Can we not have both
Been on the a320 and 737-400. So either really
Been on a321neo but not the 757 so that. Singapores better then Emirates. Then not been on either but the Fokkers rarer so that as I can head to the US and get on a 170.
Over my many flights and also some PIREP data research, I’ve found that for some reason, 737s tend to be smoother flights than the A320 family, so that’s why my pick was the 734
Emirates is better short-haul and Singapore is better long-haul. I recommend looking up what they do for making those a350ulr
To gauge public opinion on this, who thinks generic airports are a good idea
If you do not know what im talking about please refer to this Dev Chat February 2025 - #58 by Thatflyerguy
- Yes, i think generic airports are a good idea
- No, i think generic airports are a bad idea
If anyone wants you are welcome to forward the results to the discord where the devs are more active i think
By the way what is a “generic airport”? I’ve never heard of this.
Check the link in the post
Nobody knows the specifics really. The only thing we know is the images Lechonk linked above
Honestly I love the devs work and this commitment to getting more airports in the game, but as someone who hates the generic airports in uatc I just can’t see myself liking this.
I cannot really judge it until we get the first one, we’re going off so little info, it could be much better than we beleive it will be
I honestly think it depends immensely on how they implement it. If they have basically all correct layout/gates and functionality, but just look ugly like NGO gates and unrealistic buildings/textures, I think it’d be just fine. But if they just put a random layout matching size and runways but nothing else, I’d prefer them not to do this.
I agree. At least the layout should always be respected imo. Whether it is 3d with bad textures or just a 2D map
And now that I think about it some airport like BKK, LHR and MCT don’t even have 3D buildings at all like in real life (I would call that unrealistic)
It has an airport framework and basic navigation functions, but it has not been realized.
If Generic airports are fake airports then I’m 100% against it, I like the reality on where airlines come from and on the actual airports that exist. I just wont play fake airports if you know what I mean,
Please read the devs actual announcement!
I think its because when lhr was first released it had pretty bad performance. It was making devices overheat and kick people out of the app. Once they fixed the bugginess, then I think they didn’t want to take a chance with buildings since they would probably decrease the performance again. That mindset was most likely applied when it came to bkk since it is a pretty large airport, but I don’t get why msy and syd barely got any, since they are pretty medium sized airports compared to lhr, mct, and bkk.
And here, too, I have to say something… every day the devs receive countless requests for playable airports. But how are they supposed to fulfil all the requests? From small airports to AMS and ATL, everything is included. Daily.
And I think it’s great that the devs are thinking about YOUR wishes!
Nobody knows exactly how the devs envisage this, but the way I see it, there are two options to quickly get many more playable points on the world map.
Option 1: a “flat” map from Google Maps and the devs virtually make the taxiways and gates (an option that may be played primarily on the radar)
Option 2: non-realistic, simple, airport models, no big jamboree, just realistic RWYs and gates
MSFS does something similar. Do you really think EVERY airport there is playable? There are also differences between non-realistic models and realistic ones.
Making these airports in this way would certainly cost less money and time in terms of licences.
Let it come to you first before you judge.
Monthy Poll
What airports are you currently playing
- INN
- BRI
- PRG
- IAD
- NGO
- SAN
- MCT
- LEJ
- SXM
- LHR
- SYD
- BKK
- MSY
i’m on my LHR grind rn