@mSparks

Eliminating with photoshop a small cloud in a grass field of a few tens of square meters is child's play.
Try doing it on a scenario of hundreds of square kilometers by elaborating by hand, one by one, hundreds of satellite tiles which, in addition to having the "flat clouds" to correct on the tiles, also have all the colors of the different tiles. Colors that must be compulsorily aligned with each other to obtain a uniform overall scenario free of defects.
I've done this in the past with a satellite scenery for FS9.
The scenery is 80 square miles, Himalaya Buthan area, and consists of more than 5800 tiles.

Keep in mind that:
- Some tiles had visible seams that need to be fixed
- I had to eliminate all the spurious clouds on the scenery.
- I had to eliminate all the spurious shadows caused by the clouds.
- I had to rebuild the parts of the land that were covered by clouds.
- I had to standardize all the defective tiles that the satellite had photographed in different seasons and clock times.
- I had to color correct the entire 80 miles area to get an overall homogeneous scenery.

 

To achieve this result I had to work two weeks with photoshop, processing by hand, one by one, more than 2000 tiles. 🥵
I promised myself never to do such a thing again. 🚫

Now you understand why I admire MSFS AI-powered satellite streaming technology.
The Asobo simulator may not be the best in the world, but it manages to inject an almost perfect satellite scenery into the simulator in real time, that is, thanks to the AI, it instantly carries out the powerful "correction process" which cost me two weeks of hard work.
Of course, not all that glitters is gold in MSFS.
That sim has strengths and weaknesses, like all sims.
But on scenarios it's really powerful, I'd say almost incredible, I've seen portions of areas that I know well (and that I know are flawed), were perfectly corrected by the MSFS AI, I don't understand how he managed it. 😳
Ortho streaming cannot do these miracles.
Unless you operate the old-fashioned way: talent, photoshop, and a lot of patience.
 

Going back to helicopters (I'm not a helicopter pilot) I think Bhutan area is nice to fly with helicopter.
With the simulator you prefer. 👍

26 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Eliminating with photoshop

that's not photoshop, I have it applied on close to 2TB of ortho on my local drive. Not legal for me to distribute the files tho, and fairly low on my list of priorities, and I have zero interest in making the processor stuff windows compatible.

Also waiting on a point pool fix for dsf tools to keep the dem resolution post processing - currently use a hacked version of

https://github.com/X-Plane/xptools/blob/master/src/DSFTools/README.dsf2text

to get it working, but still lose some resolution until the pool conversion is resolved.

slightly older version is here

pretty much the latest iteration in that mach round the mach loop.

sometimes when I get bored enough I work on fixing issues I'm aware of, e.g. you can see how my local heliport has changed since that october and now with

but as I said in that deleting clouds thread, Im personally hoping we get new default scenery that will make all that obsolete.

26 minutes ago, efis007 said:

I've seen portions of areas that I know well (and that I know are flawed), were perfectly corrected by the MSFS AI, I don't understand how he managed it. 😳

I forget who, but someone grabbed me the above location in MSFS

Not feeling it tbh.

Edited April 7, 20233 yr by mSparks

 

Quote

X-Plane has had decades of highly experienced helicopter pilots and test pilots pouring their talents in to X-Plane such that every helicopter developer has all that experience on hand, by default, ready to go, before they even start.

You can give me the finest ingredients in the most modern kitchen in the world, and you will not get a fantastic meal.

 

Quote

doesn't mean that other sims can't do a half decent rendition of a single heli,

Damning with faint praise, indeed.

DCS World helos, with the unfortunate exception of DCS: Gazelle, are widely regarded as some of the very best addons available anywhere.

For e.g., the Nimbus UH-1 and DCS: UH-1H are both highly rated to the point where ones preference of simulator carries far more weight than the fidelity of either addon.

And, interestingly, the DCS: UH-1H has been available and largely unchanged for literally a decade. Nimbus' rendition is just a few years old. Pretty impressive considering the advances in simulation in that time.

 

Quote

It does mean, that whatever your favourite heli, XP is the place to come to get it, whether it exists yet or not, whether it's perfected yet or not, no debate, those are facts.

so while I would happily recommend the JRX Gazelle in XP over the DCS version, I would never choose XP's freeware Mi-8 Hip over DCS: Mi-8.

