Made a city flying fps improvement...

Hi Tom,Great efforts, thanks for sharing. I like you want to keep the 1024 ground tiles, but don't think we need them for ai ground traffic, fishing boats and their specular reflections as well ..I noticed a couple of things (maybe its just for me) but the files are no longer viewable with imagetool or dxtbmp after the mod. (I could view them with xnview though) I also noticed that the DXT5 textures seem to get the alpha blended into them on the DXT1 conversion.(resulting in sort of an inverted texture with no alpha)So I edited your batch to change the coresponding DXT5 files to have the -DTX5 switch. Still the only way I can get imagetool/dtxbmp to view the files after the mod was to manually do each one within the gui and select the format & save accordingly.I did not get much difference from the change, but as a test I attacked the NAMW and Scenery/Global folders, (which both have alot more 1024/>1mb files than NAME) to see if I could improve that region. As I want better textures than FS9's 256, but don't need to read goodyear on the AI cars - so the purpose was to bring down both DXT1 and DXT5 textures that are 1024 to 512. (especially all the specular textures)I used xnview to flip/resize/bmp them into respective output folders (dxt1 & dtx5) Then I used convimx (same author as DXTBMP) to make the the respective dds files, dtx1 & dxt5. Hovever it seems that while convimx can do dxt3, the textures get screwed up if your select dtx5. So I made them dxt3's. I tried them as dxt1 w/alpha but the colors get screwed up.End result after all the screwing around (and I defragged when done):Longer load times (holds a 0 for a bit - maybe it dosent like dtx3's when expecting dxt5's?), and I actually noticed almost a decrease in performance. KSEA (very dense scenery) downtown was 19-20 with the mod, 20-22 without. Regardless its down not up, and made minimal difference regardless. I have a pretty high end rig and most of the sliders are to the right (Large/90/10/1/2xlow/vd/d)and I still have yet to see my 512 card use more than 300mb running FSX anyways. I still am convinced the perfromance issues we face has more to do with coding within the program, its contiunual hunting for invalid autogen, textures and thier locations, and a maybe just a few other things..Please don't read this as a negitive, but only as my observations in hoping once again a magic bullet (or part of one) was found for increasing overall perfomance. As seems with all teweaks, your milage will vary depending on your system config and FSX's mood at the time. Well here's to trying :-beerchug , I sure hope the patch is one.Best Regards'Garett