>To sum it up: this sucks. Not even the valiant defenders of>FSX could mitigate this one. I hate the desert airports, I>just plain hate them, and I shouldn't have to wait for a 3rd>party payware add-on to fix them, either. I was actually>starting to get more into FSX with Sp2 and the f/a-18, then>winter came and I was reminded how awful this game looks>sometimes. While I'd agree that sand textures are not perfection, I certainly won't use a "blanket" statement regarding "winter textures". Much of the mountainous/cityscape textures in the mountain west look a lot better in stock FSX than FS9, looking over snow covered mountain landscapes. I just looked through my collection of screenshots from last year, for both FSX & FS9, and those FSX shots are quite impressive; just as I had remembered. In fact, FS9 looked rather dismal in comparison.L.Adamson

Geof,I'm not debating the increased accuracy of terrain and water features in FSX stock.The features you are saying improved in FSX over FS9 has no relevance to this topic.I'm talking about landclass and textures, not terrain and water feature accuracy.I'm all for the new and improved landclass variations and types as it means more choice down the line with improved landclass and texture products, but as it stands right now even after changing the textures to the set created by Adam Mills and using FSGenesis landclass we still have to put up with airport polygons being textured with this god awful sand colour.It seems the only way to change this (as detailed in a post here) is to manually edit each airport background by hand.Joy of joys more endless tweaking....Glenn

Well your initial question was "How did these textures ever get passed as being acceptable for the conditions that they are portraying". I assume since others piped in with the "desert" mantra that this complaint went beyond just airports.I think Holgar answered this in any case which is why I posted his link.As for airports-I think they are one of the most unrealistic things in Fs worlds-every version up to now. Real runways don't appear as obviously in the real world as they do in fs-and yes they don't have a generic polygon of either green or sand or any color around them. Either do roads which is why I don't find the encasement texture by utx terribly realistic either.I think the real answer for this in the future this is tileproxy driven scenery where actual real roads and real runways are displayed along with their real slope, colors, and surrounding real world landlclass. The present way of displaying airports is terribly limited, an can't ever be very realistic-except as you mention-by doing each one individually by hand-not very practical for a whole world.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

I was referring to areas other than airports as well, which with Adam Mills textures do look somewhat better. That does leave the airport polygons as discussed.The sand texture as a whole should never have been allowed to exist in the finsished product regardless of any excuses offered.Your reference to improved terrain and water features (vector) in FSX still has no bearing on the texture set that is used to display seasonal variations. The bottom line is that the texture used to represent the area determined by the landclass is just WAY off.Just because stock FSX improves the accuracy of terrain and water features over FS9 (which is a moot point anyway if you use UT in either FS9 or FSX) it doesn't mean we should regress to global warming conditions being prevalent in large areas of the world when it comes to the textures that are used to portray the seasonal variations.I hope GEX improves on the advancements that Adam Mills has already made with his texture improvments but having to manually alter the airport polygon texture to match is going to be a real pain.Glenn

Did you read what Holgar had to say? I think he explained why the choice was made. It took me a while to find-but in this thread a year ago-both Holgar and Koorby-two of the most respected fs scenery designers in the business explained it quite well:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...ing_type=searchIt obviously is not the choice some would have made-but there is a logic to it-not an excuse....http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

I read that thread when it was originally posted and again from your link.Bottom line is this:Even with FSG landclass, the deserts still remain. Do you know of any better landclass product for the USA than FSG?If this is the best landclass product available for FSX then cleraly the 'sage grass' texture is still being used within this 'improved' landclass.We can say it's the landclass fault, USG data fault, whoevers fault, but the problem to me is that no matter which landclass product is used (including the best from FSG) these textures are STILL being used.If the landclass products took the issue away then we wouldn't need to mess around adding modified textures.So this 'sage grass' classification only goes so far in absolving the blame for this.Again, even if we manage to fix the deserts, we are still left with 100's of airport polygons that will need to have the textures altered.It's a mess whichever way you look at it. It seems that flying in the summer months is the only 'real' way to stop this from happening. Not exactly realistic when the weather is -20!

