Talk:World Air Freedoms

From OpenGeofiction Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I have created this page based on the model of wikipedia's freedoms of the air page. However, my main intention is to allow countries to specify what level of air freedom they intend to grant to other countries on the OGF world, by means of the "List of countries with freedoms granted." I have listed my countries of Mahhal, Tárrases and Ardisphere to serve as examples of the types of freedoms and how the table might be used. Other users are free to make alterations - this is a community space. I think if it is widely used, we could point new users asking about air connections to this page and not have to negotiate "individual concessions" if we don't want to. The concept is similar to the somewhat unsuccessful Countries with Free Trade Agreements with the Ardisphere, but is intended to be multilateral rather than bilateral. Ultimately, the page is meant to serve as a link that can be given to other users when they ask: "Can my airline fly to your country?" or "Does anyone want to fly to my country?"--Happy mapping - Luciano (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2016 (CEST)

New freedom between 8th and 9th?

Currently the page states that the 8th freedom gives "the right to fly inside a foreign country, continuing to one's own country" while the 9th freedom gives "the right to fly inside a foreign country without continuing to one's own country". Now, between these two there is something you might have overlooked. Namely it's the right to fly inside a foreign country continuing a different foreign country. An example for such a flight would be Maralgola - Bezantyra - Yasheu, by a Kalmian company. Is this considered part of the 8th freedom, the 9th freedom or do you think it should be its own category? ZM (aka _zM on OGF)(talk) 20:20, 26 April 2016 (CEST)

Hm - well, if there is an oversight, it is on the part of the creators of the real-world "Chicago Convention" and the international civil aviation regulatory bodies - I just copied the list of freedoms from wikipedia. There's no reason we can make changes, however, to the real-world list. You are free to do so, too, if you want to define your country as falling into that newly-defined category.--Happy mapping - Luciano (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2016 (CEST)

Proposal for Simplification

I would like to propose that rather than use the real-world Freedoms of the Air, that we use a simplified version of them, and list them in terms of what each country grants to anyone that grants the same freedoms.

  1. Freedom to fly over my country on the way to a third country. (Real world #1. United Airlines flies over Canada to take passengers to Europe.)
  2. Freedom to land in my country in order to refuel, resupply or maintain aircraft, and then travel to a third country. No passengers or cargo may embark or disembark. (Real world #2. Qantas refuels in Los Angeles on the way to New York.)
  3. Freedom to fly passengers/cargo to/from your country to mine. (Real world #3 & 4. Egypt Air transports passengers between Cairo and Rome.)
  4. Freedom to fly passengers/cargo to/from my country to a third country. (Real World #7, which would require that the 3rd country also grant the same freedom. Aeroflot picks up passengers in Miami, and flies them to London.)
  5. Freedom to fly passengers/cargo within my country, with the flight connecting to your country. (Real world #8, Lufthansa picks up passenges in Houston, flies to Dallas, picks up more passengers, and continues to Frankfurt. Passengers may not disembark in Dallas.)
  6. Freedom to fly passengers/cargo within my country. (Real world #9, Air France transports passengers between Denver and St. Louis, with or without a connecting flight to/from Paris.)

Real world #5 & 6 are combinations of other freedoms. I think ignoring them will simplify things.

I think having a table something like this might make things simpler. Much like the table on the embassy page.

 >>>  First Draft Table Removed <<< 

--Paxtar (talk) 05:08, 27 April 2016 (CEST)

We've talked about this in private messages, and I'd like to support this proposal. It's much easier to understand, especially if one isn't familiar with the RW Air Freedoms. Leowezy (talk) 21:08, 1 May 2016 (CEST)
I fully endorse the simplification. My intention in making this page was that it be a first draft, and I fully expected and hoped to see further changes. Take it live! I will support it.--Happy mapping - Luciano (talk) 01:33, 2 May 2016 (CEST)
I definitely like this simplification much better. I support as well! --Ernestpcosby (talk) 05:12, 2 May 2016 (CEST)

I would like to propose one more change. I think that Freedom #1 should be universally granted. I assume that the majority of users would grant it anyway, and eliminating that column makes the table slightly less complicated. If someone wants to specifically restrict their airspace, then I think that could be listed in the notes. If there's agreement, I can clean up the table on the talk page, and move it to the main page. --Paxtar (talk) 19:49, 2 May 2016 (CEST)

This simplification really helps (perhaps you should let the Chicago Convetion members know!).

But Freedom 1 is still needed: there are some OGF countries that won't grant even this minimum level or will want to negotiate their fly over rights individually (maybe charging for this at a different rate from 2+?). So I think removing freedom 1 from the list would make it less useful, though perhaps simpler.--Udilugbuldigu (talk) 09:16, 3 May 2016 (CEST)

I understand your point. From the perspective of trying to keep things realistic, it should be included. For ease of use, for those setting up air traffic routes, I thought automatically granting it, unless specifically not granted (in the notes), made sense. Much like everyone automatically gets AN membership. My reasons are also partially selfish. I set up a flight schedule based on the shortest routes. I am not looking forward to checking each route for Freedom1, and then reworking the programming to account for restricted airspace that may fall along the routes. Even though it would be more realistic! (A map of restricted airspace would be an interesting project, maybe based on the OGF overview map?) Unless there's a lot of support for removing freedom one from the table, I'll leave it as is, and move it to the main page. --Paxtar (talk) 16:56, 3 May 2016 (CEST)

One more suggestion: I'd recommend including the freedoms in the column headers, maybe like this... I imagine this would be easier than forcing people to look back and forth to remember which freedoms are associated with which numbers. --Isleño (talk) 11:29, 4 May 2016 (CEST)

>>> Table Moved to Main Page <<< 
I went ahead and filled in the second chart based off the first one --Ernestpcosby (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2016 (CEST)
I think the second version of the table is much clearer, and have deleted the first version. I've added the missing countries from the main page to the current table. Do we want to keep signatory date?--Paxtar (talk) 04:10, 5 May 2016 (CEST)
No need to keep signatory date, actually. It can be part of what goes in note, and if people aren't yet working on their history, they don't have to worry about it.--Happy mapping - Luciano (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2016 (CEST)

The descriptions of the freedoms seem like they could be better. Maybe illustrations would would be helpful? I also changed 'fly' in many cases to 'carry passengers and cargo' since that seemed clearer. --Paxtar (talk) 13:34, 5 May 2016 (CEST)

Countries removed from list

I just noticed Neo Delta and some other coutries were removed from the list in the following edition: Is there a reason why? --deltanz (talk) 02:29, 3 October 2016 (CEST)

I contacted the user who deleted the countries and got no response, so I added back Neo Delta, Forrintië and Balam-Utz. As the owner of Neo Delta, I did not get any notification that my country was being deleted, so I imagine the owners of Forrintië and Balam-Utz did not receive it either. Let me know if I am wrong. And please, if you ever feel the need to delete a country from the list, let the owner know in the discussion section and/or send them a message! --deltanz (talk) 08:45, 4 October 2016 (CEST)