Agreed. It is why I wrote: “More types of input data, more accurate data, better pattern recognition, etc. all would help generate a more accurate output.”
@CharlieFox00 wrote in the post I linked to previously:
IMO, it is unrealistic to expect that Microsoft could somehow acquire the data for the thousands of airports, airstrips & airfields where it currently does not exist, and even if they did, and assuming they created a tool that allowed the creation of one airport per day - maybe also unrealistic, as per @N316TS’s comment:
I’ve done about 20 airports so far, and it’s taken me hundreds of hours to do them
One person creating these would take 38+ years. Or, 38 contractors could do this working non-stop five days a week for 1-2 years.
That’s an ~5% increase in the current “800 people” I recall Jorg mentioning were working on MSFS in last weekend’s presentation. I can’t see the budget decision makers approving that additional expense for airports that may only be visited by a small minority of the 15 million users of the sim.
So, like it or not, we are stuck with:
a). The teams that run the AI & other procedural systems improving their ability to render airports, or
b). The World Hub - particularly if, over time, enhancements and functionality is added to do more things, more quickly, and more easily. I’m not suggesting this is going to happen any time soon. The World hub is still in alpha. It make take another complete cycle of MSFS before it is really good enough to do what we want it to do.
That would not not stop MS/AS adding a few smaller bespoke airfields to every WU, the choice based on their telemetry data (i.e. which are the most used small airstrips / airfields covered by the WU area), but that still would be a very small percentage of the overall number.
I research airports to death. I just submitted a relatively simple airport, and it takes 4-5 minutes to read the changelog I left on it. I don’t think Microsoft would ever hire 38 N316TS’s. (Alas!)
