57 minutes ago, Noooch said:

Is it normal the airports's (LFMN) beacon is visible that far away? Isn't that cheating?

Good catch. We are off Théoule, Nice is about 25 km away.  The airport beacon could maybe be seen, I have my doubts for the runway PAPI.

2 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

Good catch. We are off Théoule, Nice is about 25 km away.  The airport beacon could maybe be seen, I have my doubts for the runway PAPI.

This is a concern I have since the Figari mini-video a few months ago.

The runway stands out way too much in the landscape, this is an unfortunate legacy from FSX I am afraid, and so is the airport beacon.

This is an immersion breaker and feels like we are cheating, I don't like that at all. This is a real shame after all the effort Asobo made to achieve this amazing simulator in term of visuals.

I was hoping Asobo would have made something about it, but it seems they didn't.

4 hours ago, Noooch said:

Is it normal the airports's (LFMN) beacon is visible that far away? Isn't that cheating?

 

3 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

Good catch. We are off Théoule, Nice is about 25 km away.  The airport beacon could maybe be seen, I have my doubts for the runway PAPI.

Not sure about air nav-charts but marine/nautical charts show how far away the light is visible. For example the light on Cap D'Antibes is visible from 9 miles or 14km at sea level. ([TR OC(3) WRG 12S 13/9M] Green occulting light with a period of 12 seconds and a range of 9 miles)

Tried to see if there is any light info on a marine chart but sadly no info. It would be interesting to see if there are any air charts with listed distances of lights somewhere??? Who knows the light may just be visible at that distance, especially as the scene itself is a little gloomy.

1 hour ago, Noooch said:

This is a concern I have since the Figari mini-video a few months ago.

The runway stands out way too much in the landscape, this is an unfortunate legacy from FSX I am afraid, and so is the airport beacon.

This is an immersion breaker and feels like we are cheating, I don't like that at all. This is a real shame after all the effort Asobo made to achieve this amazing simulator in term of visuals.

I was hoping Asobo would have made something about it, but it seems they didn't.

Hopefully this is not the case but yes the FSX runways one can spot in the middle of a CATIII IFR, are hopefully not reproduced here.

four years ago when I moved from FSX to the other simulator, I was sweating during the first few flights while looking for the runways with casual VFR conditions. This is for sure the case in real life too in such conditions.

 

10 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

Hopefully this is not the case but yes the FSX runways one can spot in the middle of a CATIII IFR, are hopefully not reproduced here.

four years ago when I moved from FSX to the other simulator, I was sweating during the first few flights while looking for the runways with casual VFR conditions. This is for sure the case in real life too in such conditions.

 

On that approach, the thin layer of clouds makes the lights fade a little, so I guess you won't see anything on a CATIII approach.

Just now, Matt Barraud said:

 

Not sure about air nav-charts but marine/nautical charts show how far away the light is visible. For example the light on Cap D'Antibes is visible from 9 miles or 14km at sea level. ([TR OC(3) WRG 12S 13/9M] Green occulting light with a period of 12 seconds and a range of 9 miles)

Tried to see if there is any light info on a marine chart but sadly no info. It would be interesting to see if there are any air charts with listed distances of lights somewhere??? Who knows the light may just be visible at that distance, especially as the scene itself is a little gloomy.

LFMN charts have nothing on that. 

I wonder whether an ATC guy like @ryanbatcund has an opinion on the matter. Ryan ?

19 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

Hopefully this is not the case but yes the FSX runways one can spot in the middle of a CATIII IFR, are hopefully not reproduced here.

four years ago when I moved from FSX to the other simulator, I was sweating during the first few flights while looking for the runways with casual VFR conditions. This is for sure the case in real life too in such conditions.

 

Exactly. And the Figari clip is not the only one.

If you take a look at every single airport in MSFS, even in the last "Airports" video (KMIA,YBAS,SBGL...) you will see the runway markings are excessively bright and cartoonish. No work has been done on that.

 

Edited April 25, 20206 yr by Noooch

42 minutes ago, Noooch said:

Exactly. And the Figari clip is not the only one.

If you take a look at every single airport in MSFS, even in the last "Airports" video (KMIA,YBAS,SBGL...) you will see the runway markings are excessively bright and cartoonish. No work has been done on that.

 

Yes FSX polygon/vector shapes with a texture stand out a lot, I hope MSFS textured polygons do not have the same issue. But Asobo's engine should take care of that. Unless the airport hard surfaces have a different treatment... 

Well I opened XP11.5b4 Vulkan and positioned the aircraft at the same spot with different weather conditions with the default scenery. When it's overcast, the runway lights are visible from far a distance... As for the PAPIs we need to be on final to start spotting them and their status. 

In non overcast conditions, spotting the runways in XP is a challenge. When overcast is set, the runway lights are automatically on, it becomes easier...

But without any doubt MSFS looks way more realistic overall but yes, the lights + textured polygons vs distance could be something to finetune.  

Despite the lights guiding me on the right path in MSFS more than they should 🙂 I can see how true to life it looks compared to XP11.

Edited April 25, 20206 yr by Claviateur

4 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

I can see how true to life it looks compared to XP11.

No doubt about that. Amazing comparaison job thanks!

South of Marrakesh, Morocco

Trout Lake WA, USA

Wow, that last one... look at the trees, water and the mountain. 😍

Edited April 28, 20206 yr by MaVe64

Great work as always @Shack95. Looking at that last one, I like that the AI has taken some liberties with the placement of trees along the road. I think it adds to the scene nicely. Saying that, has that road been rendered as a dirt road or just left the satellite imagery as-is? I thought Asobo were doing some road replacement. I guess that's one of the hardest bits to make guesses on as something which is a thin grey line could be hundreds of things and not necessarily a road.

3 minutes ago, tronied said:

Great work as always @Shack95. Looking at that last one, I like that the AI has taken some liberties with the placement of trees along the road. I think it adds to the scene nicely. Saying that, has that road been rendered as a dirt road or just left the satellite imagery as-is? I thought Asobo were doing some road replacement. I guess that's one of the hardest bits to make guesses on as something which is a thin grey line could be hundreds of things and not necessarily a road.

Yes I find it stunning the AI knows it's a road and makes a slightly elevated roadside bank along it. It's totally flat on the google earth image.

55 minutes ago, tronied said:

has that road been rendered as a dirt road or just left the satellite imagery as-is? I thought Asobo were doing some road replacement. I guess that's one of the hardest bits to make guesses on as something which is a thin grey line could be hundreds of things and not necessarily a road.

That's hard to tell indeed. In reality it's a tarred road. But I agree, it looks stunning nonetheless.