Google Earth vs Google Maps for flight sim planning: compare 3D terrain, routes, elevation, distance tools and Google Earth's built-in flight simulator.
For general flight-simulation planning in Microsoft Flight Simulator, X-Plane, FSX and Prepar3D, Google Earth Pro is the better tool: it offers 3D terrain, saved paths, KML/KMZ projects, elevation profiles and nautical-mile measurement. Google Maps is faster for finding places, roads and Street View, but neither supplies authoritative aviation data.
Which is better: Google Earth or Google Maps for flight sim planning?
Google Earth Pro is the stronger primary planning companion; Google Maps is the faster secondary reference for ground features.
| Planning task | Google Earth Pro desktop | Google Maps |
|---|---|---|
| Viewing terrain | 3D globe with tilt, terrain relief and oblique viewing | Satellite, terrain and 3D views, with coverage varying by location and device |
| Building a reusable route | Saved paths, placemarks and KML/KMZ data | Convenient searches, pins and basic multi-point measurement |
| Measuring distance | Straight-line and path measurement with nautical miles available | Distance measurement, normally displayed in metric or statute units |
| Checking ground elevation | Elevation profile for a drawn path | Terrain shading, but no equivalent route elevation profile |
| Finding visual references | Best for coastlines, valleys, ridges and large landmarks | Best for roads, railway lines, place labels and Street View |
| Flying over the map | Includes a basic built-in flight simulator | No official flight-simulator mode |
| Aviation information | Not authoritative | Not authoritative |
Choose Earth Pro for mountain routes, VFR sightseeing, helicopter operations, coordinate collection and reusable projects. Choose Maps when you need to identify a small airfield quickly, study road access or inspect a landmark at street level.
This comparison mainly concerns the desktop Google Earth Pro application. Google Earth in a browser or on mobile has different project, measurement and elevation functions, so instructions written for Earth Pro may not match those versions.
Does Google Earth Pro include a flight simulator?
Yes—the desktop Google Earth Pro application includes a basic flight simulator, while Google Maps does not.
The Flight Simulator command is available from Earth Pro's Tools menu. It provides an F-16 and an SR22, selectable starting positions and keyboard, mouse or joystick control over the mapped globe. Our guide to launching and controlling the Google Earth Pro aircraft explains the controls and the usual input problems.
The Google Earth flight simulator is useful for exploring terrain and practising broad visual orientation, but it is not a full aviation simulator. It lacks the detailed aircraft systems, flight planning, ATC, weather modelling and navigation environment expected from a dedicated platform. Our comparison of Microsoft Flight Simulator with Google Earth explains where the two flying experiences differ.
Can you fly in Google Maps?
No official Google Maps flight simulator or Google Maps fly mode exists.
You can pan, tilt and move through supported 3D areas, but that is map exploration rather than aircraft simulation: there is no flight model, cockpit, aircraft control system or aviation route manager. Searches for a maps flight simulator often conflate this 3D movement with Google Earth Pro's separate desktop flight mode.
How should I use Google Earth and Google Maps to plan a simulator flight?
The reliable workflow is to use Earth Pro for route geometry and terrain, Maps for local visual references, then rebuild and verify the route inside an aviation planner or the simulator.
- Confirm the airports first. Search by ICAO code where possible, but verify the result against the simulator's airport data. A map pin may identify the terminal, entrance road or nearby town rather than the airport reference point or runway threshold.
- Draw the route in Earth Pro. Add placemarks for the departure, destination and meaningful turning points, then connect them with a path. Keep the number of points manageable; tracing every bend in a valley creates an awkward route to reproduce in an aircraft GPS.
- Measure in nautical miles. Use Earth Pro's path measurement rather than Google Maps road directions. Our instructions for measuring flight-plan distances in Google Earth cover unit selection, segmented paths and the difference between a direct leg and a route following terrain.
- Inspect a terrain corridor. Open the path's elevation profile and tilt the 3D view around ridges, passes and confined valleys. Do not inspect only the centreline: wind, turns and navigation error can put the aircraft either side of the plotted track.
- Check visual references in Maps. Look for roads, railway lines, bridges, reservoirs, coastlines and distinctive junctions. Street View can help identify the form of a landmark, although the simulator may use imagery or object data from a different date.
- Recreate and validate the route in the simulator. Add the coordinates or recognised waypoints to a compatible planner, then check leg order, altitude, navaids, procedures and runway selection. Understanding how a simulator GPS interprets waypoints and route legs helps prevent discontinuities and unexpected direct-to routing.
What makes a Google Maps or Earth flight plan inaccurate?
The most common mistake we see is treating familiar-looking map imagery as if it were aviation data.
- Imagery is not live: aerial and satellite coverage may combine captures from different dates. New taxiways, runway extensions, buildings or wind farms may be absent.
- Google Maps Directions are for surface travel: driving, walking and public-transport routes do not represent direct aircraft tracks, airways or instrument procedures.
- A map pin is not necessarily an aviation waypoint: confirm whether the coordinate refers to the airport, terminal, runway threshold or another labelled feature.
- The elevation profile shows ground, not safe altitude: it does not account for obstacle clearance, airspace, operational minima or a required safety margin. A narrow plotted line can also miss high ground beside the track.
- Map track is not cockpit heading: do not copy a measured geographic bearing directly to the heading bug. Magnetic variation, wind correction and route geometry affect the heading flown.
- Coordinate formats are easy to mix up: decimal degrees and degrees-minutes-seconds are not interchangeable. Reversing latitude and longitude or dropping a south or west sign can move a waypoint thousands of miles.
- The map may not match the simulator: terrain mesh, coastlines, photogrammetry, autogen, airport layouts and scenery add-ons can all differ from Google's representation.
Can Google Earth routes be imported into a flight simulator?
A Google Earth path cannot be imported reliably as a native flight plan across all simulators.
Earth Pro normally stores geographic objects as KML or KMZ, while simulators and aircraft avionics expect their own flight-plan formats and route rules. Some utilities and add-ons can read or convert geographic data, but waypoint names, altitude interpretation, leg types and procedure information may be changed or discarded. Simply renaming a KML file with a simulator flight-plan extension does not convert it.
For a simple sightseeing flight, copying a small set of latitude and longitude points may be sufficient. For IFR simulation, recreate the route using recognised fixes and procedures, then validate it against the simulator's navigation database.
Can either map replace an aviation flight planner?
No—Google Earth and Google Maps are visual research tools, not substitutes for an aviation flight planner or approved real-world briefing source.
They do not provide a dependable set of airspace boundaries, obstacle data, instrument procedures, operational runway information, navigation cycles, weather or notices to airmen. For simulation, verify the route using data compatible with the simulator and aircraft. For a real flight, use the approved planning and briefing sources required by the relevant aviation authority.