During a recent flight I noticed a considerable difference in depiction of streams, canals and rivers between Belgium and France for example. Flying back from Calais, I noticed some very prominent blue lines on the charts that were in reality very small ditches, easily jumped over. On the other hand a canal 30meters wide near point N for EBKT is not even shown even if it is a very prominent landmark and very useful for navigation.
You can notice that most of the blue lines on the chart in the NW corner of France stop at the border.
The geographical data for France and Belgium doesn't seem to come from the same source.
I want just the bare essentials on the maps (my preference). Highways, canals and navigable rivers, railways and larger cities. The aeronautical information is prominent of course. I would also like to get rid of the 'information balloon' next to destination and departure airports since this is now redundant with the new style info in the vertical view.

We also have a lot of pilots clamouring for "more detail" (whatever that means) almost constantly. It's all very well saying you only want "major rivers" but there is no standard flag for whether a river is "major" or not. I have generally argued that most scenery information is not relevant at all for flight safety, but in the face of constant demand we are gradually adding more details. We try hard to do it based on zoom level, so the 500k chart gets no more cluttered than it has ever been, for example.

I was hoping I would not have to point out that Google probably have quite different resources available to them for their mapping.

I note that you did not comment on the improvements we have made in today's chart update.

Tim,
I, for one, believe your charts have improved significantly by switching the provider. The option of loading more detailed elevation data is also welcome when flying in the Alps. Roads appear to be depected better, too. All in all, a good step forward.

That said, there will always be inconsistencies between countries how they report different features. Clearly it is an ongoing process to smooth out rough edges and work toward more consistency in the map's underlying database. This will take some time, I understand.

Regarding having more or less details: SD is geared toward VFR flying. As such, its maps are used to navigate and relate observed features to specific map points. You are a pilot yourself, and I assume you have a good feeling for what is useful for navigational purposes and what isn't. And treating their individual visibilities based on the current zoom level helps to reduce clutter and focus on the important parts.

Greetings, -- Chris.