In a year or three, we'll be able to compare X-Trident's superb CH-47 to DCS' rendition, and based on professional opinions, I'm willing to bet their fidelity levels will be quite similar in all regards.

 

Quote

afaik they don't even have publically available SDKs,

Immaterial to the quality of the finished commercial product. Very few people have the ability to effectively modify an aircraft addon for higher fidelity.

If that was truly a differentiator, Apple would be out of business vs Linux & Android.

 

Quote

So if my favourite helicopter is a Gazelle model SOKO HN-45M Gama 2, DCS or FS4 are options for that?

By that standard, you could model it in Arma 3...

I couldn't care less if the exact make, model & serial number aircraft is available in-sim, or modd-able to be so, if the fidelity of the available addons is very high.

 

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

I still stand by it, you need zero experience of helicopters or development, and never had to have sat in a cockpit to create a perfect rendition of your favourite helicopter model in XP12 that will pass even the most brutal rw test pilots evaluations, all you need is the time, the will and a copy of XP12.

This is the same with DCS World, and has been professionally proven.

(And MSFS helos, for that matter (now that CFD-Lite is available))

 

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Or more likely they just don't understand that generally speaking the best of the XP helis (aircraft in general) are not publicly available

It is commonly known that Commercial/Military/Govt simulators are frequently not at the forefront of Fidelity, especially in the areas of flight dynamics, etc.

And let's stick to "science", in principle, at least: if we can't evaluate the evidence, then it simply doesn't exist.

 

The best helos in X-Plane are undoubtedly World Class, and XP is well known for it's relatively easy development.

And there is ample evidence to incontrovertibly refute your XP "Uber Alles" nonsense.

Edited April 7, 20233 yr by UrgentSiesta

31 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

are widely regarded as some of the very best addons available anywhere.

I've flew a few of them on someone elses beefy PC with an HTC vive pro.

They arn't bad, they aren't good either. inaccurate or missing most of the turbluence, IGE, VRS, autorotation and others and the VR experience left a lot to be desired (although that at least is looking pretty good these days)

But I'm talking here about "Favorite X Plane 11/12 Helicopter"

like, yep, DCS has a pretty good Huey, but if your fav helicopter is a UH-2 rather than a UH-1 you are SOL, even if you have the will and time.

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

that's not photoshop, I have it applied on close to 2TB of ortho on my local drive. Not legal for me to distribute the files tho, and fairly low on my list of priorities, and I have zero interest in making the processor stuff windows compatible.

Also waiting on a point pool fix for dsf tools to keep the dem resolution post processing - currently use a hacked version of

https://github.com/X-Plane/xptools/blob/master/src/DSFTools/README.dsf2text

to get it working, but still lose some resolution until the pool conversion is resolved.

What would that code do? 🤔
Locate where are the defects on the tiles and correct them automatically?
If the answer is "Yes", how does the code know where the defect is located on the tiles?
It could be anywhere.
What apparently might seem like a defect, maybe it's not a defect, maybe it's snow on the ground that shouldn't be corrected.
Or maybe what looks like snow is a cloud smeared on the tiles.
How does your code tell what is bad and what is not bad?
How can your code fix these artifacts without using photoshop?

The white inside the circle isn't snow, it's clouds, it's a defect that needs to be corrected.
How does your code fix those mountains with clouds smeared over them?
I know how to do it, with photoshop, and I assure you that it takes talent and patience to rebuild those mountains.
Currently I don't know of any "little magic code" that is capable of doing the same job of fixing/rebuilding with photoshop, and that manages to achieve the same result as me.
Only an artificial intelligence can do it.
But it has to be a powerful AI that analyzes (but seriously analyzes with powerful algorithms) the entire general graphics of the scenery, and manages to reconstruct it without defects.

1 hour ago, efis007 said:

Locate where are the defects on the tiles

no. much, much simpler than that. so simple in fact as to really earn a title of embarrassingly simple.

On Linux anyway.

obviously the tools are important, as with any seemingly hard nut to crack that ends up being embarrassingly simple

and not before wasting a significant amount of time on methods that didnt work nearly as well.

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by mSparks

13 hours ago, mSparks said:

no. much, much simpler than that. so simple in fact as to really earn a title of embarrassingly simple.

Come on friend you know that it is impossible to correct the defects of the satellite scenery without doing a great job with photoshop.
I don't know how much experience you have in making satellite scenery, but if you find a bad Bing or Google tiles ...

