I have been thinking often about this topic, each time I buy a new airport scenery in fact, which is frequent nowadays since I acquired FSX only three months ago and bought over fifty airport add-ons from FSDT, FlyTampa, Aerosoft, Tropical Sim, Imagine Sim and the likes.

 

Before with FS9, no question, if you want airport services, AES is a must and the only way, but in FSX we have a choice with GSX as an other option.

 

Or do we?!

 

With my first airport, I bought GSX immediately as a no-brainer, I was getting in one product all airport services at all airports in the world including FSX stock airports in one go, it is smarter, considerably cheaper and as pleasant as AES (which I used for many years in FS9 and invested an awful amount of money in for all my airport add-ons).

 

But I soon realised that if FSDT, creator of GSX, made a point to ensure that all its airports would have moving jetways with the FSX command CTR+J, such is not the case with Aerosoft (distributor of AES) and many other airport add-on developers receiving the AES treatment... Meaning that if you want the full set, you better have AES after all, since the FSX default command is ignored by a majority of developers, hence no moving jetways. Using GSX with fixed jetways will trigger the placement of a movable stair in front of the jetway, a particularly untidy situation!

 

In the end, it is a win-win situation for (a) the airport designer (he does not need to create mobile jetways= less work), and ( AES sells credits for a new airport for the sole designing of mobile jetways (since we now know that other services such as pushback, catering and fuel vehicles don't require to be redesigned for each airport as proven by GSX).

 

The only loser seems to be the client - us - who has the choice of a shaby airport setup or an organised one with an extra expense since the default command has been volontarily ignored. There are times when conspiracy theories are tempting although I thoroughly dislike them as a matter of principle!

 

Food for thoughts, but unpleasant ones: how can we break this vicious circle and ensure that a default command of the game be respected by everyone regardless of what they design for it? This would be called "Fairness" in many languages and giving clients a real choice!

The issues isn't just that the default command is ignored but that it is very poorly implemented in FSX, at best you get a jittery moving jetway that will sometime perform weird acts and finally

wont even attach to your airplane correctly.

The scenery development community has a very good reason to go with a custom solution like AES, It looks and operates ten times better.

 

My hope is that in the future the guys at FSDT will figure out how to correctly control and animate the gates, this in my opinion will be the best solution for us the simmers.

The issues isn't just that the default command is ignored but that it is very poorly implemented in FSX, at best you get a jittery moving jetway that will sometime perform weird acts and finally

wont even attach to your airplane correctly.

The scenery development community has a very good reason to go with a custom solution like AES, It looks and operates ten times better.

 

My hope is that in the future the guys at FSDT will figure out how to correctly control and animate the gates, this in my opinion will be the best solution for us the simmers.

 

Interesting as there are parts of this I agree with, and others not so much.

 

I agree that the FSX jetways are in general poorly implemented. They in fact do jump around, sink into the ground, and rarely connect properly with the plane. And that's when they are working as designed. Best case scenario. When they don't work they simply do nothing. This is definitely where GSX falls short in my opinion.

 

What I don't agree with is the "custom solution like AES, It looks and operates ten times better." In my opinion, with the exception of the jetway attaching to the plane which AES clearly does well, GSX excels in all other areas. The models look better, they move more authentically (moving in time with the ground instead of unnatural gliding across the ground), and the pushback animation is far better than the jerky AES movement.

 

Indeed if GSX could consider customizing airports for their jetways, perhaps even at an upgraded "premium airport" price, it would cover all the areas for me. Until then I still use GSX in spite of the jetways because it ticks more of the boxes for me.

I personally prefer AES, I think it's much more realistic and a far better product for what it does, that being said, AES doesn't cover all airports, so that's where GSX would be great, I don't own it, only tried the Demo, but it pushes you back to the back of beyond when I was trying it at Milan once... :rolleyes: I think for add-on scenery AES is the way to go, but for default airports GSX is a real step up from what's there to begin with...

 

I don't like that FSDT now are refusing to allow AES on their upcoming CYVR airport, AES is usually the first thing I look for before buying an airport, that and close proximity to another airport with AES, hence why most my flights are internal Ireland ones due to the close proximity of 3 AES'd airports... I think they should have at least let Oliver add his AES to the airport and then let the customers decide what they want...

 

Just my €0.02

 

Regards,

Ró.

I use AES specifically because of the jetway movement. They do not sink into the ground and work marvelously IMO. I use GSX for all other functions and will continue to use it until FSDreamteam implement a jetway system into their software. Works great for me but I agree it would be nice to use one or the other.

In my opinion, with the exception of the jetway attaching to the plane which AES clearly does well, GSX excels in all other areas. The models look better, they move more authentically (moving in time with the ground instead of unnatural gliding across the ground), and the pushback animation is far better than the jerky AES movement.

 

Hmm, maybe. But the GSX pushback doesn't really know where the correct taxiway line is to position you on, and the follow me vehicle goes all over the place, and almost impossible to follow especially on corners.

 

Indeed if GSX could consider customizing airports for their jetways, perhaps even at an upgraded "premium airport" price, it would cover all the areas for me.

 

Well, I would agree if they'd also take more note of the taxiway lines. ;-)

 

Pete

Do any of these Airport service addons function/work with the AI planes when they land/takeoff? I can't seem to find any info regarding this.

 

Thanks in advance

Hmm, maybe. But the AES pushback doesn't really know where the correct taxiway line is to position you on.

I always thought that the pushback procedure for each gate was customised by AES no?

I always thought that the pushback procedure for each gate was customised by AES no?

 

Sorry, that was a typo -- GSX, not AES (corrected now). If you'd read the whole message I think that would have been more obvious?

 

Pete

If you'd read the whole message I think that would have been more obvious?

 

Pete

Reading it it could have gone either way really, I know those issues happen with both....

I agree with the OP (on having a choice) and some default movement would do it for me most of the time. So the best options would be default or AES instead of the static or AES one.

 

I always feel a bit like in an Apple store at times. You buy the new pricey tablet and it needs some power adapter and.. look! they even sell those. If you know what I mean. ^_^

 

I'm pretty happy with GSX so far and appreciate the one time payment policy a lot. Well, most of all, I appreciate the extra option on the service addons as I still run some AES stuff and was wondering about a nice pushback and loading at the other 25.000 airports.

 

If they could add a feature giving every default airport some more life, it would even be better. You know, like AES lite does at the payware.

 

Besides, I feel like it's hard to explain to people outside of my hobby why I'm looking at some sim baggage carts and enjoy it. :blush:

Hmm, maybe. But the GSX pushback doesn't really know where the correct taxiway line is to position you on, and the follow me vehicle goes all over the place, and almost impossible to follow especially on corners.

 

Well, given that GSX utilizes the AFCAD to know this information, that is where I put some of that responsibility. Given a good AFCAD I don't have many of those problems. Admittedly though, I don't use the follow-me vehicle. I use Aivlasoft which gives me a nice map of the taxiways, so I usually do not request follow-me services.

I prefer AES by a wide margine. After reading FSDT not supporting AES I doubt I'll purchase another airport from them.

With all due respect to personal opinion, my decision was made purely on "bang for the buck". AES really good at a few airports or GSX above average to really good at all default airports. I'll take GSX any day of the week versus the credit system of AES.

 

If AES had a different pricing model I'd entertain the purchase but right now it's not even worth a thought for me.

AES is custom built to the airport which is why it costs a modest amount. GSX is one size fits all which is ok as we'll just not as polished in my opinion. But that's what's good about more than one product.