Is there any explanation as to why some sceneries show textureless scenery features (terminals etc.) when the bmp files are in the associated texture folder, but show up just fine if you move the bitmaps to the main FS9/texture folder?

 

Where is the error (95% of sceneries don't have this problem, of course)? Can't find an answer searching the forums here...

 

Martin

Can you give an example?

 

Duplicate object libraries is the usual cause.

 

regards,

Joe

Well, I have had lots of examples over the years - this is definitely a known problem (not something I have just discovered) with lots of references on the forum (but no explanation, as I say). Some Readme files which accompany the scenery downloads even suggest moving bitmaps to the FS9/texture folder in order to have buildings (etc.) show with their intended textures.

 

The example that prompted this thread is 7524_UTAA-Ashgabat.zip (from the .ru 'AVSIM') - a pretty good rendition of UTAA. On my PC at least, when I move the bmps which begin with 'UTAA_____' to the main texture folder, all is OK. If they sit only in the texture folder which is 'next to' the UTAA scenery folder, just grey buildings. As I tested this, moving the bmps back and forward, it was 100% clear that the textures only show in Fs9 when the bitmaps are in the main FS9/texture folder.

 

Martin

Got any examples from this side of the pond, I avoid Avsim.ru like the plague.

 

regards,

Joe

I don't remember now as I haven't noted then down as and when they occur - and with 1250 entries in the scenery library, it's not.obvious to track them down now. Will let you know if I find any more.

 

I know the AVSIM name is a rip-off, but there are some great freeware sceneries on the Russian site which are not available elsewhere. Not sure why you avoid them like the plague (but your choice of course!). :-)