Hi Fellow Simmers,Have 16hrs on FS10. Been driving flight sims for alot of years, this hobby is truly pricless with all the work put in by so many good people. (priceless also as I don't even want to know how much I've spent over the years)Anyways, I live close to CYEG (Edmonton), and mainly fly the mountains both on my CYLW/CYVR westjet runs as well as many fishing trips through the rocks and bush hitting all the small airports in between. I do NOT reconize the scenery. I have no clue where they got the textures from, but really, straight white snow for everything over 7500'. Sand intermediate. It looks rediculous. Go to Everest, it looks like a big snow cone. I know the default mesh is way better, but who cares when it looks like something spilt on it.Not bashing, please - don't get me wrong. So much new to like, I am happy to have it, and expect to spent another 500+ with FS10 too. I'm just disapointed I can't enjoy my usual ak/western canada from the word go. Rivers and stream elevation deviations I can live with, but not when there between to sandples with milk on them. Sorry.I'm a mountian bush flying guy, but I'll have to do it down under chasing giraffe's in my ultra light until some wonderfull person gets it fixed up. Some stuff you can live with (like most of it) - but textures are the color on the canvas. Its to bad outa the box it would have been close.Best Regards'Garett SchmidtAMD64-4800X2 (@2.8),A8NLSI, evga7800GT@500, Mushkin Gold 2Gig 3-4-3-8CYVR in bad weather 15-17, most of the rest stays at 23 locked.

I agree, the landclass needs quite a bit of work. I'm seeing quite a bit of sand and desert scrub throughout southwestern BC too. I tried using some landclass files from FS9 on the off chance that they might work but they didn't.

FS 9 land class files work perfectly well in FS X.However, ground textures have all changed, so the appearance will be different.In addition, land class mapping (that is, which ground texture is displayed by which land class value) have also been modified in many cases, so that there may be a different look to the ground.FS X land class is the same file as FS 9 land class, so any differences noted are either for the above reasons, or because one was using a third-party land class file in FS 9.Best regards.Luis

You're right Luis, landclass made for FS9 does work. I read your post and decided to try again, this time using landclass files from Ultimate Terrain for FS9. I copied the various LC*.bgl landclass files from the FS9 UT folders into subfolders in the FSX Addon Scenery folder, added them to the Scenery Library and lo and behold, much improved terrain! As you say, there are still some mapping problems and some of the textures look out of place but overall it's a significant improvement.Thanks for the tip.

Canada and Alaska Mountain range textures/landclass are absolutly horrible. Can't make it any nicer than that. Mountain Bush pilots beware, you will become unglued when you see.I spend most of the day modifying hard winter textures to winter textures for the mountains. Otherwise, all you see is a pixelated white for everything. Resized my existing fs9 001b2 textures to 1024, then dxtbmp'd them so can at least have a rock or two in the snow.The intermediate textures truly look like sand, but it gets worse - they get lighter/brighter in fall than in the summer? (081b2's)I give up.I don't mind changing a texture series or 2 to suit personal preference, but all of them is rediculous. And on top of that the landclass is terrible as you get granite bases with sand tops.The rural/town/city/forest and forest textures are greatly improved. Spending all day in the texture folder, I found there are truly GREAT new textures, but none of the mountain textures - are on the mountains? Someone definatly dropped the ball on the textures for mountain ranges, and it gets worse when you change seasons.My original post I posted two pics for default comparison, FS9 and FSX. The next 5 pics are of - Rogers Pass real, fs9 & fsx. The last two are near Lake Lousie, fsx default and after with renamed files and old FS9 ice/snow. To see the sand mountains, just cruise around between CYGE and CYJA, or most anywhere in the Canadian Rockies.Man I hope someone can fix this.Regards'Garett

Forgot to mention,I added the UT landclass first, and it made a big improvement. As there are many new textures in the folder, the old landclass wont be calling for them.I made my list of priorities.Lanclass Fix first.Complete Texture fix second.FSGenesis Third.Then add the planes and get them going. No point going to all the work of bringing planes in if you dont like the scenery.Garett

I agree. Flying around BC is an exercise in frustration now due to the prevalence of sand and desert scrub textures. As you say, it's particularly bad during the fall; summer and spring are better but the textures still don't make the terrain look much like BC. It's almost as though some desert textures somehow got mixed in with what should be mountain textures. Very frustrating.

Any third party developers catching this? I would pay pretty good money for good landclass improvements. I think it is the number one improvement needed in my book.

