Instead of adding airports, I added Airport Enhancement Package from X-Codr to the already outstanding default scenery.

10 hours ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

Instead of adding airports, I added Airport Enhancement Package from X-Codr to the already outstanding default scenery.

Me too!

I rarely bother buying airports these days either (and have also stopped making them).

The only ones I care about in high detail are my local ones and I'll certainly buy high quality ones, but honestly, the gateway airports are really good these days. It's a far far cry from the days when we just had a runway and nothing else.

A big thanks to those who have been contributing to the WED airports database

I have yet to buy any airport for XP but have purchased the AEP (Airport Enhancement Package) which is amazing.

Yes, I purchased AEP last March myself.

I don't have AEP, but for me the real question is how accurate is it?

I don't want dozens of ground vehicles and scattered "junk" around if an airport shows to be "clean and bare" on the ESRI or satellite view. I seldom put things in my rebuilds that I can't see in the satellite image. I've flown into default airports and found the wrong class of aircraft, tugs, stairs, chocks scattered all over the tarmac, and planes parked in rows where the satellite shows none. Many small munis and regionals are very quiet during the day, especially on week days with most planes hangared and few tie-downs. I'm looking for realism and that's what I expect to see.

I guess the ORBX business model is now a bust! Did not even bother installing Global Forests again.

Looking forward to what SimHeaven come up with even if it is payware.

To me, the quality of the default airports is one of the big pluses of X-Plane. I can chose to fly from just about any airport to any other airport, and I'll have accurate and, usually, pretty good looking airport scenery at both ends.

The same is not true in MSFS. The default airports are... hmmmm... not quite up to snuff. So I have to go trawling for freeware on flightsim.to - some really good stuff there, but coverage definitely isn't as broad as the default airports in X-Plane, plus finding and installing scenery addons takes time. Often, I'm not up for that, and as a result, in MSFS I end up flying between the same few airports all the time that I know I have good scenery for.

In contrast, in X-Plane, I'm much more adventurous in the airports I explore. Just recently, the hosts of one of the aviation podcasts I listen to (Uncontrolled Airspace) talked about Bangor, Maine. I'd never flown there, so load up X-Plane, and five minutes later I'm flying a practice ILS at KBGR.

I can't argue with any of the posts here, the quality of free airports is incredible......but......I really do miss having such a large variety of quality payware airports like there are in MSFS.

Everyone wants something different from their simming, but a detailed, real world accurate (which normally means payware) airport is so key for me personally in simming, and we really don't have enough options in XP.

And this thread explains exactly why, there is simply not the market for anyone to produce highly detailed payware airports for XP, which is disappointing for me personally.

20 hours ago, mldavis2 said:

I don't have AEP, but for me the real question is how accurate is it?

I don't want dozens of ground vehicles and scattered "junk" around if an airport shows to be "clean and bare" on the ESRI or satellite view. I seldom put things in my rebuilds that I can't see in the satellite image. I've flown into default airports and found the wrong class of aircraft, tugs, stairs, chocks scattered all over the tarmac, and planes parked in rows where the satellite shows none. Many small munis and regionals are very quiet during the day, especially on week days with most planes hangared and few tie-downs. I'm looking for realism and that's what I expect to see.

Satellite images are a snapshot of a particular time frame, what is bare today may be loaded tomorrow. As long as it don't look cluttered with too much ground material/vehicles.

5 hours ago, weaklink said:

To me, the quality of the default airports is one of the big pluses of X-Plane. I can chose to fly from just about any airport to any other airport, and I'll have accurate and, usually, pretty good looking airport scenery at both ends.

The same is not true in MSFS. The default airports are... hmmmm... not quite up to snuff. So I have to go trawling for freeware on flightsim.to - some really good stuff there, but coverage definitely isn't as broad as the default airports in X-Plane, plus finding and installing scenery addons takes time. Often, I'm not up for that, and as a result, in MSFS I end up flying between the same few airports all the time that I know I have good scenery for.

In contrast, in X-Plane, I'm much more adventurous in the airports I explore. Just recently, the hosts of one of the aviation podcasts I listen to (Uncontrolled Airspace) talked about Bangor, Maine. I'd never flown there, so load up X-Plane, and five minutes later I'm flying a practice ILS at KBGR.

Tbh, I feel the inverse. I’m a LOT more willing to visit a new area in MSFS than XP.

This is because the airport isn’t what I’m going to see - the region around it is. 🤙

12 hours ago, coastaldriver said:

I guess the ORBX business model is now a bust!

Looking forward to what SimHeaven come up with even if it is payware.

Unfortunately that seems to be true - the release pace of updated v12 airports seems Glacial. Even the ones where an upgrade fee is required.

And even then, the v12 payware seems to be centered around airliner operations.

It’d be great if there were a group like Burning Blue Design for XP, or if Northern Sky Studios would bust out of AK & HI…

Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but I’ve honestly never been a fan of SimHeaven’s interpretation of US regions. The US buildings are distinctly non-American. And as a bug smasher/helo pilot, it’s distracting 🤷‍♂️

SFD Global is a MUCH better solution, even tho it hasn’t been updated in years and years and years…

Edited Wednesday at 06:44 PM3 days by UrgentSiesta

What delighted me was finding some airfields in out of the way place like MNBL, Bluefields on the Mosquito Coast of Nicaragua or MNLP, Ometepe Island, a volcanic island in the middle of Lake Nicaragua. Not much there in real life according to pictures on the web, but what is there is modeled nicely in XP12. Provides some adventurous fantasy flights in the Caravan or DC3. And I have some breath taking pictures of the volcanic mountains and jungle regions thanks to XP Map Enhancement.

On the side I lived in Nicaragua when my Father was stationed there in 1962-64. I was 12 then and some fond child hood memories I carry of that scenic and often troubled land.

18 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but I’ve honestly never been a fan of SimHeaven’s interpretation of US regions. The US buildings are distinctly non-American. And as a bug smasher/helo pilot, it’s distracting 🤷‍♂️

Well, that's what you get if nobody produces a library with more region accurate housing that overrides what X-World is drawing. But fret not, the "Pro" release will make much more use of XP12 default buildings, which means more details for the acres over acres of monotonous suburban hellscapes. 😉