Can you tell me what kind of strategy the Commanders have when they fly or bring chartered planes to airports that don’t pay any profit? What benefit do they get for themselves? Commanders, I propose that you plan your flights to profitable airports since neither you nor the other pilots make any profit. Don’t be selfish, and let’s all collaborate with each other… I propose flying to profitable airports, for the benefit of the community. Example: A flight just took off from SASJ Airport (Argentina) that doesn’t make any profit, having a neighboring airport (SASA) to fly the same flight. And on top of that, it goes to another airport that also doesn’t generate any profit… What is the purpose of the flight, or is it on purpose so that those of us who try to fly profitable flights can’t create strategies?
If you need help being a strategist, don’t hesitate to ask us! We will gladly advise you.
Have good flights… but make them profitable.
And who decides which airports are the most profitable? Do you decide that?
Besides, the most profitable airports should be the category 5 and 6 ones, which cost a fortune and nobody buys them.
Secondly, there’s no ranking of the most frequently used airports—not in the real world, but in SIMFLY.
So what you’re saying is useless, unless your goal is to organize a mass gathering of all 110,000 simmers in a single airport.
Hi Symonx6,
I believe Charata’s message was meant to encourage strategic thinking and community-minded flying, not to impose personal rules or dictate anyone’s behavior. There’s a big difference between proposing ideas and pretending to control the simulator.
You raise some valid points — like the cost of higher-tier airports and the lack of usage stats — but dismissing the entire suggestion as “useless” seems unnecessarily harsh, especially when the intention behind it is clearly constructive.
In a collaborative environment like SimFly, we can challenge ideas without belittling those who offer them. After all, being strategic isn’t just about numbers — it’s also about knowing how to work with others, respectfully.
I totally agree with your point. I personally already follow that strategy — planning my flights to be profitable not only for myself, but also for the airport owners. That way, we all benefit.
One of the most beautiful things about SimFly is exactly that: the sense of shared experience.
Flying together, supporting each other, and helping the community grow is what makes it so special.
Thanks for bringing up the topic — it’s always good to remind everyone of the bigger picture!
GEARUP In the past, I proposed to all simmers the Rule of Reciprocity—meaning, if you landed at my airport, then I owed you a landing, and to settle the debt I had to land at one of your airports.
But many didn’t like this rule, so it was abandoned.
I also proposed the introduction of ULMs (ultralight aircraft) to bring value back to Category 1 airports, but here people are doing intercontinental flights with the giants of the sky…
The focus here is on big profits and doing things on a large scale right away. No one cares about ULMs—everyone wants to be a great captain with no real experience, when in reality, you start by flying small planes and gradually move on to bigger ones.
SIMFLY is still missing a lot of things, but from what I see, everyone is just racing to earn more money, not to enjoy the pleasure of flying.
I don’t quite understand why there’s a need to generalize or frame everyone’s actions under a single narrative. Not everyone flies for profit, just as not everyone ignores smaller aircraft or community-based strategies.
One of the best parts of SimFly is the freedom it offers: some of us enjoy realism, others focus on roleplay, some are here for strategy, and many just fly for the pleasure of it. I don’t think one approach invalidates another.
Your ideas, like the Rule of Reciprocity or introducing ULMs, are interesting and worth discussing — but I believe variety is what makes the platform richer, not forcing everyone into a single mindset.
Many people don’t like the idea that a small aircraft—not an ULM, but an AG (General Aviation) plane—can cross the Atlantic Ocean to reach the other side of the world.
They want to impose limits on the range of aircraft, and it bothers them that a small Cessna can fly from Europe to the U.S.A.
Yet in reality, there are ULM and AG aircraft that have even flown around the world.
I was told that it’s not “acceptable” or “realistic” for a Cessna to cross the ocean.
Just a quick clarification — yes, Cessnas can cross the Atlantic… but not in standard conditions. These are typically ferry flights, where aircraft are delivered from the U.S. to Europe (or vice versa).
In those cases, the rear seats are removed and replaced with auxiliary fuel tanks specifically to make the transatlantic jump. It’s a well-known procedure in general aviation.
So yes, it’s “realistic” — but it’s also a very specialized operation, and not something a stock GA aircraft would just casually do.
As for ULMs flying around the world, the ones that have done so are heavily modified and flown under unique conditions — impressive, yes, but not representative of a typical ultralight.
But hey, if you need more details on ferry operations or transatlantic delivery flights, I’d be more than happy to walk you through the logistics. 
Why don’t you show us a nice flight plan where a small cessna can cross the ocean? Do you use little nav map? Up load the flight plan.
Just to give an answer on “why” of certain flights, 1/3 of my flights is for simfly economic strategy, the other third is for the VA I follow, and then the last part is just for fun , landing in some interesting fields I like to discover.
| 1 | New York JFK | KJFK | - |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Burlington VT | KBTV | ~200 |
| 3 | Montreal | CYUL | ~150 |
| 4 | Quebec City | CYQB | ~250 |
| 5 | Iqaluit | CYFB | ~1,200 (divisa in più tappe) |
| 6 | Narsarsuaq | BGBW | ~700 |
| 7 | Reykjavík | BIRK | ~700 |
| 8 | Isola di Man | EGNS | ~1,000 |
| 9 | Aberdeen | EGPD | ~300 |
This is a normal flight a cessna can do because is made of multiple airports. Simfly is intended to manage and penalize who does a single flight that dose more than a cessna range can do. Do you understand? If a cessna 172 let’s say can do in one flight a trip of 900nm , why should simfly let a single flight of 1500nm with a cessna 172?
It’s good that many understood the point, but only one didn’t… I said it from my perspective, which is why I emphasized: “SERIOUS QUESTION.” Obviously, those who lack seriousness won’t be able to interpret it.
From my perspective as a pilot, and with this I encompass another topic mentioned, a Cessna 172 flying more than 900 miles? Besides being absurd, what else could it be?
If there are people who want to fly “fantastically,” that’s fine, go for it, but it’s not realistic. There are others who desire and are excited to do things well. In my case, it serves as practice and strategy, trying to make flights that result in lucrative revenue, an average of 7 or 8 passengers per flight. But thanks to “pilots” who leave aircraft at airports that aren’t profitable, I can’t find the excuse. Beyond their desire or passion to fly to those airports, know that they harm others by satisfying their desires. I didn’t mean to be pushy or impose anything. As always, it’s just a question… if my question bothered you, it’s not my problem. Ultimately, talk to your trusted therapist. Let’s be adults. HUGS!
P/S: I appreciate and appreciate the positive comments.
Hugs from Argentina
Good luck to everyone, and safe flights!!!