Forum:Federal States/Aviation Network

Forums → Federal States → Federal States/Aviation Network

With the new tagging and lists of airports and airlines now live, I'm opening this forum thread to document and discuss how we want to plan out and map the FSA aviation network. Please use the sections below to help keep the conversations organized. --TheMayor (talk) 22:52, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Key Topics

Airport Mapping and Designations

(How should we determine and designate "global" or "intercontinental" or "international" or "regional" airports?)

I will start off, we should definitely allow mappers to add international/intercontinental airports where realistic/feasible, but identifying major international/global hubs can be done regionally (ex. lakes, east coast, the west etc) based on the mapping/projected populations and importance for transport. Brunanter (talk) 00:08, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

I do think a "General Aviation" classification should be added aswell, because not all airports serve commercial traffic, plus a "national" designation should be added aswell for airports that have a broad range in the FSA but do not go international. RhodeIslandWV (talk) 14:52, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

We can have a 'general aviation' category, but this would be a secondary discussion. General aviation facilities should have no scheduled commercial flights. In this case, we can tag them as aerodrome:type=general if we need to add an additional tagging mechanic. These types of airports would be automatically filtered out of commercial lists. — Alessa _(talk) 00:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Network Design

(Should we have a more strict "hub-and-spoke" model for airlines? What minimum levels of service should be guaranteed to each airport? Who decides where each airline should fly to? What should the minimum distance be for each pair of airports served?)

I am willing to find a clever way around this, but I think hub-and-spoke is probably likely due to its efficiency in compact areas. I would be curious if there would be "air trains" that would have successive stops for rural markets, or if the FSA would even subsidize/require it like the US does. Since the FSA is smaller and we have purportedly decided to invest in rail more, I could see a situation where rail travel takes the place of air travel except between larger markets. A case could also be made that rail and air might be an integrated network in some ways. Not sure how it would work, but I'm just speculating. — Alessa _(talk) 00:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Airlines

(What are the largest airlines in the Federal States? What role should smaller regional airlines play?)

I am interested in the role of regional airlines serving small/more minor airports. USA does designate subsidies to airlines flying to small airports located a minimum distance from commercial airports (provides essential service where normally there would never be), but since FSA is much smaller idk how it would work out. Brunanter (talk) 00:08, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

I think the lack of size and supposed rail importance would minimize the impact and need for this type of subsidizing or requirement. I could see a situation where the largest markets and many midsize markets have airports but the rest really do not. It would likely take only 4 hours to drive from Minneuka to Madawan; under 5 hours from Minneuka to Massodeya City, for example. Not that people wouldn't fly shorter distances and not deal with cars, but this type of short distance will cut down on air travel as other options (car, train) are in play. — Alessa _(talk) 00:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Rural service may only be common in western states i guess, especially high/snowy areas, poor road connection and lack of train services. But mostly driving gonna be common since the distances aren't too long. Brunanter (talk) 22:05, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

I think there could be various rural flights throughout the Heartland, Massodeyas, and possibly even in other areas as well. But, I cannot see a single place in the FSA where road service would be so poor by necessity that flights would be mandatory. I can see places where road service in the winter could be difficult, but planes wouldn't necessarily solve that. It would be far cheaper given the shorter distances to find a way to put a semi-reliable road than finance air service. We don't have an Alaska analogue. That said, I think it may be reasonable that individual states might see the benefit of financing or subsidizing air service to various locations, whether that be commercial travel, delivery services, emergency response, etc. — Alessa _(talk) 22:48, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

As for major airlines, just to keep this conversation rolling, we have 11 domestic airline companies of varying sizes. Some are definitively major and go back to the earliest years of the project (Federal, Southern), others have legacy albeit are undiscussed without coordination (Tauhon, Union), and others are possibly larger but not sure their impact (Apex, Ardentic, flySmart). It would be nice to codify this list a bit, if there is room to discuss it. I do not think with the FSA size and population base that there should be more than 3 big, major airlines; probably two or three budget ones of varying degrees; a couple regional ones that are truly regional and not superregional. As I've said above, I cannot see the market for domestic travel being as high as it is in the real-world United States. — Alessa _(talk) 23:36, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

As a disinterested party (not sponsoring any of the airlines), I think that Apex Airlines, Federal Airlines, and Southern Airlines seem to be the largest airlines to me. Ardentic could be a major airline more focused on east coast and international destinations along the east coast (Unesia, Astrian Confederation, other unowned countries like AR033^∈⊾ƨ and AR049^∈⊾ƨ). It appears that there are two existing budget airlines: flySmart and skyRide. Perhaps one of the other 5-6 airlines in limbo could be reserved for a budget airline and the rest could be regional. PoisonDog522 (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2026 (UTC)