Yeah, when you like to see 10 meter mesh you have to install 10 meter mesh... :-wave

X-PLANE default scenery.This is the Italian Alps http://www.global-scenery.org/italy1/pictures/Monviso_1.htmlMore X-PLANE sceneryhttp://www.global-scenery.org/index2.htmlCan we convert this to FSX format?

DEFAULT you say? I am impressed.Christian

>Hi there,>>interesting comparison but what you really want to compare are>a mesh file compiled at 38m (preferably from 30-m data) and a>mesh file compiled at 10-m based on 10-m data. >>Just changing the mesh resolution slider won't show you much>because it merely changes the display grid spacing (in the>foreground) while still loading the same terrain mesh, which>in default FSX is a 38-m mesh for those areas of the US (most>likely based on the USGS 1 arcsec data). The FSG 10-m mesh>files are based on the USGS 1/3 arcsec data>>I'm not saying that the 10-m mesh will make much of a visibile>difference, particularly in flight. I'm suggesting to make the>right type of comparison to come to a useful conclusion.>>Cheers, Holger I have read from two different sources that the Grand Canyon DOES have 10m mesh. Are you saying it does not???

Yes. That's the default x-plane installation.http://store.x-plane.com/cart.php?m=product_list&c=3

Hi there,indeed, it's 38m mesh (LOD10). You can check for yourself if you have the FSX SDKs installed. Load DEM0202.bgl into TmfViewer.exe and look at the View > Level of Detail list; it shows LOD10 as the highest res embedded in the multi-LOD mesh file.Cheers, Holger

>Yes. That's the default x-plane installation.>At least it is with the additional Global Scenery set, which is seven DVD's; but X-Plane version 8 is usually sold as a set including these discs. And all for a fair price.In my experience, both X-Plane & FSX, as well as FS9 have had certain advantages while flying across the deserts of the southwest U.S. Sometimes X-Plane with have more topographical detail with flat top desert mesas, and sometimes not. X-Plane also lacks detail with bridges, dams, and airport buildings. It's just still a compromise, and I still switch between these three simulations. Three pics: The real thing with very real colors, FSX as the sun is sinking, and X-Plane/global scenery. All pics are above the Glen Canyon Dam (Lake Powell), which is right next to Page, Arizona (KPGA). Note: X-Plane has a bridge when viewed from another angle, but it lies at the bottom of the canyon.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/171175.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/171176.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/171177.jpg

Some thing x-plane will never have is detail system modeling of addons. As a result, I am almost totally on FSX now.

So any one got that shot with the 10m mesh? I am interested in see a side by side comparison as I am thinking of purchasing fsgenesis for FSX.

>Hi there,>>indeed, it's 38m mesh (LOD10). You can check for yourself if>you have the FSX SDKs installed. Load DEM0202.bgl into>TmfViewer.exe and look at the View > Level of Detail list; it>shows LOD10 as the highest res embedded in the multi-LOD mesh>file.>>Cheers, Holger Thanks for this information. I'll have to check out the SDK. I'm surprised others have said it uses a 10m mesh. I wonder where they got the incorrect info from? I believe one of the mesh devs had stated the grand canyon was 10m on their site, and I also saw 10m listed in the FS Guide thats available for downlaod in the library.

The shots I posted of Mt Zion earlier in this thread are 10m FSGenesis Mesh! You can compare it to the OP's first pic which is of the same area!

Thanks to the guys who posted the actual in-flight images and the flight sim images. You have helped me realize what it was about flight sim images that don

Probably confused it from the designation LOD10Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Well I now know there is at least a small visual improvement by running the mesh setting at 10m, even if its on a 38m mesh, and I don't see a performance hit in doing so.