I will have to check out the NE coast of Scotland. In earlier versions flying up past Brora and Helmsdale etc. where there should be rocky cliffs, the field pattern simply spilled over the edge into the sea.

 

17 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@raymar, I would have been more impressed if they’d modelled Manchester EGCC - an international airport instead of an aerodrome with grass runways.

Those small airfields are best left to Orbx. Has Barton Bridge and the nearby Trafford Centre been modelled in good detail?

Was it not likely Orbx who did the small airports for them?

16 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I don’t know the finer details of how things are modelled. With some P3D airports the surrounding area is enhanced so I wondered if they’d done the same with this airfield. Seemingly not.

Barton Bridge carries the M60 motorway and is directly to the east of the airfield. It rises around 150ft over the Manchester Ship Canal so the area is deserving of detailed modelling. Enhancing the airfield without including those structures seems like a missed opportunity.

The airfield looks pretty decent. The motorway bridge and the trafford centee could do with some work to make it actually look like the real life counterparts- I believe it's just using generic objects for those at the moment. But if you know the area you can realise what they are supposed to be. This could be something a freeware/payware dev could look into, assuming MS/Asobo don't do it. To be fair, the Manchester area could do with a bit of an update. 

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by Zangoose

17 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

With some P3D airports the surrounding area is enhanced so I wondered if they’d done the same with this airfield...

Barton Bridge carries the M60 motorway and is directly to the east of the airfield. It rises around 150ft over the Manchester Ship Canal so the area is deserving of detailed modelling. Enhancing the airfield without including those structures seems like a missed opportunity.

M60 Barton Viaduct will most likely be there automatically generated and probably look passable as it's very conventional in appearance being essentially flat spans on supporting piers with no superstructure above the deck. The lift bridge might be there but I doubt the lifting columns will be. The sewerage works and rugby ground will be there for sure, but not sure how the AI will have done their 3D.

I'm not in a position to screenshot right this moment, I might do so if I remember. A comparative head-to-head vs UK2000 VFR Airfields is no longer possible as I've uninstalled the Horizon VFR Gen X photoscenery that would have rooted it into the landscape, but I don't believe Gary included much in the way of local landmarks? Perhaps you could provide a screenshot of the approach into 08 for comparison?

I do agree it's nice to have distinctive landmarks modelled that are visible during approach to an airfield. But one can make the "area is deserving of detailed modelling" argument for just about anywhere, where does one draw the line? How far out from the airport do you go? What do you consider important structures? 

I suspect the P3D airports you refer to with "enhanced surroundings" are payware addons. But what is being discussed here is an included detailed airport, it doesn't cost any extra. It's apples for oranges. If you look at FSX+P3D I don't think the included high detail airports had much any of the surrounding area done, although you would get landmarks in cities. In MFS you have full detailed aerial photography coverage for the UK with 3D structures generated from their footprints and mapping data, so technically the entire country is "enhanced" to quite a degree. Perhaps photogrammetry will arrive in the simulator for Manchester some day?

 

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by ckyliu

1 hour ago, FlyingInACessna said:

Was it not likely Orbx who did the small airports for them?

I have no idea as I don't buy the small airfields. Possibly.

1 hour ago, ckyliu said:

but I don't believe Gary included much in the way of local landmarks? Perhaps you could provide a screenshot of the approach into 08 for comparison?

If I had Gary's Barton I could but as I never bought it I can't, sorry.

1 hour ago, ckyliu said:

But one can make the "area is deserving of detailed modelling" argument for just about anywhere, where does one draw the line? How far out from the airport do you go? What do you consider important structures?

Fair point. I only mentioned it because the bridge is the largest in Manchester and is quite an imposing structure. London's equivalent is the Queen Elizabeth bridge spanning the Thames to the east of the City. If that's modelled then so should the Barton Bridge.

1 hour ago, ckyliu said:

I suspect the P3D airports you refer to with "enhanced surroundings" are payware addons. But what is being discussed here is an included detailed airport, it doesn't cost any extra.

They are. Not sure Barton could be classed as an airport with no tarmac runways. But I accept it's a freebie.

I hope Manchester Landmarks is on the list for Orbx because it’s needed for sure.

22 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 London's equivalent is the Queen Elizabeth bridge spanning the Thames to the east of the City. If that's modelled then so should the Barton Bridge.

It is not, as those who own a licence for MSFS can see.

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by Reader

2 minutes ago, Reader said:

It is not, as those who own a licence for MSFS can see.

Ouch! I trust that wasn't a dig at those who haven't bought MSFS? I prefer to wait until the multi-gigabyte updates have finished. Thanks for providing the evidence.

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@raymar, I would have been more impressed if they’d modelled Manchester EGCC - an international airport instead of an aerodrome with grass runways.

Those small airfields are best left to Orbx. Has Barton Bridge and the nearby Trafford Centre been modelled in good detail?

There is some truly exceptional freeware photogrammetry for Manchester which definitely has the Trafford Centre. I can't remember if it has Barton Bridge or not. The freeware photogrammetry for this sim is a little hit and miss, but this is definitely a hit - better than much of Asobo's offering. I appreciate you don't have MSFS yet but, if ever you do get it and you fancy some VFR flying around Manchester, come back to this post! 🙂

https://flightsim.to/file/2151/manchester-uk-photogrammetry-scenery

https://flightsim.to/file/2152/manchester-uk-photogrammetry-scenery-south-p2

EDIT: I'm tagging you too @Carts85, because it might just be good enough to convince you that you don't need Orbx to do any landmarks! 

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by mrfilbert

12 minutes ago, mrfilbert said:

 

EDIT: I'm tagging you too @Carts85, because it might just be good enough to convince you that you don't need Orbx to do any landmarks! 

Hi Filbert, I do have this and your right it is very good the only issue is the performance hit on my machine. The Google photogrammetry as nice as it is in Manchester especially it just takes too much of a performance hit on my machine. The Orbx landmarks for instance in London seem to effect me less. 

@Ray Proudfoot

The bridges, the sewerage works, the stadium are all there, even the distant hills of the Pennines. And you get the entire of the UK and Ireland in at least this quality. All included in the base product price. And I'm doing this with 30 fps on a PC with an 8 year old processor. Okay, so the dome is missing from the Trafford Centre, but that's about all I can fault from altitude.

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by ckyliu

4 minutes ago, ckyliu said:

 

The bridges, the sewerage works, the stadium are all there, even the distant hills of the Pennines. And you get the entire of the UK and Ireland in at least this quality.

Thank you. 👍

3 hours ago, FlyingInACessna said:

Was it not likely Orbx who did the small airports for them?

IIRC, Gaya and Asobo handle the handcrafted World Update airports, Orbx just touches up the generic airports.

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by Tuskin38