1 hour ago, JYW said:

What do you actually do when you 'walk' into an airport interior in MSFS?  (Serious question).  

Is it just to have a peek and then never look again, or would you regularly walk into the airport.   I'm not taking the **** here, I'm just trying to understand the advantages of high detailed interiors, given the potential performance impact.

I do like to see some interior detail in terminals - but just from the outside, and a decent parallax effect is more than enough for my desires.

That's the problem with parallax interiors. They need to be very good, and also used sparingly. IMO, they do not look good in large areas. As for 3D terminal interiors, even just a glimpse of them from the ramp or stand is enough to make me feel more immersed.

Having said that, this scenery actually looks pretty decent to me.

Edited April 4, 20242 yr by Christopher Low

Axnos, is pretty bad.  Their Perth is so poor quality, inaccurate, and outdated it's worthless.  If you want RIC probably worth it, it looks better quality than all previous attempts by Axnos.  

53 minutes ago, aniiran said:

Axnos, is pretty bad.  Their Perth is so poor quality, inaccurate, and outdated it's worthless.  If you want RIC probably worth it, it looks better quality than all previous attempts by Axnos.  

From my experience of being a local with Richmond, it appears to be modeled pretty well. For instance, they even got the Martin Air sign in there. Don't worry, I'll be the first to report back.

Not to subtract from the quality of this airport... cause it looks awesome!  I think I'm going broke with msfs addons lol

4 hours ago, JYW said:

What do you actually do when you 'walk' into an airport interior in MSFS?  (Serious question).  

Is it just to have a peek and then never look again, or would you regularly walk into the airport.   I'm not taking the **** here, I'm just trying to understand the advantages of high detailed interiors, given the potential performance impact.

I like to explore the surroundings, set up and take lots of screenshots etc. If I'm having a tubeliner type of flight I'll typically start up at a gate and then buzz around both inside and outside the terminal with the drone cam taking shots and views. I'll try out different weather and time/lighting settings and see how they look. I may explore a few miles around the airport with the drone as well if it looks interesting. Quite often, I'll never even bother to take off and initiate the actual flight, I just want to see the aircraft at the airport.

Sometimes I'll use something like the Bell 47G or a microlight to just explore around the airport externally, and use the drone cam for the internal views. And I certainly have airports that I like to revisit, although I have so many now (literally hundreds, maybe even a thousand by now) that not revisiting a particular airport may just be down to time. And I still buy regularly, particularly at sale times, although I will rarely buy now unless there is a decent interior.

By comparison, I have pretty much no interest in how an aircraft flies or behaves. And I find a cockpit an extremely boring place to be. Don't get me wrong, I do actually fly around in the sim, even using the big iron, but I have no interest in the piloting aspect. As long as I can get in the air, go where I want, and get back on the ground again I'm happy. If I'm flying small, and low and slow, I'll often spot something on the ground that looks interesting and go exploring there with the drone as well, so airport interiors are just an extension of the other 3d scenery aspect for me.

And yes, before anyone else leaps in with the "but it's a flight simulator" stuff, I know that, and I'm happy for all you serious cockpit types, but really, MSFS is the first sim that is way more than just a flight simulator, it is also a fledgling world simulator. I'm fairly confident loads more non-flight specific stuff will be added in the coming years and releases. For all you guys zooming around at FL350 and suchlike there really is no need at all for the level of detail built in to the sim these days, and yet it's there. Which might say something about how MSobo sees the longer term future of the sim (or maybe not, I don't have any special gifts or foresight or prediction).

So there you go, one person's serious answer, at least. For me, this is the sim I've been waiting for as a way of exploring the world. I have other sims too (XP and AF) and I like aspects of both of them but nothing gets near MSFS in terms of this sort of world representation, and I love the fact that there are some truly amazingly modelled airports in places that I wouldn't otherwise consider visiting - checkout FLHN by 61 tree studio and MM simulations' EFIV if you haven't seen them, for instance.

