start with major class B airports – there aren’t all that many. expand from there as you wish, class C, class D if possible. at least towered airports.
editing default airports/paying 3rd parties to add correct taxiway designations / signs at major airports isn’t something the users should have to deal with in the year 2020.
fsx was able to do it, p3d too. at least for the time they were reasonably accurate. the holy grail would be to keep them up with the official chart cycle.
MODERATOR EDIT: A major similar topic was merged into this one. Adding the text from that post to capture both Wishlist topics:
I know the developers would prefer (and really need) actionable intelligence to make something better so here’s a specific suggestion I think would be huge and improve EVERYONE’S experience:
Make the taxiway signs universally better by increasing their size a bit and reducing the glare on the lighting. The generic signage is almost impossible to read at night and even in daylight can sneak up on you, particularly since they are inaccurate and using a chart doesn’t help much (I prefer not to use the ribbons because they detract from the realism).
For a model of what they should look like, check out FlightBeam’s KDEN. They’re perfect. Large enough to read from a distance and the lighting is perfect at night (no glare).
This is a small thing that would mage a HUGE difference for users universally.
Is it just me or are all the taxiways incorrect? At non handcrafted airports the taxiways seem like they are just randomly assigned. For example at Nassau (MYNN) taxiway H is named A. Is this a bug or just an oversight on Asobo’s part? I hope it gets fixed in the future as it makes Vatsim extremely hard to use.
taxiways are named generic unfortunately and not according to real world.
I hoped for Navblue cooperation to take care of this but obviously it doesn’t…
Very annoying indeed.
That’s a real bummer. Even FSX had accurate taxiway data based on the AFDs. Isn’t there a pretty simple way Microsoft can / could have implemented this? I mean didn’t they hand sketch each airport layout from Bing Maps? Couldn’t / shouldn’t they have added proper gate numbers and taxiway markings at that point? Hope we at least get a scenery gateway system to update the layouts…
i know it matters to us, however, this is how asobo intended it from the beginning. only 80 airports would have realworld taxiway names/signs. all the rest are procedurally generated (fictional)
Oof. I just don’t understand why they couldn’t implement whatever technology was utilized to make FSX taxiways accurate on this sim. Huge step down in realism.
with all the AI talk about how they would be able to keep the scenery up to date with new data, i was surprised there is no way for them to use the official charts and just keep them perpetually updated with the chart cycle.
btw i have made a thread on the wishlist forum… doubt it will help but oh well.
I don’t understand that as well. Based on what they’ve already accomplished with AI solutions regarding scenery placement and weather, it doesn’t sound difficult to utilize the NavBlue access they have with AI to automatically update each taxiway’s name.
Many of us spent considerable time reviewing the airports for accuracy and providing highly detailed feedback. Much of this was ignored or is queued for some future state.
if you remember, the official criteria in those tests never required the taxiway designations to match the real world… just that the taxiways were “usable”
They need to fix this quickly, especially for VATSIM. There is already problems with online controllers giving taxi instructions to people flying the new sim.
