Christopher Low

Why is it seemingly so difficult for weather software to render 100% cloud cover when the real world skies are overcast (based on that comparison video above)? I seem to remember that even the preset overcast options in FSX and P3D had a hard time doing this.

Whatever some people may think about the product, nearly 400 replies and 26000 views in a thread that is barely more than a day old indicates a significant level of interest.

Well, he did say that he is optimistic

Does it update automatically to the new version? I use Firefox at home and work, and it seems to be OK at the moment.

I am a bit disappointed with the hand crafted version of EDNY Friedrichshafen. Quite a few of the Gaya Simulations hand crafted airports in previous updates have 3D terminal interiors, but unfortunately the main terminal and other buildings at this airport have those parallax interiors that I really do not like. I know that many of you think that parallax interiors are fine, but they destroy a lot of the immersion for me. They just look fake.

I purchased the ORBx version from the MS Marketplace, so I will probably get the update around Christmas

When you see (and hear) some guy playing classical music on a piano inside the terminal, you know you are looking at something rather special

Immersion is everything in a simulated world, so the more detail the better as far as I am concerned.

No change in volume of the 146 jet engines after touchdown (from the cabin view)? Is that just a recorder thing?

The handcrafted airport is EDNY Friedrichshafen.

Burning Blue Design were once SIM720?

I do not have a problem with the rest of Carlisle airport. It's just that when I see other airport addons with much more accurately modelled static aircraft/aviation museums, I expect to see this done everywhere. It spoils the immersion for me when stuff like this is missing.

Another one...... Gaya Simulations ENCN Kristiansand - there is a reason why they are called Runway Starts, and not Hold Short Starts

I assume you mean that the airport has terrain issues? Is this with PG on or off?

Yes, but PMDG have proved in the past that they are reluctant to implement something unless it can be done properly.

Over and above the airports that need adjustments to the runway centreline markings, these are just a handful of improvements that I would like to see..... RD Presets EHRD Rotterdam - I do not have this airport, but the official trailer and other videos indicate to me that it needs a significant upgrade. The main terminal looks rather drab from what I can see, and the internal detail (if you can call it that) is utterly bare and lifeless. Not even close to the quality of their more recent efforts. I wanted version 2 of this airport in P3Dv4, but it falls short of what I expected to see in MSFS. UK2000 EGNC Carlisle - I mentioned this during beta testing, and....whilst I understand the reasons for not doing so, I absolutely think that the external Solway Aviation Museum aircraft and exhibits should be accurately modelled. MSFS is a next generation flight simulator, and using what are (to be honest) pretty basic and unrealistic default assets is not what I want to see in payware addons. Those articulated truck models also need a major overhaul. MS/Asobo EIDL Donegal - Not strictly a payware addon, but I would pay good money for an updated version of the main terminal with a beautifully modelled interior. Just a personal preference. I know that some of you will think that I am bonkers I am sure that other AVSIM members will have a rather large collection of items that they would like to see improved in existing payware addons, so fire away!

Cats! Martin will love it

I am what could be termed a "lazy flyer", so autopilots, autothrottles and NDs are a basic requirement! The increased level of automation gives me more time to enjoy the scenery....and let's face it, looking at the gorgeous scenery is a rather large part of the immersion in MSFS. That being the case, I am really looking forward to the JustFlight Avro RJ.

I wonder what percentage of the MSFS userbase has PG disabled? That would be an interesting statistic.

I activated PG just out of curiosity to see what all the fuss was about, but I quickly switched it off again. I think that MSFS in Autogen mode looks fantastic. I would love to see more City Landmarks addons though (Brussels for example).

Interesting. I wonder what exactly they mean by "incompatibility" then? I guess I will just have to buy the airport, and go on a drone tour

....and yet not a single other airport that I have installed is claimed to be incompatible with PG switched off. Konterhalbe mentioned the performance differences, but there are other reasons.....cities looking like war zones at distance/low resolution textures and visible artefacts at close range/visible colouration differences between PG areas and normal Bing maps/terrain issues at PG boundaries etc.

I sincerely hope that addon developers do not make a habit of this. I have no intention of using PG in MSFS, so I need my airports to be compatible with full on autogen mode.

That would also have to include annular eclipses, so the apparent size of the Moon (and the Sun to a lesser extent) would need to be rendered accurately. I suspect that will not be the case at the moment.

Can someone who has the IniBuilds EGGW Luton airport addon installed please try it with PG disabled? The IniBuilds website information for the airport states that it is not compatible with PG switched off, but I am curious to know how incompatible it is. Are there serious elevation issues at the airport with PG disabled?