Sign in to follow this  
Hoang

Manchester Airport - UK2000 vs Aerosoft

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone. Surprisingly Aerosoft and UK2000 release at about the same time Manchester Airport product. If I'm correct they are different developers and not related to each other. I know it is still early but has anyone tried 1 or 2 of these and have comments/recommendations? I'm really interested in this airport.

 

Just by the pictures I like the way UK2000 looks more, but what I really want is the better performance one.

 

Thank you,

Hoang Le.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

did you  download the uk2000  demo. funny I kind of liked the photos of the aerosoft better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got both. The modelling on the IDS one looks better to my eyes but VAS is an issue. UK2000 is another solid release that works as advertised, as Gary's stuff always does. VAS and performance is better in the UK2000 one.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aerosoft' EGCC is designed by I.D.S (Innovative Development Studios). Same developer as Nassau MYNN. Nassau since it's release has been a hard run for some people. I myself would take a proven developer like UK2000 over a newcomer with problems on their first release. Just my two bits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you  download the uk2000  demo. funny I kind of liked the photos of the aerosoft better.

oh yeah, I forgot the demo function, thanks for the tip, will download it right now

 

Got both. The modelling on the IDS one looks better to my eyes but VAS is an issue. UK2000 is another solid release that works as advertised, as Gary's stuff always does. VAS and performance is better in the UK2000 one.

Thank you, I will download the UK2000 demo and see how it goes on my computer, I believe the demo is a little bit lighter than the real one

I'm really close on VAS availability when using PMDG 777 so I have to be careful

 

Aerosoft' EGCC is designed by I.D.S (Innovative Development Studios). Same developer as Nassau MYNN. Nassau since it's release has been a hard run for some people. I myself would take a proven developer like UK2000 over a newcomer with problems on their first release. Just my two bits. 

thank you, I can trade some "eye candy" stuff to get the better performance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aerosoft' EGCC is designed by I.D.S (Innovative Development Studios). Same developer as Nassau MYNN. Nassau since it's release has been a hard run for some people. I myself would take a proven developer like UK2000 over a newcomer with problems on their first release. Just my two bits.

 

If it's from the same developer that created Nassau for Aerosoft, I would steer clear of Manchester until a few reviews of the product have appeared. Even after an update, Nassau is still a problem for me. In fact it is now my general policy to await reviews of Aerosoft airports before buying them, because I have had resource issues with more than just Nassau. This is a shame as Aerosoft airports generally look very good and most perform well, but they use quite a few different developers which is probably the reason for the occasional variablility.

 

UKXtreme Airports, as far as I am aware, are, by contrast, all from the talents of the same developer, Gary from UK2000, so there is a degree of consistency here. Almost all my UK airport addons are from UKXtreme and I have been generally very pleased with them. They all come with a configurator, which in the case of bigger airports such as Heathrow gives the user the option of reducing the demand on resources depending on their system.

 

Bill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had horrible performance with IDS sceneries, as polished as they look. Nassau is tolerable because there isn't a lot going on around it, but I had to uninstall SMF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that UK2000 products get continual updates and fixes - there's one in the works already responding to user requests and comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was looking forward to the Aerosoft version, guess I will hang on to the UK2000 version for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who have the UK2000 Manchester V1, note that you can get the V2 version for US $9.95 ...

 

DJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was looking forward to the Aerosoft version, guess I will hang on to the UK2000 version for now.

 

Actually version 2 of UK2000 EGCCextreme is just released, and at half price for version 1 owners, so I'd recommend that you update!

 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bought a dozen or more UK2000 scenery over the years, quick support responses, friendly, many updates and fixes, if I had the money I'd buy them all! Have my eyes on Doncaster to fly Aerologic 777s there like in real life. UK2000 may not have as much eye candy but working jetways in FSX and texture quality close to Aerosoft's release of EGLL I am always happy with their products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep  got  them  all  uk2000  airports   cant  go  wrong  with them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually version 2 of UK2000 EGCCextreme is just released, and at half price for version 1 owners, so I'd recommend that you update!

 

Pete

Yeah thanks Pete, was checking it out now, and i'm a version 1 owner  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

 

I've seen serious complaints go unacknowledged or fixed with IDS - while they have desirable airports - they're on my "no fly" list until I start seeing some positive feedback... Fix what you have sold first - then move to new scenery...

 

Regards,

Scott

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

 

I've seen serious complaints go unacknowledged or fixed with IDS - while they have desirable airports - they're on my "no fly" list until I start seeing some positive feedback... Fix what you have sold first - then move to new scenery...

 

Regards,

Scott

 

 

I've been very vocal on Aerosoft forums regarding IDS and Nassau. Foolishly I departed Manchester in Concorde a few months ago and 4 hours later on finals to Nassau the VAS dropped from 1.4Gb available down to less than 300Mb 15nm out.

 

Needless to say FSX bombed soon after and a 4 hour flight was wasted. First time ever I've had that problem with an Aerosoft product.

 

Months later and IDS are promising to fix Nassau based on the new skills they have learned with Manchester. I suspect I may be waiting a while yet given how the product has been received.

 

Bit surprised Aerosoft didn't fully test this before adding it to their titles after the problems with Nassau.

 

I too will be purchasing EGCC v2 and appreciate Gary's generous 50% discount. :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only wish with UK2000 is that Gary finds a way to make runway lighting work in P3D. At the moment the only option to stop big bloomy lighting is to tick the 'use default lighting' box, which works but doesn't look great. My understanding is that P3D uses a different method to show lights than FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


My only wish with UK2000 is that Gary finds a way to make runway lighting work in P3D. At the moment the only option to stop big bloomy lighting is to tick the 'use default lighting' box, which works but doesn't look great. My understanding is that P3D uses a different method to show lights than FSX.

 

I saw a post where P3D is going to get actual lights...that light up things.  It would be nice if developers didn't have to home-brew their own. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My only wish with UK2000 is that Gary finds a way to make runway lighting work in P3D. At the moment the only option to stop big bloomy lighting is to tick the 'use default lighting' box, which works but doesn't look great. My understanding is that P3D uses a different method to show lights than FSX.

 

The only problem that I can see with Gary's custom lights in P3D is that they are relatively faint at distance. They look fantastic (to me) at close range, which is why I have no hesitation in using them in P3D v3.3.5. Conversely, the runway lighting in Aerosoft London Heathrow Xtended is default only, and the runway and taxiway lighting in Aerosoft Dublin is default only (I have disabled the entire network of taxiway lighting at this airport because default taxiway lighting is....to be blunt.....crap).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem that I can see with Gary's custom lights in P3D is that they are relatively faint at distance. They look fantastic (to me) at close range, which is why I have no hesitation in using them in P3D v3.3.5. Conversely, the runway lighting in Aerosoft London Heathrow Xtended is default only, and the runway and taxiway lighting in Aerosoft Dublin is default only (I have disabled the entire network of taxiway lighting at this airport because default taxiway lighting is....to be blunt.....crap).

The custom lighting is really good at UK2000 airports, totally agree. Distance is not a big deal as the Christmas tree lighting you get in a lot of airports in the sim from 80 miles out is not at all realistic. It's the actual custom runway lighting and the PAPIs that are being disabled by that UK2000 checkbox in P3D, though isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PAPI lights are already default in P3D with UK2000 airports. They are the one aspect of UK2000 Xtreme lighting that has yet to be sorted out. The custom runway lighting is disabled if you tick the option to use default lighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't go wrong with UK2000 stuff. I too would recommend it. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this