAs to have some form of integration into IF in the future? How would you like this to happen?

6 Likes

Personally, I think that people should make one va, and then concentrate on that, not make a ton of not-so-great ones. I don’t think duplicate IRL should be allowed, but non real world VA’s a fine. I would love VA’s to have integration with IF in the future.

10 Likes

Yes, there are too many VAs. I think we should limit it to Originals VAs.

No, Real World VAs should not be allowed.

Not really.

I think that all Non-VAs should be null and voided, and make it more interesting with original VAs. I’m the real world, they can’t just copy another airline, they make their own.

N/A.

2 Likes
  1. Yes
  2. Yes
  3. Yes, when the other one is inactive.
  4. No, because some people might have worked hard on a VA and suddenly the VA they have been working on is taken.
  5. ORIGINAL
  6. I dont have an answer
2 Likes

So you’re saying we should ban real-world VAs and just have originals…

Interesting…

1 Like

Yes, I want to see how that would work. For example, let’s take Etihad and Lufthansa. They will just have the same routes, and we can’t add any additional routes. Now with Original VAs, we could add new routes, (or anything else) just like real world airlines!

*are

*how do you…


  1. Yes, there’s an insane amount of VAs.
  2. Yes, it doesn’t seem logical if a person is running 5 VAs at the same time.
  3. There should be no duplicate real world VAs. Having one is sufficient enough.
  4. Alliances are cool, so yeah.
  5. There not too bad, I just won’t join them. Realism is the best.
  6. I guess that’d be cool. It would have to be a well organized VA though.
4 Likes
  1. I wouldn’t say generally too many, but rather too many rushed, unprofessionally created and duplicate VAs. Some VAs are practically just a thread saying its name, what planes they operate and what routes they fly (usually just 10-20 mainstream routes). That is in my opinion spam and should be violated.
    A review and approval by forum staff before a new VA gets launched is in my opinion senseful and should help this a lot.

  2. Yes. It should be one VA per user, just like it’s always been like. Furthermore, I think only Trust Level 3 users should have the possibility to create new VAs.

  3. No, it definitely shouldn’t. That is useless and spam. A new one may be created if the old one is shut down by forum or airline staff.

  4. I do not see a problem with that. One thing I do not like is that some people take daughter companies, which are completely different airlines as a part of their airline (e.g. Lufthansa with Austrian, Swiss etc.). Subsidaries like KLM (KLM Cityhopper) or Lufthansa (Lufthansa Regional) are fine in my opinion.

  5. Well, what can I say, they are awesome and offer a lot of freedom - especially for VA staff. You can decide what planes it flies with, where it operates and so on and you don’t have to rely on real world operations (although these are sometimes not noted whatsoever).
    On the one hand, I wouldn’t want to fly for a real world VA since you can basically as well fly the same routes in the same plane and livery without flying for the VA, this is somehow the same for original VAs, but at least not as much, on the other hand, some players that care a lot about realism and a real-life orientated environment don’t like original VAs because they’re completely made up and are at least to that extent not very realistic.
    Every type has their pros and cons. For me as a airline manager, the original VAs win the battle.

  6. I’m absolutely fine with how it is right now, one thing to consider though os virtual airline callsigns (I know, some of you are holding a knife at my throat for this) or at least some sort of note about the airline at the display name.

1 Like

1 va creation per person or something.
Inactive va’s are shut down without warning

1.Yes, there are too many VA’s. And the reason for that is people don’t take into consideration how much time and work it takes to even start one up.

2.Yes, I feel like if a person is going to start up a VA, they should fully dedicate as much time as possible to it. One person should only be allowed to start one VA. Not start multiple VA’s that aren’t well made.

3.No, I don’t think there should be more than one Real-World VA on the current VA database here on the forum. In fact, I think if there is, the more professional one should be left there while the other one should be shut-down.

4.If you own an original VA, it is up to you to join a group and/or alliance. If you own a real world VA, I think you should only join an alliance if the real world airline is in that alliance IRL.

5.I personally think original VA’s are great! As long as they are well made. Take for example @BavariaAVIATION and @grxninesix who own TravelSky (I’m not a member, I’m just commenting based on what I have seen here on the forum and their website), they have a professional and well made, original VA.

6.I think VA’s in the future could be implemented in Infinite Flight using an ACARS system for PIREPS etc… Perhaps in the future, you would be able to change a setting in the settings menu stating whether you are doing a flight for a VA, then state the VA are a member of and doing a flight for, do your flight, and it would send the data of the flight to the website of the VA you did your flight for. :)

Sorted with regrets.

1 Like

Don’t forget the same person who create 2-3-4 VA’s

But I think this problem is going to be resolved (unfortunately not soon) because we’re going to have Category-Mods on the Discourse Version 1.8, we’re currently in 1.6 so this problem is going to be resolved in probably August 2017

Yes.

Deffinately. Maybe 2 at max.[quote=“IceBlue, post:1, topic:69968”]
Should duplicate real-world VAs be allowed? When can a new one be made?
[/quote]
No duplicates. A new one can be made when the old ones is inactive and removed from the database.[quote=“IceBlue, post:1, topic:69968”]
Are people making Airline groups (Taking up 2+ airlines as their own as part of a group) fair?
[/quote]
Yes if they are a group IRL. Example being Lufthansa Group. Don’t take SkyTeam or Star Alliance or whole alliances.[quote=“IceBlue, post:1, topic:69968”]
How do you feel about non real world VAs?
[/quote]
If set up right, they’re fine.[quote=“IceBlue, post:1, topic:69968”]
Would you want VAs to have some form of integration into IF in the future? How would you like this to happen?
[/quote]

Yes. I think each VA should have to be top quality and approved by FDS or someone.

1 Like

Way too many VA being created and sometimes with silly purposes.

Not everyone should create a VA, perhaps restrict it to TL2 and higher like features request. Live should also be required.

If you don’t keep up your VA active you get dropped a TL and your VA is delisted and restricted from reapplication until 90 days passed. This also should apply to those who start multiple VA. If you had the time to start you should have the time to finish.

Same case for “life suspension” ex-members.

It is like this already :)

4 Likes

I could have sworn I saw VA start recently by a TL1.

If you see a TL1 create a VA, flag it. Regulars aren’t allowed to move topics that are created by TL1 or TL0 to #features, or #live:va

2 Likes

Yes

Yes, even though i am making one right now.

No.

Yes

1 Like

He means if there should be more than one real-world VA on the forums such as 2 Alaska Virtuals.