Bringing FSX/ORBX landclass to X-Plane

[Jimmy RFR 406]

 

 

Magically produce ORBX regions from OSM data. Basically, if you give it garbage, you'll get garbage back out. You'll need good data (I think ORBX place each landclass tile by hand)

 

I believe nowadays they start with an import of vector data, and then edit LC tiles by hand to reduce repetition and increase accuracy.  They then add vector/polygon areas for smaller towns/cities and such (which makes for much more accurate small town placement / borders, but the lack of blending can be very noticeable).  They also do vector/polygon landclass placement for smaller features as well. The exact method varies depending on the region and who created it, and when it was originally done.  I've noticed what looks like a few different strategies across the range of their regions.

 

My experiments (in FSX) involved importing GIS landclass data, and first creating generic LC tile scenery based on averaged colour maps, and then creating layers of vector scenery such as forests and grassland to overlay it.  I found the end result in some areas far surpassed Orbx, but if I tried to get too detailed in vector based landclass assignments, the lack of blending made things look too cluttered.

 

Just a note - Canada has extremely top notch GIS and landclass info available for free, which makes it great for experimentation like this.

 

 

 

XP works in 1x1˚ tiles. You can't, for example, make a small mesh to cover the area around the airport. You have to create and redistribute the entire 1x1˚ tile. This IMO is a big limitation which limits the creativity of many people when creating airports, and is likely why we don't see the same quality of airports as we do in FSX. It's also a limitation for people creating photoimagery as you have to distribute on the 1x1 borders, which makes many countries impossible to do without doing parts of the neighbouring country. AFAIK, FSX doesn't have this limitation as the mesh is calculated and drawn around the aircraft as you fly

 

Although it's a negative for scenery creation, it's a major plus for display - the fact that XP has all the scenery in a 1x1 tile pre-rendered is precisely why it's so wonderful to fly in the mountains.  In FSX, you can always see low resolution mesh in the distance that 'pops' into higher detail as you get closer.  The same with textures; the textures on mountains are always nice and crisp in XP, whereas in FSX they are low resolution until you approach.  Just my opinion, but once you get used to flying mountainous terrain in XP, it's very hard to go back to FSX, even with FTX regions installed.

[tonywob 4,768]

 

 

Just a note - Canada has extremely top notch GIS and landclass info available for free, which makes it great for experimentation like this.

 

Do you mean CanVec? I think HD Mesh v3 is already using this data, and it's being imported into OSM (slowly!)

[Jimmy RFR 406]

Do you mean CanVec? I think HD Mesh v3 is already using this data, and it's being imported into OSM (slowly!)

 

CanVec is pretty impressive for sure.  It's amazing just how many layers of data is in those files.  However, I'm trying to recall which government site I found my land classification data as per detailed land use.  I'm sure it was a provincial site, not federal.

 

It's awesome to hear that the CanVec data is being integrated into OSM!

[alpilotx 505]

Do you mean CanVec? I think HD Mesh v3 is already using this data, and it's being imported into OSM (slowly!)

Correction ... HD Mesh Scenery v3 uses this for landclass:

• Land Cover, circa 2000-Vector (but I have the rasterized version in use)

For all of my processing I still use rasterized landclass data, as that is how my tool (the Laminar internal scenery generator ... but effectively very similar to MeshTool) processes landclass data on the big scale. But neither did I see big drawbacks, as usually I tend to use it at raster resolutions between 50-100m which is usually quite good.

 

And CanVec is "only" used for the water features (which are still - by far - not fully imported in OSM ... and thus are quite patchy) in Canada.

 

You can go to this screenshot album to see a lot of Canadian screenshots made with HD Mesh Scenery v3 (look at the "caption" to see which were made in Canada):

• https://picasaweb.google.com/101666907909842492197/HDMeshSceneryV3FINAL

 

By the way ... that data I use for all my HD / UHD Mesh is no secret .... there is a complete list on the download page:

• http://www.alpilotx.net/downloads/x-plane-10-hd-mesh-scenery-v3/#Data-Sources-Acknowledgments

[Oliver Ooi 85]

 

 

Remember that FSX and X-Plane have quite different methods of dealing with the mesh. At the moment you can't simply draw a small piece of mesh and then have that mesh appear in XP, here are some differences..........

 

Thank you for your detail explanation. I really hope your landclass tech success and works in XP10. There are just so many areas in XP scenery world that need improvement, and these areas lack OSM data and photoreal scenery.

[mroe 1]

... after reading about the issues and possible solutions with landclasses, tiles,and annotated objects ,

i wonder , would  AG-Points (.agp) help here ?

http://developer.x-plane.com/?article=x-plane-10-autogen-scenery-file-format

AGP's are meant as 'mini sceneries' with surface texture , objects, vegetation , facades.
So far i can see , with a texture 1024x1024 at ZL 17  you can build  a 1km² tile .

