Hi all,

 

We were chatting in a thread about the next FlightBeam airport and someone mentioned that they thought that the majority of simmers were airline types.  Might be true but, does anyone have any idea what the percentages are?  I fly about 98% of my time GA myself and have greatly enjoyed the few mixed-use airports that have been made by Orbx.  Seems to me that a great many of the higher-quality commercial airports being made are pretty GA restricted.  According to Flight Aware, LAX, SFO, JFK, IAD, CYYJ, TPA, MDW, PHX, ONT  seem like they have almost no GA.  Maybe GA pilots don't generally buy airports?  (I own KIAD, KPHX, CYYJ, KTPA).  Maybe Flight Aware doesn't have good coverage of GA?  Maybe the airport makers are interested in making airports that have as many international routes as possible?  Dunno. 

 

Gregg

Not simmers but I wonder if the same ratio holds true? Probably not?

 

http://www.aopa.org/About-AOPA/Statistical-Reference-Guide/FAA-Certificated-Pilots.aspx

It is hard to tell, but I would guess I'm a 40% airliner, 35% GA and 25% Warbird/Mil flight simmer.  :lol:

All ga flying at this point. Find ga a 30 minute flight is possible and plenty of small airfields keep me busy for hours. Payware makers can make big airports in Dubai all day, but all use google sketckup and build fake cornfields in Iowa and Minnesota and land in rural areas where short flights are easy. My backyard got cornfields and ponds that can land on. Think someone will add two plus two and see ga is goldmine of $$$ in certain regions because of the scenery and the objects gotta avoid taking off and landing. 

You know?  I'd love for this site to develop the capability to conduct polls, limited to one response per registered member.  Then at least in the population of Avsim/flight sim enthusiasts we could get a better handle on questions of this nature.

80% airline. I find the complexity involved when planning a real route replication in a Pmdg aircraft a fun challenge. Throw in a busy airport on Vatsim and a successful flight can be nothing short of exhilarating 

From the 2013 Demographic Survey:

 

Looks like GA is very strong. BTW, we who fly GA don't use real flight plans?

From the 2013 Demographic Survey:

 

ScreenHunter_13 May. 12 23.28.jpg

 

That's a confusing chart but I think I get it.  Looks it's more than 2 airliners for every 1 GA.  Interesting.  Still, while it makes sense to build airliner airports, does it make sense to make airports for exclusive airliner traffic and not for some GA?

 

 

All ga flying at this point. Find ga a 30 minute flight is possible and plenty of small airfields keep me busy for hours. Payware makers can make big airports in Dubai all day, but all use google sketckup and build fake cornfields in Iowa and Minnesota and land in rural areas where short flights are easy. My backyard got cornfields and ponds that can land on. Think someone will add two plus two and see ga is goldmine of $$$ in certain regions because of the scenery and the objects gotta avoid taking off and landing. 

 

You use Google Sketchup to make scenery?

 

 

80% airline. I find the complexity involved when planning a real route replication in a Pmdg aircraft a fun challenge. Throw in a busy airport on Vatsim and a successful flight can be nothing short of exhilarating 

 

That's one of the reasons that I slowed down on it...and, in part, because I just like being 'up there'.  I do go back to it from time to time but I'm way too slow at it.  Lately, I've just been going from airport to airport in PNW and NCA looking at airports...finding the ones that are nice and have nice surroundings and going to find more...building up possibilities for future flights and enjoying the scenery along the way.  At the same time, noting which airports are in nice areas but where the airport is crap...Eugene Oregon wins the prize for most awful airport in a gorgeous area so far.

 

 

You use Google Sketchup to make scenery?

 

If you get model converterX and library creator to convert sketchup objects it works for good enough for diy objects. Made cornfield cutout for airfields in sketcup last couple of days, and they not perfect but they sure cheap way to add immersion. 

I think this question depends a lot on where it's being asked.

 

If you went to a place like FSEconomy you'd get a completely different answer with more GA.

