35 minutes ago, David Mills said:

Did X-Plane ever get buildings at any of the airports? The two versions I purchased (9 &10) had none. The Vulkan version of X-Plane (should it ever be completed and released) will be the moral equivalent of the 64-bit version of P3D (v4) -- big hype before release but no discernible improvement in performance to the average user. MSFS2020 is the future. Face it! Enjoy it! Be glad about it! I am.

That amount of hyperbole in these forums will leave a lot of people disappointed.

Yes they have a ton of 3D airports! And a very functional G1000 thats a masterpiece to shoot approaches in🙂 The only thing missing is a more robust cloud/weather system.

Both sims will progress!  

 

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by strider1

15 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

I agree if we're talking about the world outside the cockpit. No question it's a game-changer, and the main part of that is shifting ortho-based scenery from local storage to online streaming. 

But let's not go overboard just yet. We still don't know anything about what happens inside the cockpit -- how the the aerodynamics, engine and systems modeling compares to FSX/P3D and X-Plane. There are simmers who care just as much, or even more about that aspect as they do about the world outside the aircraft.

It's way too early to know how MSFS will fare in that respect. They have a dynamite scenery engine, but the aircraft flying within that engine will have to prove that they're competitive.

Yes indeed, and my points are related to the World Engine of Asobo not the simulator as we do not know yet. 

1 hour ago, azulkb said:

this would typically include aircraft,

putting aside the fact that it seems not even technical measures make it possible for you to ignore and not make a spectacle of yourself

4 hours ago, mSparks said:

the photogrammetry is generally satellite lidar based, supplimented with aircraft only when better than 1cm accuracy is required. Although airborne is often less accurate (but cheaper)

Satellite photography is so worthless they give it away free. its the lidar/radar based photogrammy that has value.

But even that has some decent free sources now

https://gisgeography.com/top-6-free-lidar-data-sources/

Microsoft was paid $10billion or something recently to try and catch up.

Maybe the reason for this POS

Is they discovered they cant use the data.

Certainly if they cannot get Central Park right at this point no one should expect the rest of the world to be any good.

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by mSparks

Yes please let's say things as they are.

For now I sincerely think as a user and scenery dev, the best available to use civilian PC flight simulator that has, I think, the best simulation of various flying machines and a world engine that delivers fair (but not complete in every aspect) out of the box values is XP11 l.

I used FS since V2 all the way to FSX. And XP11 convinced me as user and scenery dev that it was the new gen.

Now without any doubt, Asobo's world engine, shown to the world at E3, is the new gen world engine... We can deny it with so many weird arguments but it remains a techno fact...

Now how MSFS will be as a simulator, I can't wait to see. And will we have enough tools in the SDK to create scenery for it, this too I can't wait to know.

And I must indeed stop answering the Lidar topic that is turning weirder and even more irrelevant....

2 hours ago, ludekbrno said:

Photogrametry needs PHOTOS, not a lidar data. It is not possible generate a 3D model of buildings without photos of every side, because it needs a textures. So again, photogrametry cities are not product of sattelites, but planes. Plane flying around and over the city, takes high number of shots from diferrent directions and then a special software make a 3D model of the city.

You are absolutely correct sir! The very beginning of the name "photo..." is evidence of that fact.

Reading this Wiki article describes the methodology of how the photos are taken from aircraft and or drones:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photogrammetry

or this article describing the process succinctly:

https://www.photomodeler.com/how-does-photogrammetry-work/

WARNING!

The next person that brings a discussion/argument about XP9/10/11 or Vulcan into this MSFS forum and threads may suddenly find themselves taking an brief, unexpected "vacation" from AVSIM.

28 minutes ago, n4gix said:

WARNING!

The next person that brings a discussion/argument about XP9/10/11 or Vulcan into this MSFS forum and threads may suddenly find themselves taking an brief, unexpected "vacation" from AVSIM.

I presume this is about me. Sorry but I was not promoting the other simulator at all...   But yes, fair enough, it's an MSFS forum...

I think it was more a warning to the other guy ;) 

5 hours ago, n4gix said:

You are absolutely correct sir! The very beginning of the name "photo..." is evidence of that fact.

