Please get rid of all the fake airports in career mode of MSFS 2024. Most of the airports that are provided for cargo missions do not exist in real world airport directories and therefore there are no airport charts/info or approach charts. This makes it very difficult to fly accurate missions especially when the EFB does not provide any navigational guidance or waypoints.
6 Likes
Is not fake airport, is just small airport or airport is not longer active service.
BUT with SU2 have some cleanup in database
2 Likes
the issue isnât really its fake or not⊠its the fact we donât have any information for them - no charts, no weather, no atc.
I wouldnât mind flying to the odd one here and there, perhaps early career in the C172 - but career mode, insists on flying you to them 95% of the time for many of the mission types, when they are inappropriate.
they are also often bugged, inappropriate spawn/hold points, trees at the entry/exit of the runway⊠some are also ridiculously narrow (for the a/c we are expected to land there)
so whilst im not âagainstâ them, Id like them to be converted into fully operational airfields - or give me the chance to exclude them, and give me some legit airports instead 
12 Likes
If the airport doesnât show up in Skyvector or Littlenavmap, then itâs a fake airport as far as I am concerned.
5 Likes
Agree. These are not valid airports. If there are no charts, get rid of them please.
2 Likes
I donât mind that theyâre in there as airport-shaped objects (thus useable for emergencies, bush flying, etc), but they need to do the following:
- stop generating fake ICAO-looking alpha identifiers. Instead, come up with an MSFS-unique ID prefix attached to a numerical suffix so it doesnât look like a legit airport
- stop using a nearby town as the airport name. This makes it confusing with the legit airports that are often attached to the town
- stop using them in career mode. Incorporate a flag that marks these as unuseable
7 Likes
i mean what about the airfields that are nothing more than a mile long outcropping in the middle of no where? Like a backyard air strip used by a local farmer for spraying or a misers mountain summer home and he wants to just land his toy cessna instead of driving up from Florida? Iâd imagine these are still registered in some fashion. I canât imagine these places can be accurately represented without someone going in and placing the pieces.
Though, i do second removing airfields that are now suburban neighborhoods filled with Melting McMansionsâŠ
yeah, it be nice if they were easily identifiable with âfakeâ ICAO codes.
I think the underlying problem here is MS/Asobo wanted them to look real, to kind of bulk out the map, give varietyâŠ
they then doubled down on this in career mode , so we didnât get lots of flights to/from the same destinations. - which wouldnât also work well on with their mission map implementation.
unfortunately, I fear, this is going to be a decision thatâs hard to step back from (at least in short term).
but yeah, Id love them to create more missions for âproper airportsâ (for all mission types), then perhaps have these as optional (map filter)
but Id also like to see them improve the implementation of these airports.
they are generated from the satellite images, so when doing this, why can they not just ensure the runways are cleared from the also generated trees. create a decent clearing around them.
also, they could create metar information from the weather model they use.
at the moment, they just feel âhalf bakedâ, yet we are made to fly to them 90% of the time in career.
1 Like
Those are often registered in the FAA database and have an FAA LID. Theyâre usually self-reported (not surveyed), so the data are pretty minimal and often not updated in a very timely manner. But a good proportion of them are useable. Again, best to keep it to aerial application and other limited use scenarios.
3 Likes
I think thereâs a bug thatâs letting some trees bleed through the automatic exclusion zones generated by the airport pavements. There are many cases in which the approach zone has been properly cleared - moreso than in 2020 in my experience, so itâs like they wrote some code to improve that.
However, there are always a few âleakersâ that seem to appear even closer to the runways and taxiways than in 2020. This is true in several airports that I curated in the World Hub - completely, correctly cleared of trees in 2020, but now they have just one or two right next to the threshold in 2024.
2 Likes
update your LNM to the MSFS database. there are import instructions available
2 Likes
Agreed, small runways or 2 to 3 trees right on the runway edge as you try to land, or parking spots in the trees, taxiways through trees. Surely in the world of cargo relity, planes get to fly to real airports. I have also noted that these ridiculous landind strips at mission end are always set to pay more - I suppose they keep hoping you crash the plane and spend more credits fixing them. Mostly there is no Coms either so I dont know who we are broadcasting to - causing an inability to report on final and thus finding it +++difficult to finish a mssion.
1 Like
I wouldnât call them âfake airportsâ because:
A) These airfields, bushstrips etc do exist irl
B) Theyâre not really trying to be full airportsâŠ
When it comes to FS24 career mode, we all have our preferences - i donât even wanna land on an asphalt runway most of the time,
so yea pls DONâT
as these âfake airportsâ are what i like to operate on.
May i suggest something on the lines of âmore mission varietyâ and âability to filter missions for type and services availableâ?
Doesnât need to be phrased like that, but pls donât ask to take something away when you might as well add and can provide filters.
2 Likes
I love the idea of STOL bush cargo, but it needs to be labeled as such. Getting a turboprop in and out of extremely tight strips in the middle of nowhere is a lot of fun, and actually made the career mode enjoyable while I was still playing it. They still need to do quite a bit of clean-up with the auto airport generation and suitability filtering, however.
So much of this game is not properly described. Take the âoverflying the airport without announcingâ aviator penalty. What this usually means is you busted an airspace, and if it were labeled as such I would actually know what I did, rather than screwing around trying to figure it out myself. Cargo should be similarly renamed, âSTOL Airstrip Cargoâ or something. Even when they finally add Heavy Cargo, the A400 and C-17 will be great for remote airstrips.
There are indeed plenty of actually fake airports in the simulator too. Thereâs bad and defunct data in the database, so the sim will draw airports that donât actually exist.
3 Likes
Agree with all. I havenât seen the âoverflew airportâ penalty since mid December, though.
yeah, I think its the labelling that is the key missing elementâŠ
Ive been enjoying flying a PC12 in South America, taking it into tiny strips within mountain valleys ⊠but still, there are times when IRL they would cut down the trees at the runways approach , even if using STOL aircraft
but theres also some oddities with mission types.
Im getting lots of cargo medium jobs into these tiny strips.yet only a handful for cargo light.
some of these airstrips would be much more suitable/fun to be taking in cargo with a Draco. Id be all for some risky missions with a Draco thatâd pay some decent credits
perhaps in this way that could actually make the difficulty rank actually mean something.
4 Likes
flying into âbushâ airports in a PC24 on a cargo mission in low IFR with no charts and no weather info is very unrealistic. Aint gonna happen. I donât mind a challenge in a suitable aircraft with appropriate weather, but what we have in career mode is unrealistic.
4 Likes
Flying into JFK with my little XCub and landing on the main in between all them airliners is equally unlikelyâŠ
Again: Getting rid of content just because you personally donât like it is a bad solution as it takes away from those that do like the content.
Filters are the solution, maybe addition if what you are looking for isnât implemented yet.. but substraction? No, thatâs just ignorant.
3 Likes
Agree. The weather alone isnât an issue - thatâs annoying, but itâs like a real-world go/no-go decision. Plenty of overequipped aircraft fly into places that donât have IFR procedures. I enjoy that aspect to an extent (would moreso if the UI wasnât so kludgy).
But the aircraft-airport pairing in terms of runway and ramp capacity is definitely problematic. Itâs not something we can just wait out and we canât reject it - itâll just stay there and/or regenerate with the same aircraft. Itâs a complete waste of resources.
You mean when Iâm required to announce taxi and hold short with a helicopter on a wildflower meadow somewhere in the Midwest with no civilization around?
4 Likes