As usual, Angelique is to be commended for her thoroughly researched and very complete review. She goes far beyond the normal review and gives us her extraordinary efforts.In particular, all too many, or rather all scenery reviews display a general ignorance of the technical aspects. Because of this, it is very common to read incorrect assumptions and conclusions regarding particular scenery products.Angelique has instead done the work and acquired the knowledge of scenery methods so that her review is not only complete, but also well informed and gives the appropriate analysis. This is an outstanding effort on her part, who is however always giving us outstanding reviews.Just one item - she uses Google Earth images to display what should be a picture of the real topographical feature. But, Google Earth is not particularly accurate in its display of relief and uses more primitive techniques for rendering altitude mesh than any of the products compared in the review. Google Earth cannot be used as an accurate representation of the world, unfortunately.Congratulations to Angelique, and hopefully other Avsim reviewers will follow her lead and first learn the technical aspects before reviewing scenery products (the same way that they learn the technical aspects of aircraft before reviewing those.) There are plenty of resources to help them acquire this knowledge as well as a group of extremely well-informed forum members right here at Avsim that can be consulted.Best regards.Luis

I agree, an excellent review, however was the comparisons done with default scenery and textures? If so, upgraded scenery and textures, which many of us use, can have a drastic affect on appearance, making these hard to compare against. For example this is the Matterhorn, with UTEurope and GEX textures and FSGenesis Mesh. Current DateWinter

Although this review gives interesting background information on meshes and compares some products, as far as the US is concerned it seems to be ignoring 'the elephant in the room'.Most people in the market for buying meshes are likely to understand how they compare to default from the publishers' web sites. What I really want to know is how FS Global Ultimate compares to it's main competitor, FSGenesis United States Terrain Mesh for FSX v2.0. Like (I'm sure) many others, I already have that installed and don't want to waste my money buying something else if it won't look any better...Is it possible for someone to post any comparison shots? Or better still, for my purposes, a picture of the Mittens in Monument Valley using FSGlobal, because if it can make them look better than FSGenesis I'm sold :)