At least in Brazil, V10 Xplane is ridiculous. The mesh is totally wrong, Rio de Janeiro looks worse than it did in FS98. I wish I knew how to adapt SRTM from FS into X-Plane, or at least make from the ground up, but I have no clue.

Huh? Someone mentioned a while back that those 8 DL DVDs were just crmmed with custom high-res mesh and other goodies. Now I'm confused??? :LMAO:Not that I'd know anything about hi-res mesh, you know... :(

Huh? Someone mentioned a while back that those 8 DL DVDs were just crmmed with custom high-res mesh and other goodies. Now I'm confused??? :(

The dvd's are crammed with hi res mesh, textures and terrain. Just not hi res mesh, textures and terrain of JUST Brazil or Rio. They cover the whole planet.

Not that I'd know anything about hi-res mesh, you know... :(

No, personally, I don't know. What do you do?

What do you do?

Let's just say I like to ... mesh around. <pun intended>I haven't really taken much time reading some of the XP dev docs, so I am not aware of what constitutes "high res" versus what's considered HIGH RES in the "other camp". But that day may come later in the year, where I'll be able to decipher Au$tin's way of scenery making.

Yeah. I installed the whole 8DVD DL for 6 hours, but Rio de Janeiro is just ridiculous in X-Plane... Kind of insulting really for someone who lives in one of the most beautiful city in the world, like I do =phttp://img99.imageshack.us/img99/1567/kingairc90b1.jpgNow look at FS98 pointy mountainshttp://www.flightsim.com/zview.php?cm=view&fn=/home/flight/files/20/sbrj10.zip&an=sbrj.jpg&idx=4That can't be SRTM based mesh, not even close. FSX didn't come with SRTM and looked FAR better than that.

AlexisNo one is saying X Plane has 100% accurate terrain data. There are some areas that it is even way off. But it's the same thing in every iteration of MSFS. Much of the scenery in FSX is so grossly incorrect, it's laughable. Yet you won't find X Plane users initiating a complaint about how bad FSX scenery is or whatever else there is. My local airport in FSX is pathetic. Australia in general in FSX is pathetic. The terrain is completely wrong. But not once did I whine about it.If Brazil is not SRTM based mesh, then it's because LR were given incorrect or outdated data.

If you read my first message, it's not about criticizing X-plane, but trying to find a possible solution for this problem. I don't expect X-Plane to come with Mesh compared to the ones I paid 60 bucks to have in FSX, but I think we need Custom made Mesh for X-plane ASAP. Mesh is much more important than custom airports in my opinion, first the mesh, then the airports.Let's hope FS Global and FSGenesis guys get interested in doing X-Plane mesh, and that LR can help them understand how to get the best from their data.

AlexisNo one is saying X Plane has 100% accurate terrain data. There are some areas that it is even way off. But it's the same thing in every iteration of MSFS. Much of the scenery in FSX is so grossly incorrect, it's laughable. Yet you won't find X Plane users initiating a complaint about how bad FSX scenery is or whatever else there is. My local airport in FSX is pathetic. Australia in general in FSX is pathetic. The terrain is completely wrong. But not once did I whine about it.If Brazil is not SRTM based mesh, then it's because LR were given incorrect or outdated data.

The default FSX mountain mesh of the western USA, where I do my flying is quite acceptable, and farther enhanced with FSGenesis. I do give default XP9 a lot of points for its default Telluride Colorado (KTEX) mesh. I don't have the FSGenesis addon for this area, and X-Plane 9 version looks great, as you'll see, if you compare it to this video (runway shows at 1:56). Since I don't have XP10. I'm assuming it's the same? The XP runway slope is a bit exaggerated, but there is slope. I do admit, my preference of XP is for the mesh.................and not looping 747's :(

If you read my first message, it's not about criticizing X-plane, but trying to find a possible solution for this problem. I don't expect X-Plane to come with Mesh compared to the ones I paid 60 bucks to have in FSX, but I think we need Custom made Mesh for X-plane ASAP. Mesh is much more important than custom airports in my opinion, first the mesh, then the airports.Let's hope FS Global and FSGenesis guys get interested in doing X-Plane mesh, and that LR can help them understand how to get the best from their data.

You could have fooled me. Comparing XP10 scenery to FS98 scenery is a little exaggerated and just sounds like you're just out to stir the pot.If you're talking about custom made mesh, the you would have to wait and see if a scenery developer thinks it's worth the investment. SRTM data is expensive. And the cost of the data vs the reward of the sales may not be worth it. If there is a market for Brazil, then someone will probably take it up. Personally, I can't see it happening. The airports are a different story. Airports are easy to research.

Expensive? I thought it was available for free. There are lots of SRTM freeware for FS, including Brazil.About the FS98 comparation, it may look like I'm bashing X-plane like everybody else here on this forum, but I support X-PLane and hope it can become a great sim soon, but it's the truth, it looks like FS98 to my eyes, at least my city, where I fly the most. Why would I defend it if anyone can go there and see it for themselves? FS2000 had smooth mesh already, and X-Plane 10 here looks like mountains are made out of straight lines, just horrible to look at..

The updated data is expensive. The outdated data is free.As far as mountains...mountains are not smooth. They are covered in jagged faces. That's what FSGlobal does. Overwrites the smooth mountains of FS9 with realistic looking rocky mountains. X Plane does this, to a certain degree, by default.FS98 had simple triangular mountains. No detail to them at all.

SRTM data is expensive.

Yet another X-Plane lie!!! Sorry, just yanking your chain. :Peace:SRTM data is freely available for download, from numerous sources. It's OK or good enough. I don't like the term "good enough", so I'll be trying to do better.Even if X-Plane is using SRTM, it's 90m source resolution. Doing better than that, much better (?) is the goal. If XPX won't choke on it and bring the fog in at 10 miles..., then having non-flat runways and a higher resolution mesh sounds like a winner to me!

I've constantly asked numerous scenery developers to make Australia with accurate SRTM data and they all say the same thing. Updated SRTM data for Australia is too expensive.

And off we go again {sigh}

I understand X-Plane wants to have this kind of approach to mesh in general, but the mountains in Rio de Janeiro, which I look at every time I go to my balcony, have nothing rocky looking about them, just beautiful and smooth looking without sharp edges. If FS Global looked like that, oh man, I wouldn't have purchased it.The thing is expensive I think is the developer working with the data. It makes a difference between a freeware mesh and a FSGlobal mesh where the people know exactly what to do to achieve the best outcome. Unfortunately for Brazil, SRTM is the best we have, I've been told by the FSGlobal Developer ASTER has nothing high resolution about it, it's full of errors, and shouldn't be used to make simulator meshes.I agree with meshman, if you add a 10M Mesh, like FSGenesis NextMap to X-Plane, and turn on runway follow contour, oh man... That would blow FSX out of the water. With the clouds, the fog, that would be incredible. I hope X-Plane is designed in a way that allows people to do that someday