anybody know what the default resolution specs are for FSX?? mesh and texture?? Thank you.

For starters, here's a link to ACES FSX Art Lead's (Pixelpoke) blog with his explanation on texture resolution for FSX: http://blogs.technet.com/pixelpoke/archive.../21/417847.aspx DougDell XPS Gen3 (3.6GHz/540FSB) | 2GB DDR SDRAM | 74GB SATA, 10k RPM (C: ) | 120GB SATA (D: ) | 512MB ATI Radeon X1900XTX (Catalyst 6.9) | Audigy 2 ZS Sound | MS Force Feedback 2 | WindowsXP Pro (SP2) | DirectX 9.0c

Hi Dave,Terrain Mesh: 38m: US 76m: Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, sm portion of s Himalayas612m: rest of the worldHope this helps-------Justinhttp://www.fsgenesis.netHigh Quality Scenery for FS200x

so setting FSX mesh resolution to anything better then 38m would be completley pointless.

Essentially, yes, unless you have a third-party mesh that can take advantage of a higher setting, such as what you would find by following the link in my sig. :-)-------Justinhttp://www.fsgenesis.netHigh Quality Scenery for FS200x

Justin, I have been looking for you!! LOL. I got you. I have a big dilemma right now. I want to improve FSX but I don't know if I should just buy FS9 and improve that for the time being instead. If I can buy FS9 for $30 and get FZ01 and FZ02 and also 3rd party mesh addons like yours FSG that is free of charge to upgrade to FSX then I would be pleased. Or would you simply recommend downloading the freeware here on avsim library and then purchasing FSX when I am ready?? I just noticed the avsim library freeware as I started this thread. While you are here I mind as well ask you another question or possibly questions. Do you plan on releasing mesh that is better then 9m/pixel in the future with FSX?? I am new to this so I don't know if that's what you normally do?? I am thinking that the Vista/DX10 patch will really be needed here to think about 5m/pixel mesh or even better 2m or 1m. Another question: What is mesh giving me when close to the ground. I understand it's beautiful when viewed from higher altitudes which is great and I definetley want it for that. But, also I like to have high detail imagery when coming in for landing. Especially the airports and scenery around the airport. This is where FZ01 and FZ02 come in but I was wondering what they do that mesh doesn't do?? Is it autogen that is needed to see 3d buildings from that angle of taking off/landing. Sorry if I am confusing you but I am really curious how to improve graphics not only from higher altitudes (which it seems mesh is great for) but also lower altitudes. I don't like the flattened out look that I get when landing or taking off. For example FSX default looks fine from say 2000asl looking straight down but if I make my descent for a landing at say 500asl or even 1000asl everything starts to flatten out and I get one zoomed in image. Basically what it comes down to is I (like most people i would assume) am looking for a good mesh to fly over areas (say a flight from rhode island to san diego) all the way across the country seeing beautiful scenery and realistic ground textures/landclass, etc. That is what the mesh will do for me I am assuming. But when it comes to landing I want to be able to see a high detailed airport or at least good graphics that are 3d and not flat. I know FZ does this beautifully and I am sure flytampa and other ones do as well but it's only a select amount. I would love to have more airports to fly to with great scenery as I descend and near touchdown.

HiWhat is FZ01 and FZ02? Well, I dunno. I guess it's your preference as to what you get. What do you have now?I have no plans to release anything higher than the 9.6m, as there is very little source data available with a higher resolution than 10m, and if there were I don't think there would be much benefit to it, really.Close to the ground, ulta-high-resolution terrain mesh will give you added detail and a closer-to-reality experienceTerrain mesh is a simulated depiction of the real-world terrain derived from real-world data that is provided by the United States Geological Survey and other agencies. It isn't airports, or other man-made objects--it is terrain--mountains, hills, valleys, etc. It won't add hills and mountains where there aren't any in real-life. If you are flying in Kansas, for instance, it will still be flat. But if you are flying in the Appalachians or Rockies, it will add more realistic details.-------Justinhttp://www.fsgenesis.netHigh Quality Scenery for FS200x