Funny how I never mentioned personal experience with Aerosoft Support, yet you felt it necessary to put words in my mouth.  On top of that, what I wrote was supposed to be sarcastic comedy and yet again, you took every single letter literally.

 

Anyways, anyone else have something constructive to talk about?

 

Yes I have please be so kind to leave the bickering gentlemen, and on topic since the latest update I like the Aerosoft one :-)

Regarding coverage they are about the same FSDT and Aerosoft.

Aerosoft overall more up to date only lacking in moving gates which i find rather odd.

FSDT has much better detail and with the GSX functionality, it is a worthy add-on.  I once subscribed to Aerosoft's credits for AES, but found it expensive.

 I'm also looking at getting one of the Zurich addons but as I rarely if ever have a need for customer support I'm more interested in which one is actually currently better. GSX should work fine in the Aerosoft variant as it doesn't care who made the airport.

 I'm also looking at getting one of the Zurich addons but as I rarely if ever have a need for customer support I'm more interested in which one is actually currently better. GSX should work fine in the Aerosoft variant as it doesn't care who made the airport.

 

Correct Dave however FSDT is using SODE in combination with GSX on there latest airports.

Didn't see an update for LSZH regarding SODE integration.

 

As for the differences:

Aerosoft higher detail and more up to date however VAS heavy (you could install SD textures instead of HD) and no moving gates. Option for cross runway operations.

FSDT lighter on VAS and moving gates and less textures resolution.

Carefully read my post again.  I wasn't bashing UK2000, actually, just the opposite.

 

There is nothing in your post to read into. Where did you take it from I assumed you were bashing? I thought you were unaware or, say, ignorant of the fact UK2000 airports had been updated to P3Dv3 standards.

 

Dirk.

 Thank's André, much appreciated!

As for the differences:

Aerosoft higher detail and more up to date however VAS heavy (you could install SD textures instead of HD) and no moving gates. Option for cross runway operations.

FSDT lighter on VAS and moving gates and less textures resolution.

 

VAS is no factor in my case as by the time I approach London area and UK2000's EGLL it starts building up from the comfort zone to a much more serious level than it was in LSZH anyway.

 

I don't like FSDT's autumn textures as I've mentioned already, they just don't blend in well with FTXGlobal/Vector/OLCEU surroundings.  

 

Dirk.

Funny how I never mentioned personal experience with Aerosoft Support, yet you felt it necessary to put words in my mouth. On top of that, what I wrote was supposed to be sarcastic comedy and yet again, you took every single letter literally.

 

Anyways, anyone else have something constructive to talk about?

I didn't put any words in your mouth but your own. I guess you just go by what you hear and not your personal experience.

 

Sorry I don't have anything else to add that's as constructive as your shrimp comment or as relevant to the OT as uk2000...

 

To the OP, if you alrrady have them both, just try each out and comoare, any reason why you don't?

To the OP, if you alrrady have them both, just try each out and comoare, any reason why you don't?

 

I have already as mentioned above, they are both installed...

 

Cheers,

Dirk. 

There is nothing in your post to read into. Where did you take it from I assumed you were bashing? I thought you were unaware or, say, ignorant of the fact UK2000 airports had been updated to P3Dv3 standards.

 

Dirk.

I can be a lot of things, but ignorant isn't one them.  You may want to choose your words wisely next time.  

 

I stated, and now for the record that I ENJOY UK2000's airports, because they are lightweight, provide decent detail and are not detrimental to the sim.  If issues arise, Gary is very quick to address and respond.  I only wish there were more developers that pay that kind of attention, instead of getting snarky comments back at the users, eluding that the users did something wrong or the other well known stance that "Our products do not produce issues and are working perfectly fine on our end".

 

When I said that i had regret, it was due to the fact that I have gotten away from P3D, and having UK2000 airports at my disposal was a big plus for me.

 

Hopefully that clears things up.

I didn't put any words in your mouth but your own. I guess you just go by what you hear and not your personal experience.

 

Sorry I don't have anything else to add that's as constructive as your shrimp comment or as relevant to the OT as uk2000...

 

To the OP, if you alrrady have them both, just try each out and comoare, any reason why you don't?

Sigh...

I can be a lot of things, but ignorant isn't one them.  You may want to choose your words wisely next time.  

 

 

No worries, actually it's rather me who is ignorant...of the English language, that is not my language.   :smile:

 

Guys, do you see those bright rusty patches between and around runways in FSDT's Zurich in autumn?

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

Sigh...

 

Thanks for enlightening me on how to add a constructive post (or at least on how to get you post count up I guess..).

FSDT has much better detail and with the GSX functionality, it is a worthy add-on.  I once subscribed to Aerosoft's credits for AES, but found it expensive.

As indirectly mentioned before I find the AS scenery much better and up to date as compared to the outdated FSDT scenery which I also own.

 

GSX works fine with both sceneries. IMHO the only negative point with AS are the jetways which are still not moving.

 

Just for record sake (since this is the P3D forum) - AES does not work with P3D at all.

I can't speak for the Aerosoft version as I don't have it but the FSDT version of GVA still holds up well and is sure better than a lot of newer sceneries!

Apologies for resurrecting such an old topic but I was thinking about whether the Aerosoft Zurich would be significantly better than the rather old FSDT one.

A search of this site revealed this discussion. Some said it was better but not significantly so. I checked the details on the Aerosoft shop and was genuinely surprised to see it’s still using default jetways. Wow! Not even SODE for a Professional version? 😳

My main reason for investigating the Aerosoft one was to expect the jetways would be better. The FSDT airport itself is fine.

But Aerosoft are charging €30 for an airport nearly 10 years old with default jetways. No thanks!

Some time ago I downloaded the package created by a Spanish gentleman - Cortanya - and in it are replacement advanced jetways created for the Aerosoft version. How different could the building layout be I wondered. Not much! Yes, there are some gaps between jetways and terminal buildings but not so much that they stick out.

I edited the FSDT AFCAD and deleted all the default jetways. I now have a decent version of Zurich with great jetways. 👍