Hi guys,

I am thinking about getting TE (all west coast US regions only),  It is mostly for for all VFR / GA flights and at times tubeliners.  

What is the verdict on these products graphics/performance wise including load times (I know these products are like 70-80gb each) ?  I know in Xplane 11, these regions look amazing.

I already have the FTX regions.

Buy it or skip it ?

 

Thanks

1 hour ago, Skywolf said:

Hi guys,

I am thinking about getting TE (all west coast US regions only),  It is mostly for for all VFR / GA flights and at times tubeliners.  

What is the verdict on these products graphics/performance wise including load times (I know these products are like 70-80gb each) ?  I know in Xplane 11, these regions look amazing.

I already have the FTX regions.

Buy it or skip it ?

 

Thanks

Compared to MSFS,  not even close...BUT...they (the series) can offer you enjoyment, since P3D is a synthetic textured terrain.  I have Orbx TE Florida and enjoy it, but it does not even come close to the State of Florida using either Bing, or the 'other one'.... But, that is for that flight sim and is not available to the P3D user...

Highly recommended.  I run TE all up the West coast using TE WA, OR, N CA, S CA….& truly enjoy flights in this region.  I’ve got it running nicely on P3D v4.5 with no issues.  It looks fantastic IMO.  However, P3D v5.3 can time out with device-hung errors with TE, PMDG & EA when exiting out of VR.  So if you’re on v5, be ready to make compromises in settings to avoid problems.  

I have all of the US TE products, and all sit de-activated in my Orbx account. 

Personally, I found that watching the "tiles" align as I moved along very distracting (I only have a 1080) and that the colors were off, especially in the Southern California edition. Way too red, and areas that I know from experience look like burnt toast. I posted a ticket(s) with detailed screen shots but never heard a response. The coloration was very obvious to my eye, but your mileage may vary.

I would be interested to know what MSFS and TrueEarth GB for P3D users think of the comparison for the UK. Whilst the autogen in P3D is a bit limited, the entire package as a whole looks very impressive from even low altitudes.

Great feedback,

I am getting on PilotEdge and I want all the fancy graphic when flying low and slow.  Though will be using Xplane 11 for PE but every now and then I wanna fly my A2A birds on the network

  

2 hours ago, Howellerman said:

I have all of the US TE products, and all sit de-activated in my Orbx account. 

Personally, I found that watching the "tiles" align as I moved along very distracting (I only have a 1080) and that the colors were off, especially in the Southern California edition. Way too red, and areas that I know from experience look like burnt toast. I posted a ticket(s) with detailed screen shots but never heard a response. The coloration was very obvious to my eye, but your mileage may vary.

There was a response to the ‘red’issue a ways back. I believe they said the coloration was dependent on the source data. This can be mitigated through monitor display and nVidia adjustments but the downsideis it affects everything.

OK.

If that’s true, then Megascenery, both S and N Ca, had access to another source as their scenery is very close to the real thing. So, not sure what the deal was there, if there was one at all. I live with it.

Mark

 

Edited December 30, 20214 yr by newtie
Ed

2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I would be interested to know what MSFS and TrueEarth GB for P3D users think of the comparison for the UK. Whilst the autogen in P3D is a bit limited, the entire package as a whole looks very impressive from even low altitudes.

I have used MSFS exclusively for the last 12 months, but since 5.3 have gone back to P3D with true earth for the UK. 
 

I’ve just started my PPL training and find true earth way more realistic in terms of colour and being able to navigate VFR than MSFS.  I like MSFS but find the trees too dense around roads for proper VFR nav. 
On top of the above I also get to use A2A aircraft that still feel more realistic (to me anyway) than anything is MSFS. 
 

Cheers 

I bought only the NorCal region (where I live) and that was enough for me.  Way too red.  There are elevations in Norcal where that red is accurate, but they vary in elevations and the valley has nothing close to that red.  Also, the TE color didn't mesh well with Orbx's existing airports.  In the end I shelved TE rather than tweak the colors of my calibrated monitor.

9 hours ago, Skywolf said:

Hi guys,

I am thinking about getting TE (all west coast US regions only),  It is mostly for for all VFR / GA flights and at times tubeliners.  

What is the verdict on these products graphics/performance wise including load times (I know these products are like 70-80gb each) ?  I know in Xplane 11, these regions look amazing.

I already have the FTX regions.

Buy it or skip it ?

I really dislike landclass textures. Therefore, it's TE photoscenery all the way for me.

Yes, there are colour issues with the ground (overly red tone of Californian ground textures). As a non-local they don't bother me nearly as much as repeating landclass or mountain texures that look nothing like the real thing.

In TE, the cities look better, there are far more POIs than in FTX regions and at 2,500 - 4,000 feet, my P3D world looks very good. They're perfect for low and slow, rather than airliners. Yet, it's not impossible to use complex airliners into big airports near big cities—you just have to be willing to compromise some of the visuals to maintain an acceptable level of performance.

Loading times for me (TE WA + DD Seattle + payware airliner) are no more than two and a half minutes max., now that I've disabled Vector (not needed for TE areas).

5 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I would be interested to know what MSFS and TrueEarth GB for P3D users think of the comparison for the UK. Whilst the autogen in P3D is a bit limited, the entire package as a whole looks very impressive from even low altitudes.

I find TE better than MSFS for the UK, and even more so with the XP version.

TE uses a data base for trees and buildings, MSFS uses AI at least for trees , possibly buildings and other objects as well.

A human eye has been cast over the TE landscape and rectified issues. The tree database TE uses generates correct location, height and species of tree, its quite impressive.

I can’t fly over the Peak District hills where I live in the UK in MSFS as where there should be sparse moorland the MSFS AI has interpreted the low lying heather as tree tops and I have forests. Also an ancient wooden pole on the moor is interpreted as a giant wind turbine. The Human touch with TE prevents these sorts of errors and provides a more accurate colour correction of the uk landscape from the air.

Very insightful comments...

From what I can tell HD versions are not in P3D like xplane?

Edited December 31, 20214 yr by Skywolf

No, the XP platform seems to handle TE better and give better results for some reason, especially in the U.K. regions.

Califonia ares seems more evenly matched between P3D and XP though.

3 hours ago, jon b said:

I find TE better than MSFS for the UK, and even more so with the XP version.

TE uses a data base for trees and buildings, MSFS uses AI at least for trees , possibly buildings and other objects as well.

A human eye has been cast over the TE landscape and rectified issues. The tree database TE uses generates correct location, height and species of tree, its quite impressive.

I can’t fly over the Peak District hills where I live in the UK in MSFS as where there should be sparse moorland the MSFS AI has interpreted the low lying heather as tree tops and I have forests. Also an ancient wooden pole on the moor is interpreted as a giant wind turbine. The Human touch with TE prevents these sorts of errors and provides a more accurate colour correction of the uk landscape from the air.

The human touch is also evident in ORBX’s airports.

Jon,

Am I right in thinking that the autogen houses look better in XPlane when compared to P3D? That is the one main aspect of TrueEarth GB in P3D where I would like to see an improvement, as the house types and shapes are rather limited. As for MSFS, I wondered whether it might not be quite as good at rendering the UK as TrueEarth GB in P3D and XPlane. Someone on the UK2000 forum mentioned that the Porthkerry rail viaduct (a prominent landmark on final approach to runway 30 at EGFF Cardiff) is missing, and it made me wonder just how many other major buildings and landmarks are missing. The fact that certain objects are misidentified, and there are forests instead of moorland in the Peak District just reinforces my decision to stick with P3D for now.

Edited December 31, 20214 yr by Christopher Low