Is there any reason why the runways of some airfield disappear as you zoom out, while others remain? It's a bit irritating when planning long journeys because you can't select the airfield as a starting waypoint at the desired levels of zoom (1:560,000 in my case). All you see is a coloured circle which denotes the ATZ. Airfields affected include Netherthorpe, Wickenby, Clacton and Derby on my copy of Skydemon (2.4.2.16291)

As you zoom out, features are removed to keep the maps clear. Airfields with shorter runways are removed first.

I thought that might be the case, but it does Introduce a problem. It isn't possible to select those airfields as departure points when they are zoomed out even though they are licensed aerodromes at any scale smaller than half mill as far as I can see. It's mildly irritating seeing microlight strips still on the map at those scales. You leave the ATZ in place at small scales so it would be nice to leave a circle in the middle so we can plan from these airfields.

Can't you just zoom in a bit to choose the airfield? Would you rather one airfield's label obscured another - which would be the only other way.

I'm not complaining about the concept of decluttering, but about the application of it.

The reason ATZs remain for longer is that they're airspace, and the threshold for airspace is quite high. The suggestions you have made would work very well in the UK, but we have a much larger area to consider than just the UK and whatever we do has to make as much as sense as possible throughout the whole area, where data such as whether an airfield is licensed or not is not always as available as we'd like.

I do disagree with the notion that a licensed airfield with short runways is any less important than an unlicensed airfield with long runways, which may even have superior facilities to the licensed one. This is something everyone has different opinion on, I know.

One piece of information we could add to our threshold logic would be whether an airfield has an ICAO designator. Those are, in general, likely to be either licensed or to have a decent level of facilities. I will have a play with this later on...

The ICAO designator is a neat idea.

Let's agree to disagree on licensed aerodromes. If I had an engine failure and I could glide to a licensed or unlicensed strip I know which I'd go for. The one with a surface I could trust and fire cover, even if it was a bit shorter. In that respect the new starfish in the beta are pretty helpful, though it will take a little time I suspect before everyone feels comfortable with them.

Surely if you had an engine failure, the very last thing you'd be doing is fiddling around with your GPS.