 

Honestly I think at the end of the day it's probably half and half with most people flying both

 

 

Maybe GA pilots don't generally buy airports?

 

Well that's certainly not the case for me - a 100% GA guy.  I have most of Orbx' NA airports, and I assume there are other GA guys like us out there buying these as well, or Orbx wouldn't keep makin' 'em.  In fact I recall comments from some time back from John Venema (paraphrasing as I don't have the actual quote) mentioning that their full-fat regions are loss-leaders whose main purpose was to provide the canvas for their airports where they made the money.

 

I also have a small number of select larger fields that I fly GA into, including KMDW, KLAS, KSAN and now KDEN.  Of these, the kind of GA I fly is at least plausible everywhere but KDEN - though oddly, KDEN is the only one of these I've actually flown into as PIC, which is partly why I bought it.

 

What I'd love to see is more work on fields that are more plausible for both GA and airline.  Places like Orbx' KBZN, PAJN and KRDD are good examples.  If you look at the list of fields that former Orbx developer Russ White has in his hopper for the Great Lakes region, it appears he's looking to fill this exact niche.  (You can check out what he's looking at in this poll he's conducting on his forums - http://forums.wdsims.com/post/the-great-lakes-airport-poll-6800538?&trail=25 ).

 

 

 

BTW, we who fly GA don't use real flight plans?

 

I do, generated using a real-world flight planning tool. (ForeFlight).

 

 

 

At the same time, noting which airports are in nice areas but where the airport is crap...Eugene Oregon wins the prize for most awful airport in a gorgeous area so far.

 

Hmm.  I've been into and out of the real-world Mahlon Sweet Field (KEUG) a number of times, and it's actually not bad at all IRL.  My recollection of the Orbx regional version is that it's pretty vanilla, but its been a while since I landed there.

 

Scott

In fact I recall comments from some time back from John Venema (paraphrasing as I don't have the actual quote) mentioning that their full-fat regions are loss-leaders whose main purpose was to provide the canvas for their airports where they made the money.

 

Bozeman and Jackson Hole are really, really nice. 

 

NCA is grease for the gears there!  So many airports...Charles Shultz, Lampson, Napa, Concord, Salinas, Fresno, Watsonville, Hollister...and on and on.  Also, if that's the case, then I would take a harder look at their older regions if I were them.  They've skipped some airports that could be money makers...KEUG among them.  Along the rivers there are a good many mixed use airports that could be great...similar to KRDD.  I, generally, jump on the 'city/airport' combinations.  KSFF, KRDD.  I, generally, get the airports that have longer runways because of the airplanes I fly...(and they could get the 737 guys if they do mixed use airports).  I look for 4000ft+....though I have a couple of those little artsy airports...nice when I'm in the mood to fly a 172.

 

 

 

If you look at the list of fields that former Orbx developer Russ White has in his hopper for the Great Lakes region, it appears he's looking to fill this exact niche. (You can check out what he's looking at in this poll he's conducting on his forums - http://forums.wdsims...00538?&trail=25 )

 

I don't know a lot of those airports but I've done some flying up in the northeast with Global.  Not too bad.  Rochester would be nice.

Not simmers but I wonder if the same ratio holds true? Probably not?

 

http://www.aopa.org/About-AOPA/Statistical-Reference-Guide/FAA-Certificated-Pilots.aspx

It is somewhat sobering to note that GA "Private Pilot" numbers peaked in 1980, and have been steadily declining ever since...

 

 

It is somewhat sobering to note that GA "Private Pilot" numbers peaked in 1980, and have been steadily declining ever since...

 

I found it and other statistics interesting, and although it did not directly answer the original question, I was/am curious as to the parallel between the real world GA/Commercial statistics vs. the Simmers. I fly GA 95% of the time because I like to "sim" what I can/would/do in real life.

 

On a side note, as someone stated earlier, I do believe that many developers of airports are missing out on smaller GA type airports. I use a lot of Ray Smith's airport work.