Terrain Mesh Questions

[Guest rodhamilton1]

Hello, I am looking to install some terrain mesh in FSX. My first question is : if I purchase Global 2010 and some areas of FSGenisis and some freeware areas, are they all going to be compatible? My second question is: does the lower mesh terrain number (example: 38 mesh as compared to 70 mesh) mean that the 38 mesh will be more detailed? My third question is : is all the mesh terrain compatible with UTX FTX Vancouver add ons etc. I fly out of the Yukon territory and B.C. and there are choices for terrain mesh. I guess I want the highest detail in these areas and this is why I am looking at having to buy different terrain mesh.Thanks in advance\Rod Hamilton.

[Guest marquisor]

I am looking to install some terrain mesh in FSX. My first question is : if I purchase Global 2010 and some areas of FSGenisis and some freeware areas, are they all going to be compatible? My second question is: does the lower mesh terrain number (example: 38 mesh as compared to 70 mesh) mean that the 38 mesh will be more detailed? ...Thanks in advance\Rod Hamilton.

1.) i guess this has something to do with the scenery loading priorities inside FSX, as my FS Global 2008 integrated like this. depends in what order you'll set them up.2.) 38m is higher resolution than 70m per pixel

[snave 0]

Hello, I am looking to install some terrain mesh in FSX. My first question is : if I purchase Global 2010 and some areas of FSGenisis and some freeware areas, are they all going to be compatible? My second question is: does the lower mesh terrain number (example: 38 mesh as compared to 70 mesh) mean that the 38 mesh will be more detailed? My third question is : is all the mesh terrain compatible with UTX FTX Vancouver add ons etc. I fly out of the Yukon territory and B.C. and there are choices for terrain mesh. I guess I want the highest detail in these areas and this is why I am looking at having to buy different terrain mesh.Thanks in advance\Rod Hamilton.

The primary deciding factor for priority is mesh detail: 76m will be superceded by 38m, which will be superceded by 19m, etc etc. These represent the distance between measured trig points in the original source data so in this case, less IS more!This applies no matter where the addon is placed in the scenery or addon scenery folders. BUR where mesh of equal level is found, then the highest priority in the scenery menu takes precedence. "And the Last shall be first"All meshes are NOT necessarily compatible, although as you are likely to only be running one at any one time through game design or consumer choice it's not usually a problem. Mesh of ANY resolution can be temporarily disabled as long as it is placed in the ADDON scenery folder and unchecked in the scenery menu - I believe FS Genesis assumes ideas above its station by default and inserts itself in place of the default scenery. This MAY cause problems, so install FS Genesis as any other addon scenery and you retain full control.Finally, if the Yukon and BC is your bag then check out the specialist forums for those areas - they will have the best recommendations for who, how, what, where and when. Non need to reinvent the wheel when others have already done the leg work!

[Guest marquisor]

The primary deciding factor for priority is mesh detail: 76m will be superceded by 38m, which will be superceded by 19m, etc etc. These represent the distance between measured trig points in the original source data so in this case, less IS more!This applies no matter where the addon is placed in the scenery or addon scenery folders. BUR where mesh of equal level is found, then the highest priority in the scenery menu takes precedence. "And the Last shall be first"All meshes are NOT necessarily compatible, although as you are likely to only be running one at any one time through game design or consumer choice it's not usually a problem. Mesh of ANY resolution can be temporarily disabled as long as it is placed in the ADDON scenery folder and unchecked in the scenery menu - I believe FS Genesis assumes ideas above its station by default and inserts itself in place of the default scenery. This MAY cause problems, so install FS Genesis as any other addon scenery and you retain full control.Finally, if the Yukon and BC is your bag then check out the specialist forums for those areas - they will have the best recommendations for who, how, what, where and when. Non need to reinvent the wheel when others have already done the leg work!

