Compare Google Earth vs Google Maps for flight simulation planning, including terrain, route distances, airport checks, limitations and the best workflow.
For general flight-simulation planning across Microsoft Flight Simulator, X-Plane, FSX and Prepar3D, Google Earth Pro is better than Google Maps because it provides 3D terrain, saved paths, KML/KMZ files, elevation profiles and flexible distance measurement. Google Maps is quicker for place searches, roads and Street View, but neither replaces an aviation planner.
Which is better: Google Earth or Google Maps?
Google Earth Pro is the stronger primary planning tool, while Google Maps works best as a quick reference for ground features and access roads.
| Planning task | Google Earth Pro | Google Maps |
|---|---|---|
| Viewing terrain | Detailed 3D globe with tilt and terrain relief | Satellite and terrain views, with 3D availability varying by area and device |
| Drawing a route | Saved paths, placemarks and KML/KMZ projects | Basic pins and point-to-point distance measurement |
| Checking elevation | Can display a ground elevation profile for a saved path | Terrain shading, but no equivalent flight-oriented profile |
| Ground familiarisation | Good for large-scale terrain, coastlines and landmarks | Better for roads, place labels and Street View |
| Aviation data | Not an authoritative source | Not an authoritative source |
Our recommendation refers mainly to the desktop Google Earth Pro application. The browser and mobile versions have different project, measurement and elevation capabilities, so the advantage over Maps is smaller if you are not using the desktop tools.
Why is Google Earth Pro better for flight planning?
Google Earth Pro lets you preserve an entire simulator route as a set of paths and placemarks rather than repeating the same searches each time. That is useful for VFR sightseeing, mountain flying, helicopter operations and recreating historical routes.
A saved path can reveal the broad terrain profile beneath your intended track. You can also inspect valleys from an oblique angle, measure runway or lake dimensions and record coordinates for custom simulator waypoints. Our guide to using Google Earth Pro as part of a simulator-planning workflow covers these tools in more depth.
Do not mistake the elevation profile for a safe-altitude calculation. It represents Google’s terrain data, not your simulator’s exact terrain mesh, obstacle database, airspace or required clearance.
When is Google Maps the better choice?
Google Maps is better when speed and ground-level context matter more than route construction. It is usually the easier option for finding a small airfield, identifying nearby roads and bridges, or checking what a recognisable VFR landmark looks like from street level.
Maps is also convenient on a phone or tablet while the simulator occupies the main display. Its Directions feature should not be used for aircraft routes, however: it follows roads, ferries or walking paths rather than direct tracks, airways or aviation procedures.
How should I use both tools for flight simulation planning?
- Locate the airports accurately. Search by ICAO code where possible, then confirm the runway and surrounding terrain visually. A general place marker may sit at the terminal, town centre or airport entrance rather than the runway reference point.
- Sketch the route in Google Earth Pro. Add placemarks for departure, turning points and destination, then join them with a path. Use nautical miles for aviation distances; our Google Earth distance-measurement instructions explain how to avoid common unit and path errors.
- Inspect terrain along the track. Tilt the view and examine the ground elevation profile, especially around ridges and confined valleys. Treat this as visual research, not obstacle-clearance approval.
- Use Google Maps for local references. Check roads, railway lines, bridges and other features that may help with VFR orientation. Remember that the map imagery may not match the date or detail level of your simulator scenery.
- Rebuild and verify the route in an aviation planner. Check navaids, airways, procedures, runway information and simulator-compatible flight-plan formats. Our overview of route planning and moving-map navigation with Little Navmap shows the type of aviation-specific tool needed for this stage.
What mistakes make Google-based flight plans inaccurate?
- Treating imagery as live: satellite and aerial images may be mosaics captured on different dates. A runway extension or new taxiway may therefore be missing.
- Using road directions as a route: Google Maps Directions calculates surface travel, not direct aviation legs or airway routing.
- Assuming displayed terrain matches the simulator: terrain meshes, photogrammetry and object placement vary between simulators and scenery add-ons.
- Copying a map bearing into the heading bug: measured bearings and the heading needed in flight can differ because of magnetic variation, wind and route geometry.
- Trusting labels without verification: airport names, coordinates and operating details can be incomplete or outdated. Confirm them in the simulator or an aviation planner.
Can Google Earth routes be imported into a flight simulator?
Google Earth routes cannot be imported reliably as native flight plans across all simulators. Earth normally stores project data as KML or KMZ, while flight simulators and avionics use their own route formats and waypoint rules.
Some planning utilities and add-ons can convert or read geographic data, but waypoint names, altitudes and route structure may not survive conversion. For a sightseeing flight, transferring a few coordinates may be enough; for IFR simulation, recreate and validate the route in an aviation planner. Neither Google Earth nor Google Maps should be the sole planning source for a real flight.