Bit of a headache for anyone wanting this airport, since two of the sim’s best developers now offer their respective versions. Comparison available below, although it can’t of course compare performance. Firsts for MK (I think), they’ve included animated ramp vehicles and city POIs. Aerosoft’s also features animated apron traffic and has the advantage of being a native 20204 scenery.
1 Like
Love Contrail for doing these, they’ve done that for other recent releases too.
I’m finding it hard to decide between the two - there are differences for sure, but I can’t really say one is better than the other.
Not a huge fan of Aerosoft nowadays, so I’m leaning towards the MK one. On the other hand, the Aerosoft is native FS24, and I wonder if that makes a difference, especially when it comes to performance.
Will wait till we see some more reviews.
1 Like
MK have clearly taken the threat of Aerosoft’s product very seriously, hence their addition of animated ramp vehicles and city POIs.
My observations after carefully studying the comparison screenshots and matching them up with both Google Maps and real photos of EDDL:
Pros for Aerosoft:
More accurate runway, taxiway and apron textures (although slightly lower quality) in most areas
More detailed cargo/mx area
More accurate terminal building
Correctly proportioned ground movements tower (MK’s is too slender)
Pros for MK:
Greater level of finer detail (such as that on roofs, airport roads, railways, etc.)
Better terminal interior
All static GSE branded (some in Aerosoft’s is more generic)
City POIs
I said to a friend some weeks back that my hunch was MK’s would be more detailed overall, while Aerosoft’s would be the more accurate. Seems this is likely the case. Both are single purchases for both sim versions but Aerosoft’s has the advantage of being FS20204 native.
They are more similar than they are dissimilar, with both devs having done a great job. The runway elevation profile looks identical across both versions, which is testament to the level of accuracy both have strived to achieve. Being honest, I doubt you’d be disappointed with either version but us simmers are always looking for the very best for our money. It’s the toughest call I’ve yet had to make where MSFS scenery is concerned!
7 Likes
The reviews on Contrail certainly came in fast after release!
I’ve visited EDDL many times so am pretty familiar with the place. I have this afternoon spent a good few hours doing some research, trawling through Google Maps and images of the real airport. It’s a lot closer than it might first appear.
The long and short of it is that Aerosoft’s is GENERALLY more true-to-life, while MK’s contains more fine detail. I brought up MK’s incorrectly-modelled ground movements tower (atop the central pier) and the dev team are already aware and have promised to fix it in an update. The airfield ground textures in Aerosoft’s don’t quite look as detailed as those in MK’s but they do represent the real airport more closely, in most areas.
One thing comparing images cannot determine, however, is how well a scenery performs. I’ve been in touch with someone with access to both versions and their initial tests reveal that MK’s is far easier on hardware, by quite some margin. The test PC specs are midrange by today’s standards, though, so the disparity may be far less noticeable on a top-end machine.
Unfortunately, the decision still might not be clear-cut since both developers have plans for at least one major update (with Aerosoft’s already in its advanced stages). Even the pricing is similar, although Aerosoft’s is slightly cheaper (by a pound).
4 Likes
Here are some screenshots of the 2024 version from MK Studios. In my opinion, the level of detail is even higher than MK Studios’ Seattle or Zurich. I am very impressed!
4 Likes
Useful video…
4 Likes
Another MK vs. Aerosoft vid, for anyone still undecided (like me). Worth noting it contains yet another claim that MK’s runs more smoothly. However it further highlights the many little inaccuracies in MK’s: Germanwings branding (they no longer exist — merged with Eurowings), incorrectly shaped terminal windows, spectators on the roof of the airport train station (which is now inaccessible), etc.
1 Like
And another (although in German)…
Always no GSX Profile included with this scenery ?
Not sure what you mean by “always”, but look here:
https://flightsim.to/file/93193/mkstudios-airport-dusseldorf-official-gsx-pro-profile
1.0.2 out <3
No reason for aerosofts anymore 
Aerosoft’s also had an update today. I still think it’s unwise to totally discount Aerosoft’s — object placement and accuracy is better (at least when comparing builds prior to these latest updates).
MK are a fantastic dev but I’m not sure they make actual reconnaissance visits to the airports they produce. They seem to create ‘from afar’ (I think they’re based in Poland?). So many of their sceneries contain inaccuracies and omissions, that are typically missed by anyone not familiar with the real-world places.
Luckily for the community, they do do their very best to address any issues.
1 Like