January 23rd, 2020 - Development/Insider Update

[suncoastflyer 685]

2 hours ago, FDEdev said:

Yes, but still quite a bit of work to do here.  Like with Courchevel there are noticeable terrain inaccuracies.

These intricate little details could likely be left to scenery developers. It goes without saying that Asobo can't make every airport's terrain contour exact.

[ual763 361]

While it may not be as good looking as Courcheval (could also just be the zoom level), you can definitely see some great modeling of the terminal building at St. Barts!  If this is the quality of default airports, I am extremely satisfied.  This is enough to not make me waste money on an addon airport for an airport such as this!

[Bear242 68]

Birds are confirmed, holy cow, speaking of cows, can we see them as well, Kangaroos in Australia? Koala bears in the trees, drooling right now.

[Casualcas 830]

Curious ... the tree size is fine.. what I think it is, that the AI needs to better differentiate between trees and shrubs when looking at the underlying texture. That may be the challenge. I say give the AI a chance to learn. 

[carbonbasedlifeform 179]

7 hours ago, Baber20 said:

That first screen looks like its taken from offline mode.

A lot of places are going to look like this even in online mode. Bing gives you roof shapes and sizes, not the sides of buildings.

[XMAN 12]

In the airport pic arent the trees too close to the runway , your wingtips would be clipping the trees like all the FSX airports

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

9 minutes ago, XMAN said:

In the airport pic arent the trees too close to the runway , your wingtips would be clipping the trees like all the FSX airports

Runways are typically wider than the width of an airplanes wings, so I don’t think so.

What are all the FSX airports you’re referring to that your wingtips are clipping trees in? I’ve flown in FSX since it’s inception and never clipped my wingtips due to trees being that close to the runway.

[XMAN 12]

I guess im referring to the size of them in FSX ,,  for instance if you lose an engine on takeoff you will certainly not clear the 40 ft wall of trees that you see at a lot of the small strips

[FDEdev 955]

1 hour ago, XMAN said:

.. for instance if you lose an engine on takeoff you will certainly not clear the 40 ft wall of trees that you see at a lot of the small strips

If that happens your takeoff performance calculation was wrong 😉 

[rick celik 1,243]

2 hours ago, cmpbellsjc said:

Runways are typically wider than the width of an airplanes wings, so I don’t think so.

What are all the FSX airports you’re referring to that your wingtips are clipping trees in? I’ve flown in FSX since it’s inception and never clipped my wingtips due to trees being that close to the runway.

 

2 hours ago, XMAN said:

I guess im referring to the size of them in FSX ,,  for instance if you lose an engine on takeoff you will certainly not clear the 40 ft wall of trees that you see at a lot of the small strips

 

14 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

If that happens your takeoff performance calculation was wrong 😉 

 

I think what hes trying to say is, the tree sizes might differ in real life compared to in sim, the accuracy might be off... I tend to agree at some airstrips there are very high trees close to the runway either next to or at each end. If you cross reference certain strips with real life photos, it looks nothing like that, the trees are either further or smaller. 

[Nedo68 533]

7 hours ago, Casualcas said:

Curious ... the tree size is fine.. what I think it is, that the AI needs to better differentiate between trees and shrubs when looking at the underlying texture. That may be the challenge. I say give the AI a chance to learn. 

Ai plays a key role here, without it this would not work at all,

and it will learn and getting better, trust me, soon we will be talking about Superintelligence and not more Ai (skynet anyone? 😉

 

[Noodle 626]

I think it's been well established that the tree assets are generally too big. No reason to think this won't be corrected eventually. But again, I think we should stop and recognize what we're really expecting here: not just every tree on the planet, but every tree on the planet with the correct height.

Clearly the state of the art is advancing, and things are being done we never thought possible just a few short months ago. But perhaps we should have a little bit of tolerance for the possibility that correctly scaling trillions of trees might not be as easy as a snap of the fingers.

[Shack95 2,658]

12 hours ago, SterlingCrimson92 said:

Skint's first picture of the skyline... which city is that? Same question for LookedUnicorn95's picture! Both look great! 

The first one seems to be Tokyo. The second one is Brussels.

[SamYeager 244]

@ChaoticBeauty - I notice the article has been updated to show the next update will be 01-30. Are you still able to edit your OP?

[mp15 138]

San Barth is a very important airport and needs human intervention for beauty and similarity to the real life.