Happy flying!

 

Very cool to see KRIC coming to MSFS. I used to work at Million Air KRIC - one of the most fun jobs I've ever had, fueling anything from a Cessna 152 to a Boeing 767!

So it released this morning on ORBX (A day early?) and I've had some time to mess around with it. Below are some things that I've come up with. Overall, I think it's a good product and I would give it 4/5 stars. I know Richmond will never get the attention of devs like FlyTampa, but I think AXONOS did a great job with giving our small airport some attention, while providing a competitive price and offering upgraded visuals. The items I point out below are things I think they could quickly resolve.

• Performance - This field is obviously not very performance intensive when flying in and out of it. Overall I think they did a great job making sure it performs well.
   
• Accuracy - They did a great job of ensuring accuracy. It's not perfect and I did find some small details - for instance there is a rogue wind sock placed on the right side of rwy 34 that I don't believe exists. The wind sock on the left side is a pushed a little further down the runway than it should be. The terminal looks very accurate and while it would've been cool to see parallax windows, I'm not complaining. I don't care about the modeled interior and as much as I love Richmond, there's nothing crazy special inside with maybe the exception of the entrance to the main terminal that was remodeled awhile ago. Martin Air and Million Air are both there which is nice. The textures appear to correctly match real life. Slightly low-res in a few areas, but nothing I'm terribly worried about. I did ask that the two unmarked 757s get added to the eastern side of the field - on their facebook they said they would add it for launch, but the version I have anyways doesn't seem to have that.
   
• Parking - They managed to get plenty of parking on the field with the exception of Million Air. Currently there is no GA parking over by Million Air. I'm hoping they'll add this for us.
   
• Static Aircraft - If I had one gripe it's this. The static aircraft are super low resolution and look like FSX quality. If they don't plan on improving them, I'd like to see a feature to allow us to remove the commercial static traffic at a minimum. 
  
  
   
• Lighting looks good with the exception of a weird transition on one side of the terminal. I think they'll need to adjust this. The darker orange lighting is definitely what I've experienced while going in and out of Richmond at night.
  

Edited April 5, 20242 yr by Keirtt

I guess there's no option to turn off the 600 million static aircraft at the almost ALL the stinking gates?  I just got this, and the statics are way way way out of control here.

 

EDIT:  Found a single static aircraft bgl.  Seeing if removing it does the trick.

Edited April 5, 20242 yr by Jeff Nielsen

Update is out with one thing I specifically asked for and that's the unmarked 757s that sit on the eastern side of the field. Looks like users now have the option to turn off the static aircraft from the ORBX app. I also like that we have a GSX profile included now. 

Here's a pic of the 757s sitting in the sim. Absolutely awesome!

For reference:

On 4/4/2024 at 1:09 PM, chapstick said:

No terminal interiors, even at this small airport where perf impact would be minimal. I swear the U.S. gets some of the most mediocre scenery devs. 

👎

51 minutes ago, fppilot said:

👎

🤡

On 4/4/2024 at 7:15 PM, Keirtt said:

but I've always felt this was a waste.

waste of what? polygons and textures that could have been used better elsewhere? nobody is forced to walk inside any buildings. the airport will perform just as well, with or without interiors. just like airliners, with or without passenger cabins.

Isn't it a bigger issue that Axonos doesn't go back and update previous sceneries at all?

On 4/4/2024 at 7:20 PM, thepilot said:

If you want to see how it looks inside, just head over to the nearest YouTube video. 

and read Flying magazine or watch airdesaster, blancolirio channel, probable cause or any other aviation documentory. who needs a flightsimulator anyway?

This airport does not work with AI at all. same like Jackson hole. Seems they are getting better in modelling but landing AI just disappears, and they even have a parking spot in the terminal ( believe A12 ). Not updated to airline specific and sizes.

Modelling is nice but if they do not update this for AI then it was my last buy from ORBX/Axonos