I’d like to make a quick poll. Everyone in the Community has a voice, so here is your chance to voice your opinion!
Would you prefer that spawn points (parking ramps, hangars, tie-downs, etc…) get named from a pilot’s point of view or a passenger’s point of view? Pilots see a gate as “36”, but the same gate for passengers would really be called “Terminal 3, Gate 6”. So what do you prefer? Choose from the options below, or post your opinion if it isn’t listed. Note: “Parking:” is always included by default, it’s code within Infinite Flight that airport editors do not have control over.
@Swang007 the theory of 36 being terminal 3 gate 6 is not correct for every airport. In fact, it’s rarely correct.
That theory means each terminal can only have 10 gates!
As one single example, Sydney airport YSSY terminal 2 has gates from about 30 something to 60.
Terminal 3 starts from gate 1.
If IF lists the spawn points by gate only, it will cause chaos! Please don’t take away the terminal details, it’s one of the best features! There is ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT to remove the terminal numbers, and it will just make it more confusing!
Yes, but a pilot’s perspective would mean gates would be numbered how they are currently numbered at KLAX.
and so on… You don’t actually know where you’re going to spawn. If it says “Terminal 3, Gate 6”, most users have a rough understanding of where that’s going to be. If you asked me where “36” is at KLAX, I couldn’t answer you if my life depended on it.
@Swang007 (and @Carson) yes, we use the lists to spawn. If I’m flying a certain airline, I know which terminal (or look it up) that airline flies from. The old menu of just scrolling to choose the terminal makes this much easier. I don’t need to keep randomly selecting gates trying to get the right gate…
@Carson as for the pilots point of view - that’s really only when taxiing into the gate - the gates aren’t numbered in terms of whilst ‘flying or taxiing’ in the actual sim, do it’s irrelevant. If you’re boarding your aircraft to fly, you’re going to terminal 2, gate 45 etc!
For simplicity and realism, it’s much easier to list terminal numbers and then the gate numbers for each!
Of note, some airports have repeated gate numbers for domestic and international terminals, eg, the international has gates 1-20, and domestic can have gates 1-40 etc
@Swang007 in regards to your last - that’s exactly right, if you ask me where gate 50 is, I have no idea. But if you said Terminal 3, gate 50 (for example, no idea if it actually exists) I’ll know roughly, because I know where terminal 3 is!
You have a valid point, but since we are not as familiar with airports, we should have the terminal prefix so we know that we won’t accidentally end up at the AA Commuter gate at KLAX in an A380 (even though some people still manage to do that :) ). It helps people reference where their airliner should appear so maximum realism is achieved.
Same thing is true at KJFK! It just won’t work out. We have terminal 1, 2 and 3, 4, 5 (and formerly 6 but it was demolished), 7, and 8. There are over 50 gates at each terminal. That system won’t work there (even though it says terminal names 🙂)
No but there are unique Apron names. I was going to include both. Now what will be interesting is since the term Terminal is used it will be placed after Cargo and Maintenance and others so with this method all of the main airport gates will be at the bottom of the list.
I think that system (T2 G24 - Apron 24) is a fine compromise. Helps for those of us who want the terminal numbers for reference, and for those who want apron addresses for pilot reference. I don’t see a problem with the cargo points up on top of the list. With the terminals added, you could just scroll down fast until you hit the desired set of terminal gates. Thank a lot!