@Snave:what would you generally recommend how to setup meshes without conflicting scenery addons?first case:i got some cities and airports as scenery, they should be above or below the meshes for that region in the priorities? so it doesn't matter maybe?second case:i only got REX and GEX, it doesn't matter/care what meshes and how they're installed? that's my current situation.third case:i got REX, GEX and UTX, MegaSceneryX? what then? meshes priorities go below UTX? (in my case i didn't bought UTX yet, but i consider to. would i have to abandon the higher res meshes to have no conflicts with UTX?)conclusion:i take it, that MegaSceneryX, UTX, airports etc. are built upon FSX standard scenery? or do they come with own meshes, too? that really confuses me!

[snave 0]

@Snave:what would you generally recommend how to setup meshes without conflicting scenery addons?first case:i got some cities and airports as scenery, they should be above or below the meshes for that region in the priorities? so it doesn't matter maybe?second case:i only got REX and GEX, it doesn't matter/care what meshes and how they're installed? that's my current situation.third case:i got REX, GEX and UTX, MegaSceneryX? what then? meshes priorities go below UTX? (in my case i didn't bought UTX yet, but i consider to. would i have to abandon the higher res meshes to have no conflicts with UTX?)conclusion:i take it, that MegaSceneryX, UTX, airports etc. are built upon FSX standard scenery? or do they come with own meshes, too? that really confuses me!

Personally, I ALWAYS place mesh in the addon scenery folder, then add it to the FSX installation in the `normal` way by adding it to the scenery menu through the GUI. As a matter of personal choice I also place ALL meshes just above the default scenery installation in the menu, ensuring that all addon scenery sits above it in the menu. However, this is pure `housekeeping` as mesh can appear ANYWHERE in the scenery menu and still have priority - Flight Simulator itself always places mesh before anything that sits on top no matter the menu sequencing but it mean I can keep an eye on what mesh is in use - example: I have 5m mesh for the whole of the UK. I have (default) 76m and addon 38m mesh for France and Germany. Depending in whether I'm flying over the British Isles, lowland France or Germany, or the mountainous regions of either I will load one, other or both meshes for that particular sim session. Simples!REX, GEX and UTX don't care what mesh you have installed. In fact UTX seems to make more sense with higher detail mesh. Simples!Some addons do come with their own mesh but you can have problems with platforms for airports where the airport elevation is averaged based on lower resolution mesh, as FS even after all these years cannot natively accept the concept of a sloped airport and runway. Higher detail mesh can exaggerate the effect. But remember, if you use the stated mesh installation procedure all you need to do is disable the mesh or ask the developer to upgrade their product `flattening`accordingly. Almost simples!Finally, bear this in mind, and it's a contentious statement so expect some disagreement: As a real pilot one of things that FS still gets completely wrong in my opinion is that a pilot can barely make out undulating contours from the air, so it is not always the case that higher detail mesh makes for a more `real` experience. With a slanted eyepoint the pilot has the same level of `slope perception` as a camera - and we all know how pictures can't represent the true slope of a surface. At low-level we take our slope cues from ground features such as the treeline, road or rail networks, usage and shadowing far more than we do from actually being able to SEE the slope of the terrain itself. Above a few thou AGL you cannot make out anything except the most extreme of vertical variations anyway, so if airliners are your bag you don't NEED anything more than 76m or 38m mesh. Much of Europe and USA is already at 76m by default.FS actually starts to exaggerate the error as you move to higher detail mesh as the landclass simply cannot accommodate the variation for all possible permutations of mesh. It is optimised for 76m or 152m - the FS default - and frankly, I think it starts to look more and more false as you move to higher detail EXCEPT in mountainous (as opposed to hilly) terrain, when it really comes into its own. And that is why you need that facility to switch it on and off at will... plus there is a fps hit with higher mesh resolutions that can introduce stutters and `shimmering` as the overlays of terrain and autogen adjust to the precision verticality and move into position as you get closer.Hope this helps!