I have GEpro & UT Can/AK/USA and alot of Holgers work for FS9. Makes the sim "come alive". I just hope that the fsx landclass gets some real work done to it in this area. UT mainly revises the landclass for urban/rural areas - (to which I will add made a huge difference in fsx as Edmonton(CYEG), and the surrounding towns now have buildings. They were just flat prairie tiles with roads on them, but no buildings.)Holger, Chris and many others have done excelent work in these mountain regions in the past, I can only hope the workload isnt to overwelming. My money is waiting. (donations or paywear doesn't matter.) FSX might fix some of it, but I am not going to hold my breath at 35000' for very long.It would be nice to at least get it to my fs9 level at present.(sounds sad doesn't it) There are as said GREAT new textures in fsx, and mountains could truly have treelines, intermediate fallen rock, granite etc with ice snow caps. As all the textures are mainly there, but the landclass is shot.My main enjoyment in FS is doing the things that you should never do. Flying mountains in 2 mile vis, weather, wind, GPS only, etctrying to land that CS130 or GA with 1 engine on fire bla bla. Testing my abilities, not my common sense. Scenery, then flight dynamics, then sound, then cockpit make this adventure feel as if your there.Although discouraged at present, there are enough of us diehards around to hopefully get it fixed up. I just can't help but feel very little attention was paid in this area. Rushing? Most of these texture dates are only three months old.I have done most of the missions (oil rig was the best, the new bell is simply awsome), so here I am on the pad in free flight ... wonding if I should just play fs9 for bush flights, and use FSX for transatlantic crossings and metropolis flights.Respectfully,Garett

Hi guys,in regards to landscape enhancements, in FS9 it was mesh and hydrology & transportation projects that were needed most. While there's still room for high-res mesh and updated hydrology (e.g., in Canada) it does look as if land class files will provide the most obvious benefits to users familiar with an area. Also, the seasons file (which determines the switching dates for seasonal variations of textures) is now at the same resolution as the land class files and will need to be updated for many areas.Unfortunately, land class is also one of the most tedious aspects of landscape design because the available land classification data cannot reliably be transformed into FS files via automated procedures. Thus, the most accurate land class files will be those that have been manually made or edited and, at the FS resolution of 1 sq km per land class assignment, that takes time and effort.I intend to provide FSX versions of my freeware projects (and the payware stuff too, of course) but those won't be available for a while. In the meantime you could try picking the land class files out of my add-ons, placing them in a separate scenery folder (e.g., "Holger's FS9 landclass"), and adding them to the FSX scenery library. I'm sure I will have to re-map some of the class assignments but hopefully they already are an improvement to the default situation in their current state.My land class files usually start with "LC_" so should be easy to spot. Thus, in bcmeshp2.zip, for example, the files would be LC_016_014.bgl, LC_016_013.bgl and LC_017_013.bgl. Give it a try and let me know how it looks. Cheers, Holger

Holger, you are the man !Thank You.Here's what I ended up with for my personal preference (also shown as created folders and priority)1 BC enhancements for UT - landclass2 BC enhancements for UT - scenery (with your LOD9/10 meshes in it)3 UT LandclassCopied and Renamed (Backed up originals first of course) most of the mountain winter textures over top of the hard winter textures. This got rid of the white everywhere. (Temp fix)Thanks to Holger, I can fly BC with my eyes open again. A few minor issues such as the powerline/logging & ski hill textures are off, and you'll have to live with some double shorlines around Revelstoke and a few other areas. Small price to pay for the results.Truly it is night and day difference. Far from perfect, but lightyears closer than the default fsx. At least I can move on to playing it for a bit.Pics attached (see my other posts for before)Rogers Pass now, and a general overview (winter texture) to show renaming effects.Regards' (and Cheer's Holger)Garett Schmidt

Forgot to mention (again)Your can now add/delete/change priority in the scenery library without having to restart. Just alt to the menubar, select secery libray in options, make your changes - and it reloads with the changes. FS9 dropped it from the menu all together, its back and better.Very welcomed addition.Regards'Garett

Hi Garett,you're very welcome.The reason why I was talking about my land class files only is that I know that most of the other components of my landscape enhancement won't work in FSX without major adjustments. I've started working on updates for FSX though there are lots of projects to update so it'll take some time ;-)Cheers, Holger

Reading your other post about why, sound very probable. Questions is - will they fix it or will we have to. Ahh, ours will be better anyways ...Those following this thread, read here for more info about the textures and possible reasoning for why:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...id=359750&page=Regards'Garett

Reading your other post about why, sound very probable. Questions is - will they fix it or will we have to. Ahh, ours will be better anyways ...Those following this thread, read here for more info about the textures and possible reasoning for why:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...id=359750&page=Regards'Garett