If anyone with FS Global Ultimate NG would be kind as to post some screenshots of the area around two locations, mainly the mountains around El Alto International Airport (SLLP) in La Paz Bolivia and the area around Rurrenabaque Airport (SLRQ) also in Bolivia.  I do a lot of flights in these areas among others in South America and I am wanting to see what that looks like.  There are several anomalies at these airports in Freemesh and I am wonder how FS Global Ultimate NG compares.

Hi David,

 

I wonder if these might help:

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/502044-some-images-from-bolivia/?p=3551654

 

I didn't post them here as I thought perhaps I might have gone a bit over the top last time. I'll apologise now - sorry  . I'd prefer not to attract a ticking off from the Moderators :Shame On You:

 

Regards,

Mike

Hi David,

 

I wonder if these might help:

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/502044-some-images-from-bolivia/?p=3551654

 

I didn't post them here as I thought perhaps I might have gone a bit over the top last time. I'll apologise now - sorry  . I'd prefer not to attract a ticking off from the Moderators :Shame On You:

 

Regards,

Mike

Thank you. At Rurrembarque was the airport in the flat terrain (like in real life) or in the mountains"

Hi David,

 

You beat me to it..lol

 

After I uploaded those images and then read your post again I realised that I may not have answered that question. Unfortunately Rurrembarque airport is perched on a plateau. I tried correcting it with the FTX AEC tool but, sadly, no joy. It appears to be sitting just within the edge of the mountain range.

 

Regards,

Mike

Are current Ultimate NG users setting their Mesh at 1 meter or 5 m ?   I have mine at 5 per the standard suggestion for setting up P3D and given that higher settings impact both GPU and CPU.  I ran a few tests and did not notice any difference.

Are current Ultimate NG users setting their Mesh at 1 meter or 5 m ?

1 meter, as per PILOT's recommendations. Can't say I've noticed any downside performance wise. However, I very much doubt that all their Global Mesh coverage is at 1 meter resolution. It's quite likely that I may not have flown into such an area as yet. I believe P3D will use the highest available so it doesn't make much sense to me to set the slider larger than 1 meter and lose out when the 1 meter stuff actually appears.

 

Regards,

Mike

PILOT'S GesmbH have just released a new video:

 

 

Mike

Does it solve the issue nearby the Ataturk airport in Istanbul (LTBA)?

Thanks.

Hi Wanthuyr,

I'm not familiar with the area, but I have posted a couple of images below for you to examine.

The first image is the 'BEFORE' situation (How LTBA appears with FSGUNG installed):


Registered owners of FSGUNG have access to a Airport Flattening Mesh utility called AFM2 which is currently in public Beta. (Login to your PILOT'S account, select My Downloads, select Downloads Folder and then Show Downloads).

You simply insert the ICAO code of the affected airport into AFM and then click 'Install'.

This is how LTBA appears after AFM2 has been applied:


Now, many users will already be familar with ORBX's FTX Global Vector Configuration Tool which includes the AEC (Airport Elevation Corrections) module.

This is how LTBA appears after corrections have been enabled by AEC:


To me, these images suggest that the AEC correction for LTBA provides the best compromise 'solution' but, as I said, I am not familiar with the topography around LTBA. I could be wrong, perhaps there are cliffs around the shoreline, in which case AFM2 provides the better result. However, FSGUNG is assumed to be pretty accurate so this seems unlikely to be true.

Whatever tool we use, the results will frequently be less than perfect. It's just the nature of the beast, how Microsoft dealt with airport elevations all those years ago and the side effects created by the use of high resolution terrain elevation mesh. The idea behind tools like AFM2 and AEC is that we have an easy way to apply corrections as and when we find airports that need them. Then we can decide what to keep and, indeed, whether a correction is unnecessary and can live with the default. Really all depends on what you feel you can live with, I suppose.

Hope this has been of some help to you.

Regards,
Mike

Dear Mike, thank you so much for your nice response, it really helped to have an idea how this new version makes things in that area.
It seems to be a good improvement over other two solutions I tried before (one freeware and one previous version of this). The other two I tried, created some serious anomalies around the airport, mainly the brown area that can be seen in your pics (behind the terminals) and also by the right part of the green area, beside the runway end in the right. I saw large depression holes in these areas, with floating autogen and other wrong stuff. I agree that AEC seems to be the "best" option in this case, because as far as I can recall there´s no cliff next to the sea, at least not as pronounced as it appears in one of the pics.

Hi Wanthuyr,

 

You are most welcome :smile:

 

I came across this aerial shot of LTBA:

 

Not a cliff in sight.

 

Regards,

Mike

Fantastic shots! 

 

*edit : whoops. That was for a previous series of screens one page back.