[raymar 969]

Rod, I'm hoping your thread attacts a lot of attention . . . so I can get excited about better views out the window.I have not purchased any addon meshes or photoreal scenery as of yet, but, I yearn for better resolution every time I fly. I have almost purchased the MegaSceneryX Hawaii/FS Dreamscapes Promesh combo several times. I look at the Dilliamham x screenshots often, but, it is such a small restricted area. I've read about Tongrass Fjords in Alaska. But, last night I was reading about the almost released Ultimate VFR Extreme Oahu (wow what a mouthful). Then there is REX and GEX and + versions.I stumbled across a release of the FS Dreamscapes Mississippi Promesh and instantly wondered why in the world would someone do Mississippi terrain in high def. I live in Biloxi, MS. No mountains, no valleys, muddy rivers, lots of green pine trees, flat grey deltas, lower third of state practically destroyed by hurricane Katrina. The promotional literature reads the same as Colorado or Hawaii, so beats me.I did play around with TileProxy for several weeks but got so tired of waiting for the load time and missed the 3d effect that I just quit loading it up. Too much trial and error to see if I could make it better.Maybe the next generation of terrain resolution is just around the corner. But, just look at how many different folks are coming to the market with the partial states, specific cities, blocks, or islands at the same cost or higher of a really good addon plane. :( I tend to fly in Tasmania most of the time due to the totally free FTX scenery for the entire island plus the 8 or so airports. The downside is its a real bummer when I switch back to the gulf coast of Mississippi using the fsx default scenery.Oh well, I guess I used the money that I would have spent on scenery to buy more new planes. The hanger is almost full but my home base is half way around the world. Maybe 2010 will be the year. It sure sounds like the future. :(

[Paul J 349]

Don't forget - FTX is coming out with PacNW in a short while, and it's using "HolgerMesh", so if it's the same standard as the Aussie series - we won't need any addon textures, lanclass or mesh.

[Guest rodhamilton1]

Don't forget - FTX is coming out with PacNW in a short while, and it's using "HolgerMesh", so if it's the same standard as the Aussie series - we won't need any addon textures, lanclass or mesh.

Thanks to everone who replied.Kind regards Rod Hamilton.

[Guest rodhamilton1]

Thanks to everone who replied.Kind regards Rod Hamilton.

One more question: Can I install FS2004 mesh into FSX ?Regards Rod.

[Guest LCSims]

One more question: Can I install FS2004 mesh into FSX ?Regards Rod.

Yes, FS9 mesh will work in FSX. Note that FS9 had limits on resolution that aren't in FSX.

[Guest marquisor]

hello snave! thx for detailed answer

Personally, I ALWAYS place mesh in the addon scenery folder, then add it to the FSX installation in the `normal` way by adding it to the scenery menu through the GUI. ...

well i got FS Global 2010 here now, and it won't let me choose to install in "FSX_root/Addon Scenery" folder, installer says FSX not found and quits!got a test mesh from a friend from FSGenesis for Europe, this i could install into the "Addon Scenery", it makes directories like 0601, 0602 etc. you'll know. but it is not showing in FSX scenery manager, nor i have the feeling that it's loaded. tested it in alps and some other hilly regions.further if i try to add that scenery by the manager it doesn't find appropriate files, it even doesn't take .bgl files, it all goes under "Addon Scenery" that's it.

REX, GEX and UTX don't care what mesh you have installed. In fact UTX seems to make more sense with higher detail mesh. Simples!...Finally, bear this in mind, and it's a contentious statement so expect some disagreement: As a real pilot one of things that FS still gets completely wrong in my opinion is that a pilot can barely make out undulating contours from the air, so it is not always the case that higher detail mesh makes for a more `real` experience. With a slanted eyepoint the pilot has the same level of `slope perception` as a camera - and we all know how pictures can't represent the true slope of a surface. At low-level we take our slope cues from ground features such as the treeline, road or rail networks, usage and shadowing far more than we do from actually being able to SEE the slope of the terrain itself. Above a few thou AGL you cannot make out anything except the most extreme of vertical variations anyway, so if airliners are your bag you don't NEED anything more than 76m or 38m mesh. Much of Europe and USA is already at 76m by default.

