FSX-MS For a VECTOR product purchase, 'ignorance' is not, 'bliss'....

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Since purchasing UTX USA v2.0 a few days back, that was the push, to put back all my UTX purchases into FSX.  I then upgraded each one to the most current version.  Folks, the old adage, that in some cases 'ignorance is bliss'...does NOT apply to a VECTOR program, and as to what database it derives its screen (injection) content from.

 

1. O.S.M. (Open Street Map)  an open source and free-to-use database.

 

2. Commercial and privately maintained databases, such as Tom-Tom (rtm) and its GPS products.

 

-------------------------------------

 

FSX (Pilot's) Vector 1.20 data is derived from the O.S.M open source database

 

UTX products, use the commercial database from Tom-Tom, with fee and license agreements in place.

 

What does this translate to, within FSX or P3D?:   Simply a world of visual difference.

 

Vector doesn't put half of what should be there in terrain and roadways injected into each sim, that any UTX product does, even the 'legacy' (less than v2.0 standing).

 

I am flying over Michigan, and am frankly stunned as to what was NOT injected, when using FTXVector 1.20.   Roadways..entire systems for that matter, urban, rural, highways, major, minor, rivers, streams, wetlands, all, totally absent. 

 

With UTX USA v2.0 (with database by Tom-Tom (rtm), it's ALL THERE....at the highest sim settings.   The immersion factor is 20 fold.  It's funny, in what you get used to....even if it is not an accurate depiction of the area you are flying over.   O.S.M. data for North Amercia is abysmal.  Only in Europe, does it try to come close to what Tom-Tom and other commercial databases have in their data resolution.  

 

Bottom line...(and yes, I purchased FTX Vector)...if you want the most realistic representation of the roadways, terrain features, blah, blah, that you KNOW should be there below your wing...in familiar territory...then there is a choice.  You need to purchase the UTX product that covers your area of interest, crank up your graphic settings to full...and go fly over every road, river, stream, and lake....that is there in the real world.  Even more so, with the new UTX USA v2.0  offering.   Even with my now running UTX Canada (legacy,  Canada has come alive with true-to-life detail, that was missing from only having Vector 1.20 supplying the injection.   To each their own, of course, and what you are happy with,...but in seeing once more (with my installing all my UTX products, based upon commercial data) I was 'ignorantly' NOT HAPPY with what was only, below my wing.  Now...'happy' is once more back.....

 

My 28 cents....

[xplanery 250]

Bottom line...(and yes, I purchased FTX Vector)...if you want the most realistic representation of the roadways, terrain features, blah, blah, that you KNOW should be there below your wing...in familiar territory...then there IS NO CHOICE.  You need to purchase the UTX product that covers your area of interest, crank up your graphic settings to full...and go fly over every road, river, stream, and lake....that is there in the real world.

 

Or get a photoscenery for that area and enjoy even more realistic look. I haven't flown a single flight in the US without MegasceneryEarth on since I bought it. 

 

Personally I see vector products as something that I prefer to use to enchance areas where I don't fly that often, to be able to enjoy decent looking terrain even in rural parts of Africa, Asia and South America. For that FTX Global is the #1 product as it covers whole world. 

[~Craig~ 10]

No matter what you may say about the data provision, the fact is, to my eyes, FTX Vector does a far better (more up to date) job of interpreting that data (free access or not; why is this the crux of the debate?) into visual scenery.  

UTX to me (even at 2.0) just looks too 'planted' on top of the textures.  To a degree I know the same could be said about FTX Vector but I think it does a better job of blending.

Also, it cannot be ignored that UTX requires multiple purchases of separate areas, and considerably more cost, than FTX Vectors 'once only' purchase, for the whole world.

Sorry, not a compelling case you have here on this occasion - as Yoda would say.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Or get a photoscenery for that area and enjoy even more realistic look. I haven't flown a single flight in the US without MegasceneryEarth on since I bought it. 

