thanks holger. i gave the old files a big chance. so far so good:-)

Now that is a compare that is amazing-down to the tree with the missing leaves. Heaven forbid we are getting closer to reality...and Tingoose-you really should take up politics..your slogans pretty much match up.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Hi Thomas,I'd assume that any changes to the class designations are intentional. Ground texture plus autogen display in FS is an incredibly complex (and clever) process so everything needs to be finely tuned to work together as intended. There were a number of significant bugs in earlier Beta versions of FSX all of which, I'm happy to see, seem to have been fixed.Anyway, it'll be much easier to adjust and re-compile the existing land class files than hacking lclookup.bgl. It's never a good idea to distribute different versions of central files because then support becomes messy very quickly.For FS9 we have a good selection of spreadsheets and visual catalogs to help with picking the most suitable land class for a given area and I'm sure these will be updated for FSX or new ones will become available soon.Cheers, Holger

>I'm just astounded how you FSX appeasers are so easily>pleased. You play into the hands of the developers. Demand>more. If they had competition you can bet that they would>have come up with something better. You're far too easily>pleased!Why is it that you insist on trying to rain on their parade? Everyone has their own interests, those of which merit you no room to judge, at all. So please, leave comments like these out of the forums, as they undermine not only a resource, but also a game that many people respect and appreciate.Good day.