agree with that, don't see a contentious statement it's objective. well everyone's perception differs, but you're completely right. i can truly imagine your opinion, because we don't have correct scenery for every airport nor the detail to estimate some degrees of slope, also there's no slope in FSX. well, it's "only" a simulation.if flying above clouds scenery/mesh gets out of business. see your point there of no need of more detailed mesh. but i mostly fly VFR now, as i'm not yet proceeded that far to do IFR and/or the jets.i must tell you what, for flights above 4000 feet from ground i even don't like autogen scenery. i just got into SBuilderX to get my own photorealistic ground textures. it looks far more better than the standard with synthetic plastic autogen/trees. it disables ALL autogen for the region (though i could place new, tried that, doesn't look good.). i use LOD15 for these maps. and there in hilly regions a higher mesh resolution would come in useful, because the texture gives more detail of hills, than FSX default mesh can "cut" the edges!

FS actually starts to exaggerate the error as you move to higher detail mesh as the landclass simply cannot accommodate the variation for all possible permutations of mesh. It is optimised for 76m or 152m - the FS default - and frankly, I think it starts to look more and more false as you move to higher detail EXCEPT in mountainous (as opposed to hilly) terrain, when it really comes into its own. And that is why you need that facility to switch it on and off at will... plus there is a fps hit with higher mesh resolutions that can introduce stutters and `shimmering` as the overlays of terrain and autogen adjust to the precision verticality and move into position as you get closer.

frame rate hit is an issue, but if i go the way i said above (only photorealistic ground textures without autogen) i think it's not a big hit in framerate. i personally don't like the autogen plastic trees. is there no way to make them better looking?well i have to dig around the web again, how to install FS Global 2010 manually (or at least removable) without backing up 30-50 gb of stuff... regardspatrickEDIT: if you're interested, here's a picture where you might see what i meant above with possibly using higher detail mesh in hilly regions Photorealistic vs. default+autogen. beyond the mountains is FSX default + autogen. before mine LOD15. all default mesh. i think it really could profit by higher res meshes. what do you think?

[snave 0]

Accepting that I dont' use FS Global, there is usually only one of two reasons for an installer not finding the root FS directory:1: The Registry entry for FSX is missing or corrupted - use the Flight 1 Registry Repair Tool from HERE2: The installer requires to `see` FSX.exe - simply create a txt file called FSX.exe and that will usually allow the installer to do its job.For any and all sceneries installed in Addon Scenery you need to have a main scenery folder, then two subset folders called `scenery` and `texture` respectively. FS Genesis users can tell you how to construct either a single mighty addon folder called FS Genesis Mesh, or (preferably) a different folder for each area covered, `FSG W Europe 38m`, `FSG Eastern Seaboard USA 19m` or whatever, offering you better control in the scenery menu from within FSX as I explained earlier. Always try to niclude the mesh level in the descriptor as it gets confusing when you have several different meshes and you have them all checked in the scenery menu but don't know which one is actually creating the on-screen visual.I know what you mean about autogen, but until mesh is able to create the bumps that are buildings, the only 3d perspective you get when low down (which is when you need it) is from autogen. I have no doubt that this will in time be seen as a clunky fudge of an excuse, but for now I use Ground Environment X for USA and Europe, which introduces different autogen textures and the trees in particular are much improved. There is also another payware option from Samoshin - Natural World V2 and some freeware alternatives in the Avsim library so there is some choice in the area.Finally, one thing that nobody ever seems to mentions is another simple alternative - if you can't get a realistic view from a low res mesh at high mesh settings, and you get low fps from a high res mesh, just lower the slider from the `normal` 70% down to around 35-40 in the FSX menu. This provides a useful fps improvement by can also smooth the transitions that might otherwise appear to cartoon-like within the sim. Interestingly mist modern rigs can get better sustained fps from a HIGHER mesh at LOWER settings, than from the other way round. I assume the vertices calculations shift the load balance to somewhere else in the CPU cycle, but it'd take a scenery expert to explain why properly, but it does provide a good excuse for using a more detailed meh in the first place!