"I do get a few floating trees here and there, but maybe trees really float in Colorado."Perhaps they do....:-lol

HI Steve,Given two terrain files with identical LOD covering the same area, the terrain engine will use the last one installed.-------Justinhttp://www.fsgenesis.netHigh Quality Scenery for FS200x

This is a little off topic but,For the next release should I use a installer or a zip file only?Also What should I say in a readme? Steve said I need to put the coordinates of the mesh in the readme file, but what else? I guess the rezalution huh? All I need is a basic outline. thanks.

David,Just wanted to congratulate you. I downloaded the scenery and went for a ride. Really well done, once again, congratulations and thanks a lot!Best,Bruno Francescoli.

Hi Justin, thanks for the response.>Given two terrain files with identical LOD covering the same>area, the terrain engine will use the last one installed.Ah, if only life with Microsoft were so simple! (I've done some testing.)Your statement is an example of what predicate calculus (Logic) defines as a "Universal quantification". As such, it can be shown to be invalid if there is a single "counter-example" (within the domain of discourse). Just one such "Existential quantification" is sufficient. Given the way such conflicts are actually handled in FS2004, the number of possible "counter-examples" is quite large. Potentially well over 256^36 (4.9732323640978664215538224814682e+86), but who's counting! I've only confirmed a few of them.Of course you could revise your statement, claiming only that "Sometimes ...". But that form wouldn't help us very much unless we are told under exactly what conditions the statement applies. In fact, it is unlikely that FS2004 will ever use the order of installation to determine mesh precedence. The result would be chaos.Unfortunately, the new version does change things quite a bit, and we will all have to adapt if we want to insure our mesh actually shows up in the sim.Drop by my website if you would like to learn more about mesh and how it is used in FS2004. :) www.fs-traveler.com/priority.shtmlStevewww.fs-traveler.comVery High Quality Scenery for FS200x

Hi Steve "Logic" Greenwood ;-)thanks again for doing all the legwork for mesh users and designers!!!May I suggest that you summarize your findings in a separate post in this forum and perhaps the mesh design forum as well? Just the key points would help, with a link to your site for people interested in details or replicating your tests. I'm just afraid this important news will get lost in this post.Cheers, HolgerP.S.: For the record - I downloaded Steve's test files, ran the tests as suggested, and had the exact same results on my system.

Hi James, I've done quite a bit more testing and have not been able to reproduce your results. I don't question your having seen what you describe, but it is certainly not universally true. There may be a problem with your "experimental design", failing to take into account the factors I have since learned do determine mesh precedence. It may also be related to the fact that you were working with "bad data". I don't have anything like that available so I can't replicate that aspect of your testing environment. :)You can check out what I have learned, and even download my test data and confirm the results yourself:www.fs-traveler.com/priority.shtmlAnd if you ever decide you want to spend more time flying and less time beta-testing "bad data", ....Steve

Hi certainly an improvemnt, and I wish this sort of scenery was available for other parts of the world, like europe and scandanavia.BUT...why is there a blue strip above the road there, in your screen shots? I hope that's not supposed to be a river, because if it is, it's very much in the wrong place. Hmmm.

Hi Jason:"why is there a blue strip above the road there, in your screen shots?"everything is possible in Colorado, it's the Wild West after all ;-)As for good freeware meshes for Europe you should have a look at Nanuq Faitman's site - most of the mesh files are based on DTED1 data, which are, in fact, classified, but who's asking? More importantly, they are of approximately the same resolution as the Shuttle Radar 3 arc-sec data used for the Canada and South America meshes (I believe RealTerrain is based on the SRTM 1-arcsec data). I hope he'll soon give us the Alps and Scandinavia too. Here's Nanuq's site:http://www.faitmain.com/fs2002/default.asp...C=22&SC=165&T=DCheers, Holger"DTED1 is the basic medium resolution elevation data source for all military activities and systems that require landform, slope, elevation and/or terrain roughness in a digital format. DTED1 is a uniform matrix of terrain elevation values with post spacing every 3 arc seconds (approximately 100 meters). The information content is approximately equivalent to the contour information represented on a 250,000 scale map." Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/dted.htm

Thanks HolgerDo those NANUCQ meshes work ok in FS2004?This idea of "classified" terrain data makes me laugh. Let it out.. it belongs to the people!

>> . . . And if you ever decide you want to spend more time flying and>less time beta-testing "bad data", ....>Disappointing, Steve. I thought you were above this sort of thing, subtle as it is.The "bad data" in question was from an earlier version compiled by someone else and was fixed immediately, BTW.-------Justinhttp://www.fsgenesis.netHigh Quality Scenery for FS200x

I'm using Mathew Styles proggie to mesh all of the West Coast of the US with the SRTM data atm....it's probably not as polished as the payware stuff but I can't really grumble considering it's free 38m mesh ;-) Downloaded 1.5 gb lol.....all I gotta do now is convert it all, it seems to be only about 1/3rd the size after convertion though....I've done Wash State and Oregon so far...apart from some anomolies it looks great for the most part. Also have most of the Faitman mesh for Europe so things are looking up for free mesh these daysCheersDave

Hi Jason:I haven't been to all places in Europe in FS9 yet ;-) but the Nanucq meshes work fine. There's no reason why any add-on mesh for FS2002 wouldn't work in FS9, since the basic code for mesh display hasn't changed. However, the mesh priority handling differs - see Steve's post higher up!Cheers, Holger

Hi Dave:I know it's tempting to use the SRTM data in conjunction with Matthew's utility (and I don't want to discourage you in any way!). However, for the US, you might want to consider using USGS NED data instead - they are consistenly corrected whereas the SRTM data are pretty much in raw state, with lots of holes and inaccuracies. For more information, have a look at this post:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=14760&page=Cheers, Holger

I have the Joshua Haut European mesh on FS9. Does anyone know how this compares with the Faitman? ThanksSherm