... how do you fix it into a defect-free tile?

Would you really want us to believe that your little code is enough to... fix/uniform/dedefect/recolor/refine, reconstruct, re-clone, correct... all the world's satellite mappings?
And that the code can correct textures better than a professional photo editing artist, or better than the MSFS artificial intelligence?

 

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by efis007

18 hours ago, efis007 said:

The question is: is it possible to fly on such a scenery?
Of course, just close one eye and we fly without problems.

I wonder why you feel the need to find the negative in everything?  I did a four hour flight recently in the USA and saw one area of discoloured terrain and no embedded clouds.

The thing is, I much prefer XP12 over MSFS and am more than willing to put up with a few niggles for the overall better experience I get.  You could quite easily use AutoOrtho, but for those areas you are not happy with you could download some Ortho tiles to you PC using Ortho4XP - they live quite happily together.  As long as AutoOrtho entries in scenery_packs.ini are lower down than Ortho4XP tiles you will see both, with AutoOrtho filling in where you don't have local tiles.

I wonder why you just don't use MSFS if that sim doesn't have those things that annoy you - there must be SOMETHING positive with XP12!

1 hour ago, efis007 said:

Would you really want us to believe that your little code is enough to...

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by mSparks

17 hours ago, mSparks said:

They arn't bad, they aren't good either. inaccurate or missing most of the turbluence, IGE, VRS, autorotation and others 

Please allow me to clear up your gross misconceptions:

IGE/ETL/TL/etc:

 

 

Autorotation:

 

Quote

I've flew a few of them on someone elses beefy PC with an HTC vive pro...and the VR experience left a lot to be desired (although that at least is looking pretty good these days)

VR performance in DCSW can be a challenge, but I can also say that running VR in XP vs DCS vs P3D on my rig gives reasonably similar visual experience levels across the sims. I certainly don't feel like I'm missing much in XP VR vs DCS VR on the same rig.

 

Quote

But I'm talking here about "Favorite X Plane 11/12 Helicopter" ...but if your fav helicopter is a UH-2 rather than a UH-1 you are SOL, even if you have the will and time.

Well, you're moving the goal posts, but okay:

Where can I get an accurate XP version of...

Haven't seen any, and I'd be happy with almost any modern-ish version of the Cobra.

 

Since that's not available, my fave "pure" helo experience is the sublime SA 315 in X-Plane:

But I spend most of my time in:

and

 

Quote

...DCS has a pretty good Huey...

"...Arguably the best helicopter Flight dynamics available for home use..."

There are indeed higher fidelity addons since this was written, but even now, when the Nimbus Huey is available, the IRL US Army Aviator rates them both quite similarly, though he does say the Nimbus fits his simulation goals better. Right after he says that it's not enough to get him to abandon DCS' version, either, due to the fundamentally different purposes of both sims.

 

52 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Please allow me to clear up your gross misconceptions:

Please allow me to clear up

->inaccurate or missing

All that conversation/argument you see around how "X-Plane flight model is superior",

e.g.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/209833-how-good-is-the-huey/

Quote

Loss of tail rotor effectiveness (LTE) isn't modelled in any DCS module

...

huey is the best module in DCS 🙂

vs Loss of tail rotor effectiveness is modelled in every X-Plane helicopter even if it was made by a developer who has never heard of LTE.

one example of many.

serious stuff to get right:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOpsAD9El_4

Conclusion:

->even the most basic thrown together heli in XP by someone who has never actually sat in a cockpit far exceeds anything you can get anywhere else.

52 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

But I spend most of my time in:

Very much what I meant when I said more interesting is "what is your favourite helicopter", because there are quite a lot of fav helicopters not available for XP12 yet, and they would far exceed anything you can get anywhere else, even if thrown together by someone who has never actually sat in a cockpit.

Helisimmer started to put a list together back in September

https://www.helisimmer.com/articles/x-plane-12-helicopters

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by mSparks

2 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I wonder why you feel the need to find the negative in everything?

If Ortho4x downloads defective cards, is it my fault?
Should I rejoice to find my Italy full of defective tiles?

 

2 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I wonder why you just don't use MSFS if that sim doesn't have those things that annoy you

My pc does not allow to use MSFS.

2 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

there must be SOMETHING positive with XP12!

