Hello 
I am working on an airport and there is this large hangar here that I would like to replace it with a smaller one.
I know that there is the option to remove it but in real life there is a hangar there, just not that big 
Cheers!
Oh wow. That is extremely disappointing. I understand no custom objects, but no default library scenery objects or simobjects really limits this excessively.
edit: I created a feedback post for this.
Yep same issue here cant add or replace any of buildings.
Strange the SDK Docs says you can. You first have to add a polygon to remove the old building (Page 16). Then add an object to replace it. (Page 77).
If I remember correctly Hangars are under Objects → Scenery.
Hi
someone pointed out that the documentation doesn’t match the Scnery Editor “World Hub Mode”.
It is not possible to add objects to the scene, apart from windsocks
Cheers
Aah. Thanks. Will it be in a future release?
This is not planned at the moment
This topic would be a great future request.
The SDK shall not read the community folder in this case. The offical folders only.
That is necessary to prevent an intermix of community folder libraries that you are not allowed to use, like payware sceneries for example.
So the world hub airport creation is limited to the default scenery object that every MSFS version has in the offical folder.
Steffen
I agree with the previous comments, this is definitely a major flaw at the moment.
Being able to use the default objects would make the World Hub significantly more powerful at creating as close of a representation of an airport as possible!
I would really urge you to reconsider implementing this!
Then I don’t really see a purpose of the World Hub. Correction of objects may be just as important as adjusting TWYs and RWYs. Preventing this makes the effort of fixing “the rest” not worth it.
I would say the same. At least changing default buildings and fuelstation would be helpful. Because often times they are at a wrong place or way to big and clumsy especially on smaller airports.
No being able to add or change library objects is such a great limitation to the World Hub that it might fail to be used my most gamers.
This is very disappointing. The reason I have rebuilt all the airports I have so far is to eliminate that white spot on the ground where buildings should be. Otherwise what is there to change other than incorrect taxiway signs and lights in the middle of the taxiway? I have created over 100 custom airports in the gateway for “the other sim” and all are full-featured 3D airports. As long as we use only the assets that are included I don’t understand why we can’t add structures. I don’t see much value in the hub if the airports are basically unimproved from default. I hope this is reconsidered, as it could be a great improvement to the base sim.
Edddie
100% agree. At this point I would just make a nice, detailed airport for my own use (which I’ve been doing as I see ones that need work) but just keeping it for my own use.
The airports I was hoping to contribute with all need building, fuel location, etc. so I’m struggling to see the value in World Hub as well. May as well just dive into the full SDK.
Should I add one more voice to this thread?
I can understand that adding the capability to add stocked library objects may be complex to moderate. Believe me, I know how it’s easy to overload the sim and drop thousand of objects here and here 
With a bit of exaggeration, I expect that the motivation of the Community to contribute will be limited if it’s just to fix faulty AI auto-generated taxiway name and position. What’s wrong with creating an exclusion polygon and pick an object from the fsbase/default/stocked library that would better fit than the AI generated one ?
There’re so many things easy to fix in term of faulty buildings that would benefit to the community. Here’s another example among others. In green, empty spaces or oversized hangar that do not fit at all to the reality of the underlying Bing image at LFPZ/Saint-Cyr-L’Ecole.
At the positif side, today, we can in the existing Word Hub Scenery Editor set the size and choose among a limited type of control tower default object. It’s look as a good idea.
Today, I would love not to be limited to this alternative:
The Alpha purpose exists thanks to the open mindset of Microsoft/Asobo. At this stage, I think we need clearer rules of acceptability for this v1 and a roadmap for the future. I’m - as certainly everyone here - ready to discuss with Microsoft/Asobo.
I have now submitted 2 airport corrections and I must say that the experience is very positive for me.
Although we cannot add scenery objects like hangars, the whole experience of being able to improve an airport is a very positive one. It is still a lot of fun to fix missing helipads, windsocks, and parking spots to name a few.
I recommend that others not be discouraged by the limit on what you can add/edit in the WorldHub. What you will be able to add/edit will make a huge impact on the MSFS immersion while having fun doing it.
I agree with Vincent, we need to have access to the basic objects that make an airport more realistic, hangars, service stations, aerials, fences, etc…
While we’re dreaming… if we get the ability to place objects, we also need a better, more comprehensive “base” object library (since we can’t rely on people having any WUs installed).
Also, the object library should include hangars that “auto scale” (within limits), so they can adapt to a given footprint.
If we really want this, I believe we need to take it to the other forum and start collecting votes. Microsoft needs to get the message, so they can order these new features from Asobo.
Very well said. I think a roadmap of intentions would go a long way. At this point it’s not clear if they would even consider the idea of adding objects. I realise that could easily bring performance issues for some and therefore require higher moderation efforts and testing, so I don’t blame them for starting out with a more simple approach.
While I’m ready to vote on a new ‘wishlist’ request for this, I suppose we need to let the World Hub foundations settle before thought is given to building on it. It’s still very early days.
I have had my first submission approved recently and echo the comment above from Bender that it was a very positive experience. I don’t have a lot of time to contribute but it’s nice to be able to make the smaller airfields more usable by add parking spots and taxi paths so they’re not runway-only airfields with on-runway start points only. That’s the biggest win for me and it’s great to know it will benefit everyone 
