Lot of mesh problems in mountains (See pictures)

[G-RFRY 1,738]

The reason my main sim will still be P3Dv5 ++ is some of the wish list is still years away, fix the base sim will be first and the in progress. 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Here's a little background for anyone interested in the MSFS elevation data. Asobo created the elevation files in CGL format (Computer Graphics Laboratory). The files are located here:

<drive>:\WpSystem\S-1-5-21-1205754744-1098576635-1961144884-1003\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\Packages\Official\OneStore\fs-base-cgl

In FSX and P3d5, the elevation data is in an older style Digital Elevation Model (DEM) format.

As most of you know, the industry standard for GIS work is ESRI's ArcGIS, which is rated highly because it is the standard, not because it is the best choice for the money:

https://gisgeography.com/mapping-out-gis-software-landscape/

On the low end, Manifold GIS only costs around $100 US/seat, so that is a major factor in why a shop might use it. It is also full 64 bit architecture, whereas ARCGIS is not. ArcGIS has a somewhat lower priced version (~$100US/year) but that is for non-commercial use only. A GIS app might have to be used to convert the online elevation data to the format that a specific sim uses.

If you go to this page and scroll down to "Public Data", your will see the readily available elevation datasets:

https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/manage-data/raster-and-images/wkflw-elevation-part1.htm

The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) dataset is almost global in scale and is available for free online in a variety of formats. To update what Asobo did, one would have to replace the various elevation files in the above-referenced folder with data from SRTM or another online source and convert it to CGL format in a manner identical to what Asobo did. No doubt that Pilots! and others will be working on that as we speak. But the drawbacks are that the airports and any of the other MSFS geographic data are using the default MSFS CGL files as reference. Any elevation add-on could create the same problems that exist in P3d5 with add-on elevation packages. We could see sunken airports, floating buildings and lakes sitting on plateaus (Oh wait, that's happening right now in MSFS, but Asobo can fix that easily).

 

 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

I was going to add to my previous post one additional item, but I was worried that the Mods might have deleted the whole post because of it. Anyway, I'm wondering if the MSFS elevation data is encrypted in some fashion, so replacing it with a 3rd party version may be extremely difficult. I could be wrong about this, because I don't know a ton about file encryption. 

[Farlis 2,323]

Yeah, but SRTM data is hardly the best option for a proper mesh. It may be the cheapest, but it is also the one with the hightest margin for error.

[Shack95 2,667]

I have zero technical knowledge on elevation data, so please apologize if I‘m writing nonsense here. Guessing from the screenshot comparisons between MSFS and Earth View/Maps, it appears that Asobo use the same elevation data as Bing. This was also my takeaway from the Bing partnership video. My main concern is that Asobo can‘t update their data independently but are dependent on Bing for some reason. If that were the case, it’d be quite likely that we won‘t see major improvements in the foreseeable future, because, as the Bing guy said in the video, this isn‘t a priority for Bing‘s customers. But I could be completely wrong here of course. Anyway, I hope that some 3rd party devs will find a good solution. 

[Nyxx 6,994]

4 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

Thank you very much, nobody wouldn't have thought of that 😄.   

I was not talking talking you was I, smart...word not allowed.

Edited August 23, 2020 by Nyxx

[dmarques69 316]

PANC for example also as mesh problems inside the airport, we need to report this problems.

[richjb2 195]

Take a flight from Spirit of St. Louis (KSUS) and fly east-northeast towards Lambert St. Louis Intl. (KSTL).  Look at the Missouri River.  The bank of the river are elevated at most places by around 100'.  It looks like there is an entire mountain range northwest of downtown St. Louis.  The Mississippi River also has some elevation issues. 

I can understand the errant elevation issues, but this?  No version of any simulator (P3D, FSX, FS2004 & earlier, X-Plane, etc.) has messed terrain elevations as bad as this.  This is at major US city, too. 

Rich Boll

 

[Dominique_K 10,152]

23 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

 My main concern is that Asobo can‘t update their data independently but are dependent on Bing for some reason. If that were the case, it’d be quite likely that we won‘t see major improvements in the foreseeable future, because, as the Bing guy said in the video, this isn‘t a priority for Bing‘s customers. But I could be completely wrong here of course. Anyway, I hope that some 3rd party devs will find a good solution. 

In the FSX/P3D environment, the sharper mesh supercedes the coarser one. When you add the Pilot’s mesh , you just add the DEM files as a new scenery without deleting the default ones. To my knowledge the SDK chapter on DEM has not been released yet. So we don’t know the format and whether it is still the case. BTW a good mesh is made of thousands of small files which have an impact on the loading time.

I don’t believe that MS will do anything to improve the situation, why should they if they didn’t care in the first place  ? So our only hope is 3rd party. Business as usual.<sigh>. 

That will not of course solve the OP’s issue or the gradual morphing.

To see all these old hats back is disconcerting.

[Eddrik84 10]

I have reported this issue to asobo. If you go fly in Norway, these artifacts are everywhere.

[OzWhitey 3,353]

22 hours ago, Heli said:

They mapped 200 million square miles, and 99% of it is accurate.  I wouldnt worry about 1% being immersion-breaking. 

There are a lot of mesh problems in some parts of the world. Other modern sims don't have this issue. MSFS needs to lift it's mesh game, saying they got it right somewhere else in no way excuses this!

[Farlis 2,323]

7 hours ago, Shack95 said:

He’s absolutely right. Here are some screenshots of some of the most famous Swiss peaks and what they should look like. It should be noted that these are extreme examples, other regions look much better. 

 

 

Your post prompted me to look those places up in P3D with the latest version of FS Global installed.

THIS is the kind of terrain mesh quality MSFS should have had out of the box if you ask me. After all they are marketing this as the earth's digital twin.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/5cL6xP6jqiAikTA28

(I slapped a photoreal texture add-on onto the Matterhorn shot just to show how it could look like in MSFS if someone bothered to obtain proper elevation data).

Edited August 23, 2020 by Farlis

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/alot-of-mesh-problems-in-norway-this-is-everywhere/199020

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

https://www.msfsaddons.org/scenery

 

There are some community freeware fixes starting to show up, and they're pretty good too!

[Shack95 2,667]

I don’t know when it happened but the DEM in the alps has been improved. It now looks like in Maps App, before it looked like in Earth View. I noticed the same in parts of the Himalayas in August (around Everest and Makalu). Here are some comparison screenshots. Although it looks better now, I think it’s still far from perfect (or even good), but at least the hights and contours are more accurate now.

Eiger, Mönch and Jungfrau, Switzerland:

Before update:

After update:

San Vito, Italy:

Before:

After:

Edited November 27, 2020 by Shack95