There were some pretty huge holes in the review. A comparison with Aerosoft Manhattan is highly misleading because Manhattan is not a "photoreal" replacement per se but a full replacement for the Manhattan Island and immediate surrounding area that gives night and seasonal replacements also...is this true of Chicago?Living in Chicagoland myself I have been contemplating buying this scenery and having read the specs on the website I was on the fence. I was pleased to finally see a review on the area and was counting on it to help make a decision on purchasing this. However, having read the review I found it to be terribly incomplete for a large scenery area almost as it was done in a rush and half heartedly. Avsim writers have provided much more detail on a single airport much less a whole metro area.

Being from Chicago, as well, I would opt out of buying this scenery for the simple reason that Meigs is no more. The lakefront renovations, the new Soldier Field, etc., in its place are really beautiful and should have been modeled. Frankly, I'm really surprised that Aerosoft chose to do it this way.

There were some pretty huge holes in the review. A comparison with Aerosoft Manhattan is highly misleading because Manhattan is not a "photoreal" replacement per se but a full replacement for the Manhattan Island and immediate surrounding area that gives night and seasonal replacements also...is this true of Chicago?

Mike, Let me try to answer your questions...As best I can tell, Chicago X is built like Manhattan, not quite photo-real, but a replacement that looks "convincing"..There are no seasonal or night effects, however... just VFR daytime.The only photo-real sections I could find are around the airports.Have a good look at the Aerosoft site.. they provide a fair amount of information about this product as well.