Please allow us to place objects when we edit airports in World Hub mode.
Please provide a comprehensive library of objects, covering anything from marker cones for grass runways, runway guard lights, fences, and flood lights (and please let us use tools like Vector Placement with these objects), to procedurally generated hangars and terminal buildings that adapt to a given footprint with adjustable height (like control towers) and selectable style.
Maybe even consider adding cosmetic objects for flair: static vehicles (e.g. emergency vehicles), luggage carts, shipping containers, etc.
And, finally, please consider relaxing the rules on matching the aerial, so we can bring airports closer to reality by adding missing buildings (or, unrelated to objects, but still worth a mention: by changing apron, taxiway, and runway layouts even if they’re not reflected in the aerial).
Please let us add, move, and remove airport beacons. (At least, give us the option to hide existing beacons. No beacon is better than a misplaced beacon blocking a taxiway.)
Please let us access terraforming, if only small scale, to let us fix bumps on taxiways or sloping aprons, or to model fire ponds or overgrown hardened aircraft shelters.
Of course all of this has been brought up on the SDK forum before. Microsoft and Asobo are aware of our requests. This post exists to collect votes both from World Hub editors and users who want prettier airports. As we know, features get more attention when they make it onto the official wishlist.
I’m not an expert, but I don’t think the number of objects as such is a big issue for the MSFS engine. Just look at the number of buildings (a lot of them with unique footprints) and the number of trees the sim renders in densely populated areas even on potatoes without breaking much of a sweat.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the impact of add-on airports was caused mainly by objects with highly complex geometry, and lots of different high resolution textures.
If you look at any “standard” airport, you’ll find similar looking hangars and terminal buildings using shared textures, and they’re probably not more expensive to render than the thousands of diverse buildings in the world around those airports.
When we ask for a “comprehensive object library”, we’re not asking to be able to create custom buildings with custom geometry and custom textures. We just want access to the features that were used creating the existing “standard” airports.
I agree with you that asking for decorative objects like baggage carts might be going a step too far, but that’s something that Asobo should decide. They know their polygon budgets. Maybe the World Hub could warn us if we go overboard, and there’s always the moderators that would reject unreasonable submissions.
edit: Let me make an additional point: the airports with “thousands of objects” are prominent, but they’re not the majority. The majority of the 40k aerodromes in the sim are (in SDK terms) “S” (small) or “XS” – I have no easy way to count them right now, but I just checked and only about 1700 airports have a control tower object. You don’t need thousands of objects to make a grass strip more realistic and, indeed, prettier. A couple dozen will do (including the marker cones, which I feel are a must-have), making them just as cheap to render as their surroundings.
Forgive me, but I need to see that to believe it.
Can you think of an airport (in the standard edition, if possible) I could check for stock assets with missing LODs?
Also, is Asobo aware of this?
It’s hard to imagine they would ignore low-hanging fruit like that when it comes to optimization. I mean, you don’t even need a “real” dev to fix that.
I agree, essentially. With the caveat that, right now, we can change the airport size. The budget should be based on something that can’t be “played” or manipulated by the editors.
Whether the limits are based on the number of objects, or memory footprint, or polygon budget, and whether they are enforced in the SDK Scenery Editor, or on the World Hub server, these are details Asobo need to figure out. That’s why they’re paid the big bucks.
I was disappointed that airports in 2024 are still missing hangars just like they were in 2020. Please Asobo/Microsoft give us the ability to place stock hangars at a minimum when World Hub opens back up. It would be nice if we could place any stock object. If you are afraid that we will place too many objects or in some way impact the sim, then you can limit the amount in some manner but please give us the ability. Landing at an airport to find zero buildings is something that should not be happening and the community is very willing to fix it, if you are willing to let us.
If we get those tools, they have to be consistently applied. As it is now, there’s no consistency between having either OSM or MS detected buildings enabled and either/or being disabled. Part of me also wonders if when OSM is enabled, if newer edits to OSM buildings are making into the sim that end up covering existing parking spots (that are fairly certainly not being updated). So then we generate on a spot inside a building.
I’m also not sure how career mode handles the preferential parking spot assignments, either. Some additional flags and tools might be needed for that.
Such a shame that this tool has been de-prioritized and under-cooked since its inception years ago. This is basic functionality that should’ve been available on initial launch.
Not only this, there are still a lot of “airports” with only a runway an 2 rwy start points, and missing parking place. So, you are always starting there in ready to takeoff state. Should be eliminated by now, but at least the World Hub must be reopened soon.
In MSFS 2024, even if the airport has no parking spots, you can always start cold-n-dark on the apron by setting a custom start position on the ground.
