what do you think of this sample (before/after) ?http://www.simforums.com/USARoads1.gifMichael J.

Whoa, Mysterious Michael! I think it looks incredibly awesome! What is it!?!? WHAT IS IT!?!?! Does it effect performance at all? Does this addition use the default textures for the highways and roads? It looks like perhaps not, but I'm not 100% certain.Cheers!Jim

Howdy,mysterious? Nice little payware plug it is: http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_post...p?TID=7494&PN=1The intersection does look pretty neat though ;-)Cheers, HolgerP.S.: I wonder how much in licensing fees they would have to pay to the original GPS data provider???

Hey, it's our scenery Hero Holger! :) Thanks for the link Holger. $30 to cover the USA eh? I still think I'd have to have it. It'd be an addon that would be way cool!Wayne's World, Wayne's World... Party Time! Excellent!!Cheers,Jim

$30, every road in the USA... sounds like a deal! (Being a student pilot for my PPL-ASEL I need roads! The default roads just do not cut it!)Happy Flying,Jason :-wave

Hi all.If TIGER data is used, there is no licensing fee involved. As far as textures, it would be better if they are not the default, as those would have problems with unwanted telephone poles and signs popping up in the wrong places. Edgar Knobloch, Christian Fumey, and I studied that problem a while back.Some roads will look odd, as they will cross the default lakes and rivers... no bridges, and the lakes and rivers are wrongly shaped and placed anyways. And the old roads will leave their flattens, unless you've messed with the terrain.cfg, or deleted the original road bgls.To make the US lakes and rivers would be a challenge, as elevations would need to be altered for each water body, and the defaults cannot be simply excluded because of the left-over flattens of the default lakes. ( The old road flattens will also have this problem, but are less noticable ). So the best recourse is to entirely replace the defaults with the corrected bgls, if possible.We argue this design problem every month in the scenery forum. It's nice to see the image, as it shows the possibilities. It's very cool to fly over your home area and KNOW where you are by sight!Dick

Maybe someone who knows MSFS scenery world better could answer this - what will hapen if someone uses non-default mesh ?. Are we ging to see roads suspended in the air in some places ?But no question it could potentially be an awesome addon.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

Hi,Free TIGER data is not used. It is not accurate enough. We are using very expensive Mapping data (more info on this coming). TIGER for example does not show each side of a divided highway. The data for this product will handle each side of a divided highway, so they will look very realistic.Textures are new also for enhanced visibility.

Hate to be the party pooper, but am I to take it that this addon is payware, or will be payware? If thats the case this post isn't legal as per the AVSIM terms of agreement.

Whoa Fred. The original post that started this thread was not from Steve or his group. Steve posted in response. This does not violate our terms of use.

I have been waiting for this for a long time-looks great!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Ah whoops. I thought it was. Just ignore me.

I am neither employee of Flight1, invested in them nor was I bribed or pushed to make the original post. As a matter of fact I still have pending unanswered question about this product.Michael J.

"And the old roads will leave their flattens, unless you've messed with the terrain.cfg, or deleted the original road bgls."I hate the FS2004 scenery system. The ridiculous default.xml buildings, billboards and lightpoles slow things to a crawl and cause problems with addon sceneries (and even default sometimes). Instead of using more accurate data Microsoft is trying to make their inaccurate data look good by creating canyons and flattens for rivers and roads, which remian even after you install third party scenery (Georender, Megascenery). I want more accurate scenery, not randomly placed powerstations that do not appear on the charts, cartoonish fast food houses etc.Now when it comes to the things that really matter (mesh, textures, accuracy), FS2004 is hardly better than FS2002 and in some cases, worse. Texture resolution is still limited to ~4.8m/pixel (lower than Flight Unlimited II back in 1997), and the max displayable mesh resolution is actually lower than FS2002.As for the screenshot, it does look good, but needs replacement road textures, badly. The roads "stick out" way too much and look totally unrealistic. They should blend better with the underlying textures.

> The roads "stick out" way>too much and look totally unrealistic. They should blend>better with the underlying textures.Matter of opinion. I really think they look very good and I have seen many roads from the air. When you see them in Arizona or Texas they will blend better but for relatively green North Carolina they could hardly look better. But maybe someone will finally tell my whether they will automatically be flattened over higher resolution mesh.Michael J.