FS9 default terrain mesh resolution??

[Guest davewins]

Does anybody know what the default terrain mesh resolution is for FS9?? I am thinking about buying FS9 and upgrading with FSGenesis mesh. I just recently bought FSX and I am not satisfied so I figured I would buy FS9 and get some add-ons until I can be happy with FSX when Vista/DX10 come out + more add-ons.

[ubersu 78]

As I recall (vaguely...) it's around 105 (or more) meters resolution - Holger can give you the exact figure, I'm sure. The FSGenesis 38 meter mesh is an excellent upgrade! Get the FSG landclass while you're at it. Then get the GE Pro package, and the Ultimate terrain packages and you're in businesss...DJ

[Guest davewins]

>As I recall (vaguely...) it's around 105 (or more) meters>resolution - Holger can give you the exact figure, I'm sure. >The FSGenesis 38 meter mesh is an excellent upgrade! Get the>FSG landclass while you're at it. Then get the GE Pro>package, and the Ultimate terrain packages and you're in>businesss...>>DJThank you very much....my wallet isn't going to be thanking you though. =)Do you have any idea if these are free to upgrade to FSX or at least discounted??

[ubersu 78]

FSG has the mesh available for FSX now - the prices are low, and I don't think there is an upgrade price. Check out the site at http://portal.fsgenesis.net/ ... his quality and service are among the best in the business. Ultimate Terrain has issues that require a lot of work for FSX. Check the forum at the Flight 1 site - http://www.flight1.com/ GE Pro is also available and supported from Flight 1.DJ

[Guest davewins]

Well the thing is I kind of want to go down to FS9. I don't have a copy of FS9 now so I will have to buy a copy and start from scratch. I was thinking about buying FS9 and getting FSGenesis and landclass and possibly UT-USA and maybe GE pro 2006. The main add-on I really want to get is FZ01 and FZ02 Rhode Island and Portland. I just don't know if it's worth it to spend the money. If some of these add-ons can be upgraded to FSX for free in the future then I will be fine just spending $30 for FS9 and $65 for FZ01 and FZ02. I just wish FSX had better performance out of the box then I could just build FSX to where I want it but right now it's just not enjoyable at all for me. FZ01 and FZ02 look brilliant. That is what I am looking for. I am big on 3d imagery at low altitude (taking off/landing), high detailed airports and high detailed scenery. I don't know if I should do that or not. I think I might regret it come time when Vista/DX10 patch is out and FSX is running better and more add-ons are available but who knows when that is going to be. Big dilemma for me I guess.

[Chris_CYWG 0]

Don't forget to add the price of Vista to wallet as well, and a videocard that can effectively use what DX10 can offer when its available...I'm in the same position, FS9 runs nicely, FSX is a slug... I am probably going to upgrade to a better machine with whats available now... With a better machine I will have the ability to crank things up more in FS9 as well...

[GHarrall 494]

There is an excellent section on the FSG website covering terrain.Here is an extract from it covering your question:"What is Terrain? Terrain Mesh is the shape of the ground in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2000/2002/2004. It is compiled by FSGenesis using real world data in the form of Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) from the United States Geological Survey (USGS).The default terrain mesh covering most of the world is 1223m horizontal resolution, that is, 1223m between elevation points. There are small areas of the Japan and the south Pacific, including Papua New Guinea, with 76.4m terrain. Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa is done in 76.4m.The default terrain mesh covering the United States is generally 611.5m horizontal resolution, that is, 611.5m between elevation points. Small areas of the western United States are done in 153.2m, as well as the entire Caribbean. The Grand Canyon, Hawaii, Mount Rainier, Yosemite, and Catalina Island are done in 76.4m.FSGenesis terrain mesh is compiled in three different horizontal resolutions, 76.4m, 38.2m, and 9.6m between elevation points using 90m, 30m and 10m source data, respectively. We currently have the entire western hemisphere covered in 76.4m terrain mesh.Additionally, the entire coterminous United States is covered in 38.2m terrain, and selected areas, including Monument Valley, Yellowstone & Grand Tetons, The Grand Canyon, and The Hawaiian islands covered in 9.6m terrain.All FSGenesis commercial terrain mesh products are available for immediate download after your purchase. As well, there are numerous freeware samples available in the Downloads area."

[scott967 62]

There is a description of the default here:http://portal.fsgenesis.net/index.php?name...artid=10&page=1This used to display nicely for me (graphic of default mesh areas), but in the current FSG site software, it doesn't render properly in my browser.scott s..

[Guest drmweaver2]

I'll add my name to those who recommend the FSG product line. I have them all and they make a definitive difference in my experience all by themselves. I did try some freeware meshes before going with the FSG stuff and I'm going to stick with the FSG's.If you add/install ALL of the FSG meshes, you wind up with the entire US/Can/Mexico landmass at 38m resolution with specific smaller areas at 9-19m resolution (ex., Hawaii, Grand Canyon, Mt. Rushmore, etc.). The rest of the world is essentially "meshed" at 76m (except for the Alps)... and this is a noticable difference after flying in the foothills of the Rockies/Hawaii/Grand Canyon for a while. That is, on top of the FSG meshes, I'm constantly looking for 38m or better meshes for non-N. American areas as they make a big difference anywhere there are even only rolling hills. Toss the UT-USA/Can/Europe sceneries on top and things get even better.FWIW, I believe the least "impressive" FSG mesh is 153m and that didn't do squat for my "visual enjoyment", even with UT scenery on top. I found I personally needed to have at least the 76m mesh and decided that it was worth the investment to go all the way. I haven't looked back or regretted it for a second.Unfortunately, what Justin has made for FS9 is all he intends to make - that is, he's said there will be no further improvments to his FS9 meshes. This is why I keep looking for more/higher resolution meshes for areas he's not going to add or work on any longer. (He's moved on to FSX, basically. That's not a criticism but an interpretation of what he's posted on his forums.)Finally, I don't know Justin Tyme of FSG and don't have any other association with FSG than being a satisfied customer.

[GHarrall 494]

The 153m mesh (and higher) is there to act as a 'buffer' between mesh layers so you don't get the dreaded 'blue slivers' which can happen if you go from high res mesh straight back down to the default. With the addition of 76m, 153m, 306m and then the worldwide buffer mesh, this transition becomes seamless and the slivers are 99% gone.FS always looks for the highest res mesh first, so installing it all is the best thing to do, then you have the nice layering effect between the different resolutions.