 

Personally I see vector products as something that I prefer to use to enchance areas where I don't fly that often, to be able to enjoy decent looking terrain even in rural parts of Africa, Asia and South America. For that FTX Global is the #1 product as it covers whole world. 

Yes,...FTX Global is a total 'must have', but unfortunately Pilot's decided to use an free-base database for their product, and when you compare UTX to it...it is glaringly obvious.   I am glad that Allen Kriesman decided to go with a commercially updated and maintained solution for his product line.  It shows, with each flight......why that was a good product decision.  UTX is now my permanent Vector solution. 

No matter what you may say about the data provision, the fact is, to my eyes, FTX Vector does a far better (more up to date) job of interpreting that data (free access or not; why is this the crux of the debate?) into visual scenery.  

 

UTX to me (even at 2.0) just looks too 'planted' on top of the textures.  To a degree I know the same could be said about FTX Vector but I think it does a better job of blending.

 

Also, it cannot be ignored that UTX requires multiple purchases of separate areas, and considerably more cost, than FTX Vectors 'once only' purchase, for the whole world.

 

Sorry, not a compelling case you have here on this occasion - as Yoda would say.

It's not about cost....it's about fidelity and terrain resolution.  If I can get a more faithful and true representation of the area that I fly over...then yes...I will pay for that specific area...and have superior flights....  This is not about money...this is EXACTLY about the information and database, the product draws from.  If money is the ultimate decision maker...then the user will go for the cheaper end-all solution, and not for what detail and accuracy, it actually depicts, as the whole.

[JSkorna 137]

Just wait until LCAmerica is released and then you'll be singing it's praises just as loud.

 

I live just north of Detroit and I can reassure you that my Vector is just as accurate as your UTX 2 is. I can identify every highway, mile road, major street, and side street as well. I can find every little side street that I have ever worked at along with each school building. I can identify the street where I grew up on and the street I currently live on. I can identify every street surrounding KDTW, my major home airport. Even the ponds that are a part of KDTW are shown.

 

Sometimes the bull factor is just too deep until the next latest and greatest comes along and then we'll all read about that.

 

My 1 cent..........

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Just wait until LCAmerica is released and then you'll be singing it's praises just as loud.

 

I live just north of Detroit and I can reassure you that my Vector is just as accurate as your UTX 2 is. I can identify every highway, mile road, major street, and side street as well. I can find every little side street that I have ever worked at along with each school building. I can identify the street where I grew up on and the street I currently live on. I can identify every street surrounding KDTW, my major home airport. Even the ponds that are a part of KDTW are shown.

 

Sometimes the bull factor is just too deep until the next latest and greatest comes along and then we'll all read about that.

 

My 1 cent..........

Nah...LCNorth America is only landclass definition,....and not vector data. In O.S.M. , vector data for North Amercia is lax...and this is a problem even in Xplane....  

 

One man's definition of B.S., is another man's definition of truth and what is....   The reader decides as to what to label it as always, Jim....

[Sbacchini 15]

You may be right when dealing with roads, in that case yes, maybe the data used in UTX is really much better. But that's all there is to it: roads. OSM, on the other hand, deals with the placement of everything, roads, trees, houses, farms, industries, etc. I urge you to go the OSM site and see for yourself the amount of detail that is available in some areas. Yes, the quality of the data is not uniform, there are some places where simply there isn't anything, but in the end run, for me it clearly is the better choice, something with a huge amount of details and with a community behind it that is constantly making it better.

 

And I have to agree with Craig, leaving accuracy out of the picture for a minute, UTX just doesn't look good, while Vector seems natural.

 

Cheers!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

You may be right when dealing with roads, in that case yes, maybe the data used in UTX is really much better. But that's all there is to it: roads. OSM, on the other hand, deals with the placement of everything, roads, trees, houses, farms, industries, etc. I urge you to go the OSM site and see for yourself the amount of detail that is available in some areas. Yes, the quality of the data is not uniform, there are some places where simply there isn't anything, but in the end run, for me it clearly is the better choice, something with a huge amount of details and with a community behind it that is constantly making it better.

