I just posted on this topic and it disappeared. Hoping this one won't. Aerosoft are selling some of their Mega airports over the weekend. I am torn between the FS9 versions of Brussels or Lisbon. If anyone has both and can venture an opinion I would be grateful. If one or the other has AESLite ground traffic for FS9, that would be the one I would choose. I would be grateful for any info users can give me

Cheers

Ian

Buy both. You know you want to ;-)

http://www.aerosoft.com/shop-re/links/aesairports.html

 

shows AES paid credits support both although only the Lisbon scenery details shows it is only AES compatible. Neither include AES light for the aircraft surround ground servicing vehicles although Lisbon has various ground servicing and follow me vehicles running around.

 

I have the Spanish airports (Aerosoft) suites and I have the Holiday Destinations old product with Faro, Portugal and use Faro as a departure or destination for the Spanish, French (Aerosoft), and Italian (ISD Project) airports using the 737NG series mostly in Air Berlin livery with hub at LEPA (as part of the Balearic Islands from Aerosoft. I think Lisbon would be a nice place to include in your routes.

 

As far as Brussels if you have the freeware EGLC or payware version that could make an interesting route for the small Airbus or newly released RJ85 or BAe 146-200. EGLC can represent a nice challenge even on ground manipulation it tight space for nose out parking.

 

I think both would represent interesting routing and get a credit set for AES to enable both airports.

 

So I think the routes you like should determine your choice but both have great possibilities.

G'day Ian.

 

Ronzie has provided an excellent assessment with one exception ... size. Brussels is bigger insofar as gates/airbridges is concerned. It also has three runways (2 'parallel') compared to two. Brussels also has more extensive cargo capacity if that appeals.

 

But when you get right down to it - just depends on where YOU want to fly. That, or as Gavin sensibly suggests, buy both. :lol:

I was expecting Mayia to tell me to get both! You beat her to it Gavin.... B) Having just bought new rudder pedals and yoke/throttles to go with my new PC, I am TRYING to be sensible and keep it to one purchase.

 

Thanks for the good input guys - it might just come down to a coin toss. Then again, it might come down to getting both! LOL The good thing with the Mega airport series is you can't go wrong - they are all outstanding products

Ian

They both are awesome, for me Brussells has an edge looked at in isolation, but Lisbon is in a better location for MY buzzing around Europe. But you can't go wrong either way, I get all Aerosoft and UK2000 sceneries unseen. The volume from Aerosoft is tapering off now... :(

 

Cheers, SLuggy

Thanks mate - I think I'm going to go with Brussels as I tend to favor shorter routes and Lisbon is a bit off my personal "beaten track." But I still may cave and buy both! LOL

Brussels has a problem that causes 3gd.dll error, its seems to be a common error with longer routes that pass close by (Brussels vor) when that scenery is installed and there is no mention anywhere on how to fix it on any of the fs9 related forums. I have been forced to delete it to solve this error.

Hi.

I don't think that this g3d.dll error is product only of Aerosoft EBBR. In the past I had also this strange error when approaching BUB VOR near EBBR.

Never solve this error.

After installing W7 64 bit (before I had WinXP 64bit) never had this error again.

Strange, because I installed completely same scenery's.

Only difference is that now I don't have 3GB switch activated.

Edin

Thanks for the warning. I will do some experimenting with the BUB VOR before I buy EBBR.

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/55469-ebbr-ctd/page__hl__brussels+ebbr

 

Also it could be resource starvation as it happens if FS is made large address aware with the .exe 3 GB mod.

This is an automatic message.

 

 

This topic has been moved from "The FS2004 (FS9) Forum" to "The Bargain Hunter's Shack". This move has been done for a number of possible reasons.

• The most likely reason is that the post was off topic.
  
• The topic could also have contained images or a video that were not appropriate to the original forum it was posted in.
  
• The images might not have been "illustrative" or "explanatory" in nature.
  
• The topic could have been moved because we deemed it to be more appropriately placed elsewhere.
  

Please ensure that your posts are "on topic" and contain illustrative images or videos as appropriate. Do not post videos or images just for entertainment purposes anywhere but in the screen shot or video forums.

 

Members who continue to post off topic posts can be denied entry to specific forums in order to reduce and remove the practice. Your cooperation is appreciated.