I was just checking out the simulator discussed in the recent update. I’m curious how accurate it is with things like the height of a tree or power lines. I currently have to do a basic survey of the area I’m creating flight paths for to make sure I get appropriate elevations. Can I trust the simulator enough to forego that time and effort?
Nothing will ever be perfectly accurate but google earth simulation is probably as close as you will get to reality.
Thanks for the reply. That’s kind of what I’m finding out. I went through some of my previous flight paths comparing measurements from the associated surveys and it’s pretty darn close. I feel like I can use this simulator, apply a margin of error, and be able to eliminate the time it takes to manually measure obstacles for every flight.
I guess one question I still have is how frequently that map data is updated. Is it like Google Maps where busier areas are updated more frequently, and less common areas stay fairly dormant?
Here is a bit more detail on the issue you brought up regarding the accuracy of the Google content used in the Litchi Google Earth Simulator. I researched this a few weeks ago, as I do quite a bit of data acquisition in mountainous terrain. Hope you can use this information:
To your question, the short version: Yes — it’s very similar to Google Maps. Busy areas get refreshed more often, rural/desert regions (like much of Arizona) can go years between updates. But there’s a deeper nuance depending on which layer the simulator is using.
Below is the clear breakdown, grounded in what’s known about Google Earth’s update pipeline and how Litchi’s simulator pulls that data.
How often Google Earth’s underlying map/terrain data updates
Google Earth is built from multiple independent datasets, each with its own refresh cycle:
1. Satellite & Aerial Imagery (the “photo layer”)
-
Urban areas: updated every 1–3 years
-
Suburban areas: every 2–5 years
-
Rural/desert/mountain regions: every 5–10+ years
-
Updates depend on:
-
Airspace availability
-
Cloud cover
-
Commercial imagery provider schedules
-
Demand (cities get priority)
-
2. Elevation / Terrain Data (what affects tree height, hills, ridges, etc.)
This is the part that matters most for the simulator.
Google Earth’s elevation model is a blend of:
-
SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission, early 2000s)
-
ASTER GDEM
-
LiDAR (only in select regions)
-
Commercial DEM providers
Terrain updates are far less frequent than imagery updates.
Typical refresh cycles:
-
High‑priority regions: every 2–5 years
-
Most of the world: 5–15 years
-
Remote areas: sometimes unchanged for decades
3. 3D Buildings / Trees (Photogrammetry)
Only available in cities where Google has flown photogrammetry missions.
Update cycle:
-
Major cities: every 2–4 years
-
Smaller cities: every 4–8 years
-
Rural areas: often never get 3D coverage
What this means for the Litchi simulator
The simulator uses Google Earth Web’s 3D tiles, which means:
-
If your area has photogrammetry:
Tree heights and building shapes are surprisingly accurate, but only as accurate as the last Google update. -
If your area does NOT have photogrammetry:
Trees are not real trees — they’re approximations based on:-
DEM elevation
-
Imagery color
-
AI‑estimated vegetation height
-
These areas update very rarely.
As an example for my area of the world (Gilbert, AZ / Superstition Mountains / Sonoran Desert)
Based on typical Google update patterns:
-
Gilbert / Phoenix metro:
-
Imagery: refreshed every 1–3 years
-
3D photogrammetry: refreshed every 3–5 years
-
Terrain: refreshed infrequently, often 5–10+ years
-
-
Superstition Mountains/desert areas:
-
Imagery: 3–7 years
-
Terrain: 5–20 years
-
No photogrammetry → tree heights are estimates, not measurements
-
So yes — the “busy areas update more often” rule absolutely applies.
Practical takeaway for flight planning
You can trust the simulator for general obstacle awareness, but:
-
Treat tree heights as ±10–30 ft margin of error
-
Treat power lines as not guaranteed (they’re often missing entirely)
-
Treat desert terrain as accurate, but not necessarily recent
Most pilots use:
-
Simulator for planning
-
A 20–30 ft safety buffer
-
A quick on‑site visual check for anything tall or new
Again, I hope this helps!
That’s awesome! Incredibly helpful, thank you!
I’m actually in Mesa AZ and currently working on a project in a residential area of Gold Canyon, so your example of the Superstition Mountains fits like a glove. I will say what I’ve review so far is very accurate for both the trees and powerlines. The powerlines aren’t clean images, but the heights are accurate. The biggest “gap” seems to be the width and depth of the trees, not the height.
So I think my takeaway from your comments (aside from all the wonderful detail) is that I can use the simulator to eliminate the pre-shoot surveys, but I need to apply a healthy buffer and test in any questionable areas where I might not be 100% sure. That’s absolutely doable and less time intensive.
Thanks again!
I just noticed at the bottom of Google Earth “Imagery Copyright 2026 Airbus”.
Does that mean this specific image was taken in 2026?
Yes, I have extensive experience with imaging in the Gold Canyon area. I conducted a post-fire assessment following the Woodbury Fire a few years ago. Additionally, I’ve completed several Trail Head scans, which involved flying missions across the region. For example, I flew from Peralta Trailhead to Hieroglyphic Springs and from Flying Dutchman to Weaver’s Needle, among others.
Recently, I completed a mission (last week) where I created a waypoint mission as a terrain-follow flight. This mission took me from the Broadway Trailhead through the canyons leading up to Flatiron, the tallest point in the Superstitions and back. Here is a link that showcases all of those flights:
It’s quite coincidental that we are in the same area. If you have any questions about collecting data in the area, I might be able to help. Feel free to reach out! I live in Morrison Ranch near Power Road and Guadalupe.
Regards,
Gary