When Xp12 will fix the bugs of antialiasing, performance, dark panels... then I will write that XP12 has something positive compared to XP10-11.

You're probably missing a concept: I judge the positivity of a product on the basis of the quality/price ratio.
Did you read my hardware specs in my signature?
Well, with this hardware I flew with  Xplane10 + Ortho + Reshade + Simheaven + pay planes + RTH ... at fixed 30fps. ↓

Later, with this same hardware, I flew with Xplane11 + Ortho + Reshade + Simheaven + pay planes ... at fixed 30fps. ↓

Subsequently, always with the same hardware, I flew with Xplane 12, without Ortho, without Reshade, without simheaven, without pay planes, without anything at all otherwise I dreamed of the fixed 30 fps!
And I got this stuff. This is the big Xplane 12.

Now let's talk seriously, in front of these pictures of my XP10, XP11, XP12, are you still surprised why I speak negatively about XP12?
Should I speak positively about it?
Why should I speak well of it?
This sim has a disastrous quality / price ratio, compared to Xp10-11. 
If I want to get the same graphical beauty of XP10-11 on XP12, I have no choice, I have to spend a lot of money on hardware.
There will come a day when I will change the hardware.
Yes.
But only after XP12 fixes all the bugs I've reported: antialiasing, performance, dark panels.
If it fixes these bugs I will abandon XP11 and start flying with XP12.
If it doesn't correct them instead.... bye bye XP12. 

 

double post sorry

Edited April 8, 20233 yr by efis007

Some people (the so called "usual suspects") seem to have waaay toooo much time. Just sayin' .... Are they bored by their favorite product? I don't know. Please tell me ...

2 hours ago, mSparks said:

Please allow me to clear up

->inaccurate or missing

All that conversation/argument you see around how "X-Plane flight model is superior",

e.g.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/209833-how-good-is-the-huey/

vs Loss of tail rotor effectiveness is modelled in every X-Plane helicopter even if it was made by a developer who has never heard of LTE.

one example of many.

serious stuff to get right:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOpsAD9El_4

Conclusion:

->even the most basic thrown together heli in XP by someone who has never actually sat in a cockpit far exceeds anything you can get anywhere else.

Very much what I meant when I said more interesting is "what is your favourite helicopter", because there are quite a lot of fav helicopters not available for XP12 yet, and they would far exceed anything you can get anywhere else, even if thrown together by someone who has never actually sat in a cockpit.

Helisimmer started to put a list together back in September

https://www.helisimmer.com/articles/x-plane-12-helicopters

Just to disclaim, I do think that X-Plane is likely the best overall flight sim development environment, and it delivers accurate results with less work. And that a key part of that is the native aerodynamic engine being applied to every given addon. 

However, it’s a long, long way from there to your extremely provincial viewpoint of any XP addon being better than the best in any other sim. That’s incredibly facile and blatantly unreasonable  

so, out of the long list of things you incorrectly believe DCS gets wrong (with no supporting metrics), you go digging and find ONE that is indeed missing…congrats!

Speaking of “incorrect or missing”, please explain how these glaring X-Plane issues were only added or fixed in just the last few months, after 20-odd years of “perfection”:

https://developer.x-plane.com/2022/09/x-plane-12-early-access-notes-for-aircraft-developers/

Not to mention it required 3rd party expertise to do so

are we now to believe that v12 is without inaccuracies and omissions? Somehow I think even Austin himself will freely admit there is still work to do  

And if XPs native IDE is so automagically superior, why do we need the likes of SimCoders and X-Aerodynamics?

And why do so many X-Plane-exclusive developers choose custom code, especially for Hi Fi addons?

If the native IDE gives an exceedingly accurate result,…

…why do so many devs talk about hacks required to get their XP addon to behave correctly?

…and why did they all have to spend so much time updating their flight models for v12?

How can you speak in such absolutes when you use the absolute least compatible OS for flight sim possible? Neither DCS nor MSFS run on Linux,
so you can’t even directly test your own hypotheses! And the “results” are so predictable. 

In the end, I choose to believe the opinions of highly experienced IRL Professional aviators, such as those at HeliSimmer, and quite a few others across various media. 

They’re nearly unanimous in extolling XPs virtues, and for those who also fly DCS, agree that it ALSO provides a compelling and highly realistic flight experience.