 

And I have to agree with Craig, leaving accuracy out of the picture for a minute, UTX just doesn't look good, while Vector seems natural.

 

Cheers!

Cheers,  and as always, everybody's opinion is just as good as the one following, or preceding it.   I found that that with all roads as mere grey lines in depiction, you can easily lose it when it goes through a city or town graphic. With the encasement and shoulder treatments of UTX, that is most unlikely.  Also, the different roadways, their widths, all different within the UTX products, as vs Vector.  Yes...I respect that this is only my personal opinion, and that it will not be mirrored universally.   I am grateful that there is a choice to be made, as to what a user's final solution will be.  I tried Vector, and always found myself 'visually starved'.  For myself, I have now taken care of that matter for what suits me.  Other's M.M.V.  

 

Post Edit:  Yes, I agree with you about O.S.M defining building placements, but in use as a Vector product, this facet is not applied.  

[mmann 72]

For the places I fly (mainly in Canada); UTX Canada is so far beyond Vector it's embarrassing!! For road and trails on Vancouver Island, UTX Canada is beyond even FTX PNW. Want to follow the trail network in the Forbidden Plateau region? This can only be done using UTX Canada.

[Slayer 190]

It's too bad that there isn't a way to get updated vector data into FSX easily or that it takes full product updates to get any changes to OSM data. X-plane has tools to do it but I have yet to see anything for FSX or P3D.

 

If a vendor could make a way to just go to OSM , download the data you wanted and send it to your sim, the FS community would be more apt to contributing to the OSM project. I put in a lot of time updating the little town I live in here in Michigan and I can convert this and put it right into XPX....wish I could do this for FSX. Global vector is nice but the the old adage of garbage in,garbage out still applies.

[GHarrall 494]

i believe vector 1.2 did use commercial data for usa and Canada because of the very fact that the osm source material was far from good.

 

This was mentioned in the FTX vector sub forum

 

A quote from the developer (pilots)

 

" Last but not least the new dataset is the official vector dataset of Canada and proves to be consistent - just see the amount ot lakes / rivers / streams added in all screenshots I have posted so far."

[mmann 72]

I know that FTX PNW didn't use commercial data for Vancouver Island's vector and mesh; they used the no fee GeoBase data. Not sure what Vector 1.2 used, but it sure looks ugly in this area!

[klamal 282]

It's too bad that there isn't a way to get updated vector data into FSX easily or that it takes full product updates to get any changes to OSM data. X-plane has tools to do it but I have yet to see anything for FSX or P3D.

 

If a vendor could make a way to just go to OSM , download the data you wanted and send it to your sim, the FS community would be more apt to contributing to the OSM project. I put in a lot of time updating the little town I live in here in Michigan and I can convert this and put it right into XPX....wish I could do this for FSX. Global vector is nice but the the old adage of garbage in,garbage out still applies.

Have you ever checked this out?  http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/forums/scenproc.131/  Might not be quite "plug and play" so to speak, but it will do exactly what you're after I think.

[Slayer 190]

Have you ever checked this out?  http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/forums/scenproc.131/  Might not be quite "plug and play" so to speak, but it will do exactly what you're after I think.

 

Didn't know about this thanks for the link

[dave2013 1,123]

I've no doubt that UTX USA uses better quality data than FTX Vector and is more customizable.

 

Having said that:

 

UTX USA coverage area as a percent of total Earth land area = ~6.5%, Cost = $30

 

FTX Global Vector coverage area as a percent of total Earth land area = 100%, Cost = $59

 

With FTX Global Vector one gets about 15 times the coverage area, albeit at a slightly lower quality than UTX in the USA and Canada, for only twice the cost of UTX USA.

 

You can make up your own minds which is the better deal, but the answer for me is pretty obvious.

 

Dave