Reading this Wiki article describes the methodology of how the photos are taken from aircraft and or drones:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photogrammetry

or this article describing the process succinctly:

https://www.photomodeler.com/how-does-photogrammetry-work/

https://www.jameco.com/jameco/workshop/howitworks/xboxkinect.html

Probably better.

Or Perhaps

https://spie.org/Publications/Proceedings/Volume/2313?SSO=1

As well as IR, you can use laser light (LIDAR), radio waves (RADAR), even microwaves and xrays - pretty much the entire EM spectrum.

Visible light is the least useful part of the EM spectrum for building a multidimensional models, but yes, you can use visible light as well.

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by mSparks

3 minutes ago, Noodle said:

A LiDAR point cloud is not photogrammetry.

SAR is not photogrammetry.

Stereoscopic imagery is used for photogrammetry.

You're wrong and you should stop talking.

Take it up with the authors of

Microwave Instrumentation and Satellite Photogrammetry for Remote Sensing of the Earth

I'm sure they will be more interested in your opinion.

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by mSparks

Sorry, the contents of that paper aren't available online without a subscription, and I doubt you've read it anyway. That title doesn't imply what you're inferring.

Regardless, I know a thing or two about remote sensing, OPIR, MASINT phenomenology, multispectral/hyperspectral imaging, LiDAR, SAR, ISAR, and image interpretation. Photogrammetry uses stereoscopic electro-optical imagery to determine feature height from multiple 2D images. It can use visible, panchromatic, or even near infrared imagery, but imagery nonetheless.

You're making stuff up and you should stop talking.

EDIT:

That title you posted is actually a volume of several different research papers. Some about photogrammetry, and some about microwave radiometry. At no point in any of the abstracts does it mention anything about using microwaves to perform photogrammetry. Which is a given...considering photogrammetry is totally unrelated to microwaves or lasers.

Read it for yourself:

https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/conference-proceedings-of-SPIE/2313?SSO=1

 

24 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Take it up with the authors of

Microwave Instrumentation and Satellite Photogrammetry for Remote Sensing of the Earth

 

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by Noodle

7 minutes ago, Noodle said:

Photogrammetry uses stereoscopic electro-optical imagery

doesnt require the use of the visible part of the em spectrum.

seems whatever you think you know you dont know what "electro optical imagery" means.

e.g.

Electro-optical MASINT involves obtaining information from emitted or reflected energy, across the wavelengths of infrared, visible, and ultraviolet light. ... Sensors used in electro-optical MASINT include radiometers, spectrometers, non-literal imaging systems, lasers, or laser radar (LIDAR).

You're just googling terms you don't understand.

Colloquially, when we say EO we mean visible to NIR. When we say IR, we mean NIR/SWIR/MWIR amd sometimes LWIR.

You can point to some academic definition of some all-encompassing term, but that's not representative of the real world.

We can talk about multi-static radar and radio interferometry too, but like the other parts of your silly arguments they have nothing to do with photogrammetry 

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by Noodle

25 minutes ago, Noodle said:

You're just googling terms you don't understand.

Colloquially, when we say EO we mean visible to NIR. When we say IR, we mean NIR/SWIR/MWIR amd sometimes LWIR.

You can point to some academic definition of some all-encompassing term, but that's not representative of the real world.

We can talk about multi-static radar and radio interferometry too, but like the other parts of your silly arguments they have nothing to do with photogrammetry 

but forestry photogrammetry does not generally use the visible spectrum since it cannot penetrate the canopy, so not sure what your point is.

Edited January 5, 20206 yr by mSparks

26 minutes ago, mSparks said:

but forestry photogrammetry does not generally use the visible spectrum since it cannot penetrate the canopy, so not sure what your point is.

That's NOT photogrammetry. You're talking about first vs second vs last-return LiDAR. I can't explain this to you in any more basic terms.

Photogrammetry used in forestry is terrestrial, not aerial. The cameras are at chest height above the ground. Oh, and it's experimental.

Stop talking about things you don't understand. You can't just google your way out of this.