Originally Posted by
Grumble
Garbage in, garbage out. You get sorta how it works (or you can copy paste) so if you're not being exact and telling PBS precisely what you want... Whose fault is that? You're proposing going from seven weighting pools to 100 to speed it up too??? So 12000 pilots go from seven weighting pools to 100, you're probably talking trillions of possible solutions.
I've gotten my #1 or 2 bid group every month, month after month because I bid what I know my seniority can hold. If you're at 80% and trying to pick trips, or at 10% and not giving appropriate avoid/award commands, thats not a failure of PBS. Could it be easier? Sure, and Boeing could build a better airplane than the 737, but it's what we have. My bidding QOL is up to me to understand how it works, sink or swim.
As far as the speed, if you want lesser optimization levels we can get it sooner.
I think this represents the basic problem. You don't understand that having more bid weightings REDUCES the solvers work. There would not be as much iteration with more bid weightings. Its not # of bid groups X # of trips that determines the possible combinations. The only reason we have multiple bid groups is because of the LACK of bid weightings. If you don't believe me read where ALPA proposed adding 2 weighting groups H+++ and L--- to take the total to 9 instead of 7.
The only reason I can think of why so many people don't understand that this specific PBS is terrible are because either they think all PBS systems will be difficult so why change when they have already have learned this one, or because they don't understand how it works.
We should let seniority determine lines, not bidding skill and/or limited weighting choices.