An important reminder to all airport editors

Please do not add building outlines as markings. Only actual real markings should be included.

@carmalonso please make sure contributors know this. Maybe editing the set of rules you guys put in place could help.

Edit: this only concerns taxiway lines. Please do not add taxiway lines to outline buildings. Having pavement to mark building is ok, this is how it has always been.



Wait the buildings should be remived too now? May I ask why? :o

1 Like

How should the buildings be now? Just as a hole?

I’m confused.

1 Like

Buildings themselves are fine I guess

So let me understand. Do not use lines for buildings but taxiways are ok? Or are we suggesting zero buildings?

All buildings need to be eliminated. Buildings are not markings on the ground and therefore should not have been allowed in the first place.

Philippe is saying that both the asphalt taxiway and the white line need to be removed.

[quote=“Henrik_B, post:6, topic:17798”]
Buildings are not markings on the ground
[/quote] well actually they are probably built on some kind of fundation, in airports it mostly built on the asphalt durectly so theoretically there is.


Buildings aren’t markings. They are structures. Talk to Philippe if you still don’t agree.

1 Like

Physical space is used to site these assets. They are not movable and take up an area where traffic cannot move in to. To simulate real world airports it would make sense for aircraft not to drive through a terminal building.

I suspect at some time in the future these allotments will house 3D representation of the actual buildings. In the interim I await a recommendation as to what we do moving forward. I have already committed over 1000 hours into this project and would like to see it through!



Even though I’m not an airport editior at all, I kind of agreed to take away jet bridges, but buildings are too far, it’s taking my sense of realism away! 😡


Look at KLAX now, and look at the KLAX picture that shows up when you select the SoCal region in the menu. The grass makes it look primitive :/


Philippe himself said that they will add jet bridges in a different way in the future, so I assume it’s the same way with the buildings. You have to go back to go forward, just be patient:)

I’m still waiting for philippe to explain what he actually means now. The whole asphalt thing or just the whote lines

1 Like

Ok, there seem to be confusion here. I am only talking about taxiway lines here. Pavement under buildings should be done as it always has been done.

Only add a markings (taxiway lines) when the same marking exist in real life.

1 Like

So the buildings won’t disappear… I’m confused, can you help get your point across if the buildings are staying or not? Thx :)

Only talking about markings here (taxiway lines). Not pavements.

I have no idea how I can be more clear here. Just do not add taxiway lines to “trace” buildings over the pavements (like I have seen it done for gates for example).

1 Like

Oh, gotcha. I have seen it too, very sorry @philippe, please forgive me, Sir.

So if we have a building depicted say in asphalt to show a difference between it and the surrounding apron then we should remove the white line featured on the taxiway item which depicts the building but keep the actual building plot of land?

That is correct. But don’t use pavement to outline jetbridges :)

Do buildings the same way it was done originally.

1 Like