I was wondering if anyone has purchased and tried USAwaters from FSFreeware, and how well it works. I thought I heard that Flight 1 was developing a similar package, does anyone know if it is still in development.

I decided to go and purchase a years Mapserver membership. So far I've downloaded all available waters plus some of the road packages. .Is it accurate? Well it's a lot better than MS default. There are maybe one or two things that I would change. For example, a few lake polygons very slightly run up the sides of surrounding mesh. Also, I personally find some of the road areas too congested (I have removed my "residential" road files.I understand that FSFreeware will issue updates to the released products in due course and they invite comments from users as to what they would want corrected.Overall I like what I see. I think it does quite a good job of covering some large areas. It probably isn't as good as something created using for example Ground2k4 but then again that takes time. Something most of us don't have masses of.

I just bought the package and it is an increase in reality.I have two shots-the first one showing a big improvement-the second showing a semi improvement.The first shows a shot from a flight I made to Cleveland Burke Lakefront this summer. Before this package-the accurate roads of USA roads were floating in the water. Now they follow the coastline as they should. Big improvement.The second is a shot of the small lake I live on. In the default FS there is no lake at all. Now there is a very crude representation-not like the beautiful and perfect lake Terrascene and Fly would have produced-but still a vast improvement over nothing.I am very happy for now until the next improvement.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/102845.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/102846.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/102847.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/102848.jpg

I just compared a shot of the Detroit River I took this summer with this package.Now Grosse isle with all its coastline, bodies of water is very faithfully reproduced along with a very accurate Us coastline.However, the Canada side of the river is not-and now Downtown Detroit is floating.....2 steps forward, and one back.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

So does anyone know how FSGenesis is doing on their Coastlines, shores and lakes. Also, same question applies to the company that released USA Roads, as I understand they are working on a similar project?

Howdy,as for the question about the Flight1 water package see this thread: http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_post...p?TID=9671&PN=1and for the FSGenesis/USA Data version see here: http://portal.fsgenesis.net/index.php?name...iewtopic&t=1784---Disclaimer: Anyone familiar with my own approach to landscape design knows that I prefer "complete" packages of smaller areas over single-element products of entire countries or continents.More specifically: Any FS water body consists of three different parts: the Land-Water polygon that outlines the water, the information tag that defines the altitude of each water polygon, and the shoreline texture with or without associated wave action. From what I can tell from the screenshots and various posts Raimondo's USA Waters package delivers only one of the three parts: the basic water polygons. Shorelines and waves are absent and all water is mesh-clinging (see http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...g_id=2232&page= ). Ray has stated that future updates will include accurate elevations and shorelines but I can tell you from first-hand experience that adding these takes way more effort (a factor of ~10 in my own projects) than the basic polygons. Thus, the word "update" is a bit of a misnomer, IMO, as the current product is incomplete.Also, anyone interested in these single-element packages should realize that they are inherently incompatible with any local or regional landscape add-on, which might well be more accurate. For my own projects, including Misty Fjords, I'm trying to make the file structure modular so that users can selectively disable water, roads, or whatever but that doesn't mean a different combination will work well. As an alternative, you might want to ask the developers of country-wide products to provide you with information for disabling parts of their add-on, so that you, the user, can make your own decision.While I always applaud improvements on the FS default landscape, from both a user's and a developer's perspective, these new single-element files have the potential to create lots of chaos and headaches. My suggestion is to hold off for a bit and see whether the developers deliver on their promises to provide complete and compatible solutions for their area of coverage. Cheers, Holger

I am morally opposed to spending money on something peddled on a site that calls itself "FSFreeware". I mean, seriously, these people are no better than FSPlanet, IMO.

I guess it all boils down to what you're happy with. If like me you like to see a better overall representation of the world but with some drawbacks (for example when flying over Misty Fjords I disable the FSFreeware scenery and then re enable afterwards. Lack of shorelines. Mesh clinging polys)then I'm sure these add ons may be for you. As I said, it's better. Not the best but better.Victor

Are Cape Cod and the islands in Massachusetts any better? Nantucket in CF9 is UGLY! But it looks like they used better coastline data for Marthas Vinyard.

Do I think it is a mistake to call the site FSFreeware? Yes.Did I aquire a memership? Also yes. Come on at that price (for the membership) if I compare it to other offerings it is a no brainer. I have downloaded all they have for Europe and I have made some extensive flying in Germany. The quality is absoutly convincing. Together with Lennart's textures, RT's roads and waters and FSGlobal mesh (which seems to have the same data source as it fits perfectly) for the first time Germany looks like what I see flying over it in RL.Alex

No price, however small it may be, justifies calling a place "FSFreeware", when you have to pay to get the offerings. This isn't about a dollar figure, it's about principles. I have no problem with anyone wanting to sell an addon. I do, however, have a serious problem when a place that identifies itself with the free offerings of user-developers, while charging money for their wares. I mean, to me, it's like saying "Free Coke! $1.00 a can!"

Well Jon;I tell you why the site is called FSfreeware !the site distribute freeware files free to all at not cost - at high speed - and no servers restrictions apply!we - that work there - have produce more than 230 - - TWO HUNDRED ADN THIRTY - FREEWARE - scenery - wich have been offering free of charge to the community - - unfortunately - there are people like you - that even after a record as we have - have the courage to criticise us.talking about freeware authors wich have left the freeware world - because ingratitude !! and i think i'll follow them soon !! if this is what you get back !!! no thanks!raimondo

Oh that's just so mature! Pack up your marbles and go home when someone criticizes you? Hey man, it's your hobby. Do with it what you will. I'm just calling a spade a spade, here. Avsim has a ginormous freeware library from which I can download at good speeds. Even FS.com, though with limitations, provides free downloads. If you're concerned with costs of server space and bandwidth, but still want to maintain that your site is for "Flight simulator freeware", sell ad space, or make Pay-pal donations an option. My problem with you doing what you do is 1) Are you making a profit from your sales?, 2) are the "freeware" authors making a profit from your sales? Seems only right that they do if you're using their stuff to support your site. Finally, back to the original argument, 3) If anyone is making a monetary profit from the sale of software, that software is no longer "freeware", and your site's name is a misnomer.Yeah, I know I should let this go, but I'm amazed that it seems no one else has a problem with this.

Hi Jon,the confusing name of Raimondo's site and his mix of payware and freeware has been discussed many times before. For example, see this thread: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...ing_type=searchHowever, it also has been stated frequently (including the listed thread) that Ray has contributed for many years and very generously to the freeware community. And many of us are thankful for that, which probably is the main reason that most people don't have "a problem" with FSFreeware. Cheers, Holger

Yeah, I know I should let this go, but I'm amazed that it seems no one else has a problem with this.Exactly Jon - the only problem here - its you.we and many simmers and also many authors wich are My friends - are just above this boring and now very antiquate ideas. ray