I don't disagree at all-however it does seem this is the price of moving forward.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Some small examples of fixing the textures yourself. Winter in Western Pennsylvania near Pittsburgh. The question I have is - could Microsoft have hand tainted the offending sand textures with one person during one work week? Regards,Dick BoleyA PC, an LCD, speakers, CH yokehttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180071.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180072.jpgSome work still needs to be done on the sand area in a few textures. http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180073.jpgSUMMERhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180074.jpg

Maybe FSX is a watershed and FS11 will learn from all this?I hope so......Glenn

It is real bad here in upstate NY and whole NE, very hidious looking. The word hate comes to mind. It is so far off the target to real world flying that is makes FS5.0 look good. It is a shame, esp since Aces has ignored it. Reminds one of the day when super vivid colors were used to depict things like Pumpkin patches, Bright red Bricks etc.Landclass upgrades do a good job of selecting the right class, but no matter, it was the image processing/selection/balance of these textures that is way off. Looks like someone used a preset in Photoshop to "correct" the image data.Have to agree with others that this is a complete QC screwup.A bone is bone is bone. Its ugly, its unatural, its a bone.The FSX textures are so interlaced with this overly bright dirt/desert/sand texture that it is just plain unfun to the eyes.I get excited with all the new addons but it fades real fast as you get in the air and come face to face with the bright scorched patches of earth all around. Completly turned off by FSX now.Sad.

Wait - I don't get it, what do missing bodies of water have to do with the awful, awful, awful, awful sand textures that I imagine were meant to simulate the slightly muddier appearance/dead grass appearance of the ground in winter (and somehow that also got translated to fall and spring).Ultimate Terrain totally fixes all missing bodies of water for both FS9 and FSX (while FSX is better than FS9, Ultimate Terrain/X still blows it away).But the only thing that can fix these awful, awful, awful, awful sand textures is a replacement texture product. Adam Mills apparently did part of it, but, for some reason, he did not modify the airport backgrounds. I have not installed his textures yet, so I can't give a definitive answer here.Landclass products, by definition, cannot fix this problem. All they do is distribute the existing textures. The only way to fix this is to replace the bad, bad, bad, bad, bad, bad textures.I have to agree. How were these textures EVER seen as acceptable?BTW, as an open letter to whoever designed these textures. If you ever spent any time in the air, you would note that, at least in New England, the grass pretty much never goes brown. As long as there is sun, it is green. Then it gets covered up by snow. It might look a little bit darker or muddier, since it doesn't grow much during winter and early, early spring, but, it's still pretty much green. As reference, you would be More likely to see brown PATCHES of grass in deep Summer!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

As I noted below - Landclass products cannot fix this. The textures have to be edited. You might be able to trick it by using summer textures, but, then you are using summer textures in fall and spring. The only real fix is to edit the textures.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

"Hand tainted"? Interesting choice of words :-) (I know what you meant).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

It isn't about missing water-it is about source data-specifically: "the Olson "Global Ecosystems Legend". Notice Holger's comment about a "combination" of issues... all explained quite a while ago in post number 9:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...e=search#359954 http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Hmmm, excuse me, Dick, was that not my spreadsheet with the land class values? Anyway, would you be so kind as to append it here - unfortunately, I had an OS failure and have lost everything, including that spreadsheet.As for the airport background, removing the "sand" textures is particularly easy, although it is a bit of work.I explained the entire procedure here just a few weeks ago:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...ing_type=searchAnybody can do it.Here are the images that no longer form part of that thread:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180077.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180078.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180079.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/180080.jpgVery, very easy to fix, much more productive than complaining, and bound to bring much satisfaction when airports are no longer "sandy".Best regards.Luis