Greetings,I find it hard to believe that I am getting this look at a lot of airports (see screens).Screen 1 - Aspen Colorado - I admit to having auto gen turned off (can't stand the pop) but is this how the area around Aspen should look? I forgot to mention using FSGenesis and Xclass US.Screen 2 - Thought I'd give the Alps a try. This is more like it, and more what I see in FS9.Screen 3 - Anchorage, Alaska, back to the airports with the bare sections.Screen 4 - KORD - surprise! At least there is some grass or something there, but now that I think of it should it be there at a huge airport like that?Screen 5 - KONT - Southern California. All of the airports in Socal look like this. I can assure you this is not how it looks in reality.So, is it my system or does it look like this to everyone else in these areas?ThanksAT

Well you can use a landclass replacement like XClass but this won't get to every post in the world. There are some experimental texutre reaplcement packages around, you need to experiment and find what works. Enhance it with some better mesh. It's a hobby that requires patience. FSX out of the box isn't that awe inspiring, just like FS9 out of the bos wasn't that pretty. You gotta let the community start to do their magic. Default airports are always going to be a little rough.

>Well you can use a landclass replacement like XClass but this>won't get to every post in the world. There are some>experimental texutre reaplcement packages around, you need to>experiment and find what works. Enhance it with some better>mesh. It's a hobby that requires patience. >>FSX out of the box isn't that awe inspiring, just like FS9 out>of the bos wasn't that pretty. You gotta let the community>start to do their magic. Default airports are always going to>be a little rough. I mentioned above that I am using XClass and FSGenesis.

Screen 1: I have been there at Aspen/Pitkin. Colorado is a dry state. The shot of Aspen there is a little off for summer, but not excessively so. For spring there is usually some snow up on the peaks. It would look better with some autogen. And yes, the LC needs adjusting there, no question about it. I recommend EZ-Landclass...if I can use it, I know you can...Screen 3: FSX has two airport background textures (well three if you count the snow texture)--a green one and a light brown one. The color you get IS DEPENDENT ON THE LANDCLASS AROUND THE AIRPORT. Landclass tiles are set into two categories: Dry, or Wet. Dry LC = light brown airport background. Wet LC = green airport background. In places with both categories of LC tiles around them, you'll see a combo, such as at default MPTO. Anchorage must have 'dry' category LC around it. That's not too accurate, either. Again a task easily done using EZ-Landclass, or by using FSGenesis bugtracker.Screen 4: Well, weeds should be there, anyway. :) Grass is close enough for me.Screen 5: Even in August?RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

I've only done testing around the pacific northwest, AT, but I downloaded this a week ago, and I think it's pretty good. http://www.scenerytech.com/Cheers,

Does anyone else thinks that Autogen "pop" is unacceptable and would turn the autogen off because of it?

My alpshttp://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r45/abulaafia/Innsbruck/check out other areashttp://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r45/abulaafia/(some folders obviously still FS9)==Marten:Weber==P-D920 oc3.64MHz 2GB RAM WinXP ATI X1900+1024MB 2xSATA250 2xVIEWSONIC 19"Best AI available today: www.world-of-ai.com

No, I would not turn it off because of the pop. I don't like the pop, but to me the value of autogen exceeds the pop issue to me.I do wish you could increase the radius of the autogen and high quality textures. I'm running my E6600 at 3.34 GHz and doing pretty well on the frames and there's some headroom there in my opinion. I think there might even be some headroom in the overclock, and that's with air cooling (Zalman 5900, 2x120 mm fans in case). IOW, I don't think it will be long before people start complaining that they didn't give us enough range on the sliders, lol! (What kind of numbnut would complain that the program runs too slow with the sliders all the way to the right???? Set the sliders to the max your machine can handle and be happy. Someday you'll buy a faster machine and wish you could set the sliders higher.)Thomas[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

If it's 3D detail you are looking for: 1. You lose a lot by turning off autogen. Having detail in the surroundings affects your perception about detail at the airport.2. This is default FSX - You'll have to wait for others to add more detail. They had a lot of airports to do and needed an automated process.3. What is your scenery scenery complexity slider at? If you are looking for detail, it should be at Very Dense or higher.Thomas[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

>If it's 3D detail you are looking for:> >1. You lose a lot by turning off autogen. Having detail in>the surroundings affects your perception about detail at the>airport.>2. This is default FSX - You'll have to wait for others to add>more detail. They had a lot of airports to do and needed an>automated process.>3. What is your scenery scenery complexity slider at? If you>are looking for detail, it should be at Very Dense or higher.>>Thomas>>[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 180Scenery density is full right. I still find it hard to believe that ALL the airports in SoCal look like that. Even stock FS9 out of the box they looked better in my opinion.The thing that really irks me is that I purchased both FSGenesis and XClass US and still get this look around SoCal.AT

I'll second that for the scenerytech landclass. I guess it depends where you fly, but for my Alaskan flying it has made a huge overall difference. Ian.

When I grew up there 40 years ago-it was more desert looking like your shot. Since then-people have planted trees, watered them, and they have grown like crazy giving it a more lush and green look where civilization is. In the winter when the rain comes it can look quite green in the mountains-in the summer though it can be quite brown.The scenery tech landclass makes it look much closer imho.For absolute reality though tileproxy does it 100% right!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

>Tileproxy has perfect landclass-thus bats 100% here.Try living somewhere that the best imagery anyone has is "greenish blob." I'll take default FSX over that any day

>For absolute reality though tileproxy does it 100% right!Does TP do it 100% right at night? In winter? In fall? At dawn? At dusk?RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

It does for me....but in this case the op was speaking of landclass.Tileproxy has perfect landclass-thus bats 100% here.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg