1 minute ago, ralinn said:

I'm still trying to get used to people calling airports like  KGPI "small" (although, obviously I get why).

We've put so much stuff in to this airport so far that the thought of anything bigger feels horrifying! :D Developers doing bigger airports have my respect.

Thanks,
Russ

The hobby is becoming so expensive, I am picky about an airport or airplane I buy and have had to cut back my spending habits. Your airports have been hitting almost all the important boxes for me, served by multiple airplane types that have a good addon like CRJ and Q400, most inside a scenery region from Orbx. And being in an Orbx region you have a good variety of other addon airports close enough for general aviation flyers to hop around to giving months of enjoyment. My personal preference is also to have a liveatc.net feed because my computer cannot handle Ai traffic but can't always have everything. I think kmso has a center feed that covers the area anyway.

Just have to save up for GPI and IDA this spring since I am planning to first buy the Flight1 GTN. Keep up the great scenery work!

1 hour ago, ralinn said:

I'm still trying to get used to people calling airports like  KGPI "small" (although, obviously I get why). It has literally taken me a few months just to complete the Terminal area! haha

I hear ya Russ! :-)  Places like Big Bear are definitely "GA" but still not small by any means.  Wandering around your rendition, I'm amazed and enthralled at the detail and that's not even addressing the extensive surrounding areas.  And places like KIDA and KGPI are really more "regional" in classification to my mind.  In any case, I'm thrilled you guys are doing these, and doing them at the level you are!

BTW, this plays into one of my pet peeves - referring to most GA planes as "little" or even "tiny".  I suppose when your point of comparison is a flying megabus, but as I often pointed out to acquaintances, "if my plane is so 'tiny' why is it that the hangar that only holds my aircraft can fit 4 or 5 cars in it"?

In any case, glad you guys are doing what you're doing.  Keep it up!

Scott

Most payware airports have and are charing for things I do not need.  I do not need every tap and washbasin moddled.  I do not need each empty check in station moddled in loving detail with the full schedule of the airline apppearing on the computer screens at the terminal.

I do want an airport that looks like the real airport when I fly into it with correct taxiways and parking stations and ramps.

Turbulent = Very high Quality

I will buy this one like all the other that i already have.

Thanks Russ for the heads up.

Before I purchase an airport I always go to Google Earth to look at it.  

If there are no smaller GA aircraft on the field I just do not purchase it.

Why spend the money on a destination that you would not use in real life?

Although you can legally land at any public airport in the US they really do not you in the pattern where your approach speed is slower than the stall speed of everyone else.

So I give a big Thank You to Russ for developing high quality GA airports for us and hope that he continues on that path.

Oh, by the way, spend a day at your home airport taking photos of the buildings and hangars there and let the developers know that you would be happy to supply them, and just maybe you might see your local airport on the market, or you could try your hand at building it yourself and publishing it here on AVSIM. 

 

Dale

On 1/19/2018 at 1:01 AM, harrry said:

Most payware airports have and are charing for things I do not need.  I do not need every tap and washbasin moddled.  I do not need each empty check in station moddled in loving detail with the full schedule of the airline apppearing on the computer screens at the terminal.

I do want an airport that looks like the real airport when I fly into it with correct taxiways and parking stations and ramps.

We do not charge for those details, we charge for the detail we go to with things like the ground polygon detail, the building detail and the amount of work we put in to getting those features as close to the real thing as possible.

That aside, the majority of our customers appreciate the detail we go to. But we understand that not everyone needs it, so we give you the option to disable it.

Clutter is actually not accounted for in our budget for airports at all. Which technically is insane, but we understand that a lot of people love it being there, but don't want to pay for it.

On 1/19/2018 at 4:23 PM, Gypsy Pilot said:

Why spend the money on a destination that you would not use in real life?

Dale

This is where our hobbies differ. There are many people out there that use simulation to do just that. Our goal has always been to encourage exploration and do things you wouldn't usually do. That's an advantage simulation has over reality. Why use a simulator and restrict yourself? Have a bit of fun and explore the places you wouldn't be able to in reality :)