Only a thought . Don't know if this makes sense in this context.

[tonywob 4,768]

You could use AGP points this way, and it's basically the same idea. The only difference is that the AGP point and texture would be draped over the existing mesh and would probably run really slowly (Like if you use too many draped textures).

[mroe 1]

Hi Tony,

 the loading of a lot of terrain textures seems also a big  load.

XP's Scenery engine draws every object in a .agb or .ags this way.
Hundreds of thousands in a dsf-tile.
This is possible due reusing the texture and object instancing.
Variation comes from ' library tricks.'

But as i said only a thought.

[mtaxp 666]

An un-related question though but I'll ask..

 

Tony , do you have any plans for covering Latvia?

It seems like Riga for example has a neat coverage in OSM.

And Air Baltic has a 737-300 so with the IXEG it'll be a great destenation

[tonywob 4,768]

I'm looking forward to flying the IXEG with a Norwegian Airlines livery :-)

 

Anyway, for me to do a W2XP pro region, there are three criteria:

• Good free data. I'm not just talking about OSM here, but consistent coverage of data I can legally use. Normally from government sites
• It has to be somewhere where people will want to fly. I put a large amount of effort into Denmark and it has the most detailed data available. But, not many people actually want to fly there as the terrain is mostly flat farmland.
• Have either good photoimagery available, or good mesh coverage by AlpilotX.

Here are the ones I have on my list to do:

• New Zealand. Legally, the photoimagery can also be distributed, so I might try and get the community together to help setup a server. This will be a region like Norway Pro (semi autogen), but with detailed cities. Plus NZ is such a scenic country like Norway (I'm going back there in May, and I already can't wait )
• Sweden. I have this mostly done, but the problem is the data is missing the mountainous terrain bordering Norway, so it may not happen, or only be a partial scenery.

Regarding Latvia, if the data is already in OSM then just use the scenery from Simheaven for now (Although the building theme won't match). I don't remember seeing any opendata for Latvia, and I often hunt around.

[alpilotx 505]

New Zealand. Legally, the photoimagery can also be distributed, so I might try and get the community together to help setup a server. This will be a region like Norway Pro (semi autogen), but with detailed cities. Plus NZ is such a scenic country like Norway (I'm going back there in May, and I already can't wait )

Tony, let me know before you go for that ... you know, I already did once NZ Pro ( http://www.alpilotx.net/downloads/x-plane-10-new-zealand-pro/ ) many years ago and I was thinking about "refreshing" it one day (well, I don't mean to do it immediately but somewhere in the future it might be interesting). NZ Pro is already in many ways similar to Norway Pro (was one of the few times that I created my own, additional artwork / objects) ... but of course, with better building data, it could be further improved ;-)

[tonywob 4,768]

Thanks Andras, I will do. I mainly want to localise the autogen artwork, and import some of the cities. I think there are also address points that could be used, but they're not as accurate as Norway, but any data is good data. You already did a great job here with the mesh (I was comparing it to LINZ photoimagery, and the forests, shrubland etc are all spot on)

[alpilotx 505]

Thanks Andras, I will do. I mainly want to localise the autogen artwork, and import some of the cities. I think there are also address points that could be used, but they're not as accurate as Norway, but any data is good data. You already did a great job here with the mesh (I was comparing it to LINZ photoimagery, and the forests, shrubland etc are all spot on)

Well NZ Pro was already mostly based on LINZ data (of course, on the newest data at that time). I used a lot from it. For example landclass was a mixture of the New Zealand LCDB data and some additional classes merged in from LINZ (rasterized). And then I also used most of their vector data .... like roads, railroads, powerlines, water ... but also a lot of overlay stuff like the treelines, or house locations, powerstations, lighthouses, churches etc. etc. ... Thats why I would see it quite similar to Norway Pro. I think NZ Pro was already quite good in rural areas, but its greatest shortcoming was/is the cities (thats where you might do a better job with your tech :smile: ).

 

Nevertheless ... if I would (and I am not even in a planning phase - so no hurry) work on NZ again one day, I would at least redo the mesh (likely maybe at UHD quality) with a bit improved landclass and improved waters.

[nikaslan 9]

Hey, we better leave the two guys that transformed XP do their stuff together, shouldn't we? 

I'm drooling over a UHD NZ Pro ...

[alpilotx 505]

Hey, we better leave the two guys that transformed XP do their stuff together, shouldn't we? 

I'm drooling over a UHD NZ Pro ...

Mind you: this is not something I am already actively working on ... its just on my "agenda", and I look at it some times when I have really nothing better to do (which I do have - most of the time :smile: ). So please, do not see this as an announcement ... more like a ... musing :wink: