I'm aware that GSX Pro has a problem where almost all airports require customization to have a correct stand position or pushback route.
Fact is, this simply isn't true:
Stand positions not correct.GSX surely doesn't require a profile to do so, since it will always indicate the same stand positions in the simulator. If they are realistic or not, that's a completely different issue that is of course only related to how the scenery is made, but having a GSX profile wouldn't change anything.
If you see a mismatch between what the scenery shows and GSX, is almost invariably because you have an add-on scenery which comes with jetways, and you forgot to disable the GSX Jetway replacement files for it, so you have a scenery conflict because of that. Quoting from the manual, Page 7:
IMPORTANT
The Configuration of 3rd Party Exclusion from Jetway replacement is done when doing any of the following:
• When you first Install or reinstall GSX
• When you perform a GSX Update
• If you Install/Reinstall/Unlink/Relink any FSDT airport
If you install a new 3rd party scenery, just installing it won’t result to automatically go here and reconfigure Jetway Exclusion, you should develop a habit to always check the GSX Config page after installing a new 3rd party scenery. Failing to do so, would result in Parking conflicts (visible as double Parking spots in the World Map), and Jetways malfunction
Pushback routeThis is partially true. Meaning, what makes GSX better in pushback than any other possible alternative, is that is capable to figure out a good pushback AUTOMATICALLY, with NO user intervention, in most of the situations, without a profile.
However, yes, a custom profile might help those minority cases where a normal Left/Right pushback is not possible, for example at the start of a corridor, where one direction would place you with the airplane facing a wall, and the other would place the airplane inside of it. And, a custom pushback might help with badly designed 3rd party airports with issues like wrong placed nodes, overlapping nodes, which will all interfere with the pushback automatic resolution.
Also, a custom profile will surely improve the vehicle starting positions (so they won't clash with the airport static objects) and might add VGDS that might be missing in the original scenery, or just replace them with the better functioning ones from GSX.
But that's very different than saying "GSX has a problem" as if it won't work without a profile, because it's just not true, especially the part about stand position, which clearly shows you must have a scenery conflict not fixed as explained.
Therefore, I would like to suggest that FSDreamTeam consider setting up a GSX Profile Cloud for users to share and download GSX aircraft or airport profiles in a simple way, ideally just one click for "download" or "share."
That's a completely different matter, and it is a very good point and, of course, we have been considering this feature for years, even before than the MSFS version came out.
When MSFS came out, it seems there weren't really any multiple platform, everybody was sharing on flightsim.to, so we consider a waste of our valuable time and resources that would have been better spent improving the *actual* GSX features, rather than duplicating flightim.to. Perhaps something changed after the recent controversy with flightsim.to that made several authors withdrawing their files from it, but it's not as if we can came up with something like that in a hurry, just because some website did a minor screw-up, which I think has been improved as well later on.
So yes, the suggestion is surely noted (as I've said, we have been thinking about this for years), but it's not something we can came up quickly, there's the issue with who's going to pay for bandwidth, even in 5 or 10 years, when GSX sales might have been dried out, fact users would expect some kind of quality control from us, just like they expect it from Microsoft (that takes a fairly substantial share of the sales), which will cost us time/money, even if all profiles were perfect, there's still the server handling that must be done by somebody, taking away time/resource from GSX development of new features, that's the common issue of ANY cloud-based system that is not tied to some subscription.
