Yesterday, with the comments of Sesquashtoo in mind, I flew the DreamFleet Bonanza from Lillooet (CAR3) to Vancouver BC (CYYJ). Flying a little below the cloud and mist at about 5000', the scenery was just about exactly the same as I have seen it many times driving the same route on the ground.Towns, mountains, highway, rail lines and the mighty Fraser River were all spot on for realism. I have Ultimate Terrain and the original GE- running on a pretty old machine with FS settings in the mid to high range. Monitor resolution is 3072 x 768 on a 45" screen about 26" from my eyes.Sesquash is not exagerating when he describes the potential of FS9 as FS 9.75! (no point in screenshots- the visual impact on your little 23" monitor, is about the same as an IMAX poster on the sidewalk outside the theatre!)Alex Reid

Alex, I saw that earlier thread and tried a few variations until I realized I've been running FS 9.75 for quite some time with a combination of ACtive Sky v. 6.5, Bird's Eye view and F-Scene's Autogen, Ultimate Terrain, SimReal Freeware runways and taxiways, Free SoftHorizons, and the skies, water and clouds of the tried and true payware of Flight Environment. All with 30+ FPS!I may still buy REX for FS9, if only to show my support for continued FS2004 development but I'll bet it won't be that much of an improvement over what I found a long time ago with Flight Environment and the rest of this software.

Alex, I saw that earlier thread and tried a few variations until I realized I've been running FS 9.75 for quite some time with a combination of ACtive Sky v. 6.5, Bird's Eye view and F-Scene's Autogen, Ultimate Terrain, SimReal Freeware runways and taxiways, Free SoftHorizons, and the skies, water and clouds of the tried and true payware of Flight Environment. All with 30+ FPS!I may still buy REX for FS9, if only to show my support for continued FS2004 development but I'll bet it won't be that much of an improvement over what I found a long time ago with Flight Environment and the rest of this software.

Hello ChuckYou are in for a big surprise when you do get REX2004

Hello ChuckYou are in for a big surprise when you do get REX2004

FOR REAL??? It's THAT much better than Real Environment? (The payware version, not the freeware. . . )

FOR REAL??? It's THAT much better than Real Environment? (The payware version, not the freeware. . . )

Hello Chuck-------------------------------------------------------------> this much betterStill not made my mind up on the sky textures but everything else is A+

Hey Alex....You mentioned you have UT installed. Do you have any issues with it like OOM or CTD's? I'm thinking I may buy it, but I'm rather concerned that it may start issues like OOM's and CTD's that I don't have. I fly only jets (IFR) between 2-4 hours flights and much rather have a stable system for IFR flight. That said, with all the posts about FS9.75, I'm being tempted to buy. :( With UT, is there any issues with roads being in the wrong spot mainly around airports?RJ

FOR REAL??? It's THAT much better than Real Environment? (The payware version, not the freeware. . . )

I doubt that you will see that much of a difference vs. what you have now. Let me know if I am wrong.

Hey Alex....You mentioned you have UT installed. Do you have any issues with it like OOM or CTD's? I'm thinking I may buy it, but I'm rather concerned that it may start issues like OOM's and CTD's that I don't have. I fly only jets (IFR) between 2-4 hours flights and much rather have a stable system for IFR flight. That said, with all the posts about FS9.75, I'm being tempted to buy. :( With UT, is there any issues with roads being in the wrong spot mainly around airports?RJ

3Green- Not a problem with UT other than- the bridge problem and some rivers and streams may climb the sides of mountains due to elevation discrepancies between FS and UT. Some bridges are also in conflict- I have clicked to disable FS9 bridges. All in all I wouldn't be without. Never a hiccup.If you find a conflict, there are tick boxes to delete the various functions. And the night lighting is fabulous! No conflict with GE.Never had an OOM- wouldn't know what it looks like. I get a CTD a couple of times a year because I've been experimenting or I'm careless. Never even had to reload FS in 6 years! Now you know how old this 'puter is!Alex Reid

Ok Thanks... I've always been happy just with the defualt textures because I'm more concerned with IFR flight and might look outside on occasion. But after of years of simming, it might just be time to spruce things up.Thanks again..RJ

. Some bridges are also in conflict- I have clicked to disable FS9 bridges. All in all I wouldn't be without. Never a hiccup.

Alex: Do you use this?<< http://www.qlrp4ut.com/ >>It has completely solved my "bridge" problem with UT.

Ok Thanks... I've always been happy just with the defualt textures because I'm more concerned with IFR flight and might look outside on occasion. But after of years of simming, it might just be time to spruce things up.Thanks again..RJ

RJ -Try some GA flying on the west coast of British Columbia and Alaska - you will get lots of IFR close to the ground and some spectacular scenery when you break out of the murk. A bit disconcerting to descend out of cloud only to discover a mountain beside you! Anybody for an engine out on takeoff in 1/2 mile vis?Alex Reid

I doubt that you will see that much of a difference vs. what you have now. Let me know if I am wrong.

I get some unbelievably realistic views right now. But I'm always up for trying something new, especially when a developer is willing to invest is time in something new for FS9.

Alex: Do you use this?<< http://www.qlrp4ut.com/ >>It has completely solved my "bridge" problem with UT.

Trelane- no- that's new to me. Thanks for the tip. Since figuring out how to to precisely synch multi views, low and slow GA on the BC west coast has captivated me. Only misplaced bridge here is Lion's Gate suspension in Vancouver and rarely near my flight path. So bridges are of little concern.Do you know of any UT solution to rivers that run along the sides of mountains?Alex Reid

Trelane- no- that's new to me. Thanks for the tip. Since figuring out how to to precisely synch multi views, low and slow GA on the BC west coast has captivated me. Only misplaced bridge here is Lion's Gate suspension in Vancouver and rarely near my flight path. So bridges are of little concern.Do you know of any UT solution to rivers that run along the sides of mountains?Alex Reid

rivers running along the mountains should be improved by getting some good mesh for the area. UT places the water accurately so if the mesh isn't accurate you'll have rivers in odd spots...

Hey Alex....You mentioned you have UT installed. Do you have any issues with it like OOM or CTD's? I'm thinking I may buy it, but I'm rather concerned that it may start issues like OOM's and CTD's that I don't have. I fly only jets (IFR) between 2-4 hours flights and much rather have a stable system for IFR flight. That said, with all the posts about FS9.75, I'm being tempted to buy. :( With UT, is there any issues with roads being in the wrong spot mainly around airports?RJ

RJ,I have UT-USA installed and I was suffering a CTD when flying into a rectangle WNW of Seattle. This had been bugging me for years but I just avoided the area. In all other respects UT-USA (and UT-Europe) add a lot of realism to flying.A couple of months ago I decided to try and get to the bottom of it. After much experimentation and delecting options in UT it transpired that enabling Streams was the cause of the CTD. Other than that one incident flying around the USA has been problem free for me.The thread is here http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtop...&hl=seattle and the solution is in message #32.