In some cases, teams-under strictly ordained deadline pressure to hand in decisions to the trainers and dazed by information overload-failed to make use of all the computerised analytical assistance at their disposal. For some the reality dawned when it was possibly too late into the seminar to alter positively the results of a particular airline. Participants in the most LCG recent simulation seminar near Frankfurt were a typically mixed cross section. To a degree, their varied levels of background experience with airline management systems tended to complicate team operations, but all saw the experience as beneficial and stimulating.
Among them were Philip Markham, field service regional manager for Bombardier Aerospace; Marcel Fuchs, United Airlines GM Germany, Austria & Switzerland; Louis A. Helstone, CFO of Surinam Airways; Anthony Ponton, market forecasting manager of Rolls-Royce; Luis Andre C. Patrao, general manager of yield management at Varig, and Osama M. Farid, CEO of Cairo-based Egyptian regional carrier Orca Air. Starting point for the game is that the designated airlines have been competing on the same routes for several years, transporting passengers and cargo between home base Frankfurt and Rome, Athens and London, as well as New York as the only transatlantic destination.

According to the scenario, competing for market share has become more difficult due to shifting market conditions, forcing carriers to re-evaluate their strategy. Each team assumes route management functions for one airline.
Operational responsibilities are divided among members to distribute decision-making authority. Internal communication skills become a major factor in achieving successful team results since many decisions require joint efforts and consensus.

GAMS is played over several concentrated business periods adding up four years (each time frame half a year). Pressure builds up because actual working time is as little as two or three hours for each business period.

After setting route policies for a period, team members enter decision data into forms on a PC, encompassing categories such as market evaluation, aircraft, finance and personnel. After each period an instructor picks up each team's data-diskette and enters the decisions into the central system for comparison with data from competing airlines. The diskette is returned with updated market reports and detailed figures reflecting each airline's performance. After reviewing results of the previous business period, the simulation continues with strategy moves for the next round.

Since not all decisions, such as aircraft purchases for example, are reflected in the period in which they're initiated, business policy must be planned several periods in advance. Interaction is also possible between the airlines during the simulation; for example, they could offer to sell aircraft to one another.Teams must consider a full range of critical questions, for example: What is the long-term strategy of the airline? Did you generate overbooking? How much potential revenue did you loose? Do you see opportunities to minimise overhead costs? Does your marketing-mix reflect your overall strategy? What are desired levels of market share, route capacities and flight frequency? Which market segment should be the main focus? Which planes will be out of service for maintenance during the period? Should the fleet be reconfigured? How should the team co-ordinate decisions? How does your teamwork develop in view of increasing competition and time pressure as the simulation exercise proceeds?

At the same time teams have to take into consideration fictitious "international news bulletins" that are handed out unexpectedly by the trainers, indicating developments than can impact operational decisions, such as steep fuel-price increases, terrorist incidents, foreign exchange shifts, etc. Peter Morrell pointed out that Cranfield's Airline Route Competition Simulation, or ARCS, parallels Lufthansa Consulting's program in some ways.