DougMatthews

>Hello Misho, >>The image of the ground for the entire planet is derived from>the low resolution NASA images (what were they called? the>"Blue Marble"?). They are contained in the image_globe files>and cover LODs 1 through 6, I seem to remember. The guys at>ACES, the artists I assume, must have created the seasonal>variants.>>Your land class files will not display at those LOD levels.>>You could create replacement custom textures at those LOD>levels, but the default is supposedly the real thing, so is>there really any advantage?>>Best regards.>>LuisFor FSX the image_globe files were composited from the game (including seasonal variations). They are NOT Blue Marble.-Doug

>I do not know what shp2vec does with the SlopeX>and SlopeY values. If all the points of the polygon >rest in the same plane, then SlopeX and SlopeY can >be exactly evaluated. If they they do not, then we >need to approximate somehow these values. Hi LuisShp2Vec itself does not make use of SlopeX/Y - they are passed through the BGL stream to the game as attribute data.SlopeX/Y are precomputed data used for extrapolating elevation of terrain mesh vertices where they do not fall exactly on a water polygon vertex in lat/lon space.-Doug

>Hi,>I was able to fix the problems. I noticed that when excluding>a hydro polygon, I had to use a completely separated shapefile>dedicated for the exclusion only which created a single bgl.>>Now I have:>cvxpur.bgl - for roads, bridges, parks, beaches and their>related exclusions>cvxpurfw.bgl - for freeway traffic (the exclusion still>doesn't work)>cvxpurehpx.bgl - to exclude hydro polygons>cvxpurehlx.bgl - to exclude shorelines>cvxpurhp.bgl - to define new hydro polygons and shorelines>>As for the shorelines, the SDK says that the shapes in a HLX>shapefile should be polygons, that confused me because I was>drawing the shoreline as a polygon and it was not working. I>decided to convert the polygon into a LINE and it worked.>>I'm running FSX SP1 with FSX SDK SP1.>>Regards,>JuanThe shoreline should indeed be a line (not a polygon). Please file a bug (www.fsinsider.com) identifying the SDK error.Note that if you name your files such that the first three characters of the filename are all that differ: XXXsamename.shp (.shx .dbf .xml) YYYsamename.shp (.shx .dbf .xml) ZZZsamename.shp (.shx .dbf .xml)you can compile (shp2vec) everything into one bgl.And all the excludes can be in one shapefile.-Doug

>Something wrong there with the SP1 install, I think. It>doesn't reduce the autogen, slider-setting-to-slider-setting,>only the visibility distance. A bug was fixed where polygonal autogen annotation regions did not respond to the Augogen slider. This would result in a decrease in some areas if the user did not have the Autogen slider maxed.-Doug

>Most changes will have taken place in texture or scenery>folders, so you could just rename them, then run a repair>install from the DVD. >>But if a repair install does replace existing modified files>of the same name with originals, then you might not even need>to do that?>>>AllcottMy understanding is that the patch applies binary deltas to transform a default file to the patched file.-Doug

>> I currently have a clean install of FSX. Would adding>additional> aircraft only still be considered a clean install?>> At present I have made no other changes to FSX while awaiting>the > release of SP1.>> Maybe if you see this Phil you could chime in.>> Thanks> > CraigThe SP1 patch requires the default files to be where the original installer put them, named what the original installer named them, in the same state they were originally in (unmodified). Should be just fine to add aircraft, scenery etc. that does not touch the original files.-Doug@ACES

>>I think this new 'communication with the community' stance is>great too. Thanks Phil.There are those who cannot seem to understand that the enhanced visibility provided by more open communication comes with the downside of a more bumpy ride (adjustments to estimates, etc.). You cannot have one without the other.-Doug

>Today I fooled around a bit with the various settings in FS>X. Everything looked fine. I settled for some high, medium and>low settings, nothing extraordinary. Traffic is at the Medium>low option (which is quite low...!), Clouds are one notch>higher than the lowest option, Scenery isn't too high either,>well, nothing outrageous.>>But since changing these settings I get an error and FS X>locks up! After a few hours of testing I suddenly got a>usefull error (instead of just a lock up):>>http://i14.tinypic.com/44i36zr.jpg>>But... I've got 2 Gb of ram and a 8800GTX... Shouldn't that be>enough to play with everything high?!? (Let's forget about fps>there... ;) ). I mean, how much more memory does an average>computer have?>>I use Vista Home Premium 32 bits. Is there some sort of>setting for virtual memory I should change...? My partition>with the OS has 13 Gb free and my datadisk even 200 Gb...!>>When SP1 is released and let alone the DX10 patch I want to>use a lot higher settings than I do know!!!>Try backing down your Level of Detail Radius and/or Autogen Density.-Doug

>Doug,>>I cant get this to work for the Eastern hemisphere. What am I>doing wrong in my xml file?>><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>>> latitudeMinimum = "N60 22.16"> latitudeMaximum = "N60 22.24"> longitudeMinimum = "E5 09.18"> longitudeMaximum = "E5 10.34"> excludeExtrusionBridgeObjects = "TRUE"> />>>>Cheers,>AndrewYour bridge is at approximately N60 22.35 Try increasing your latitudeMinimum and latitudeMaximum each by 0.15 minutes.-Doug

>>>Will changes made to FSX configuration and Add On products>>>affect SP1? I also wondor what the Beta testers are using?>>My>>>hunch is that they are working off a clean unchanged>version>>>of FSX and not one that has been tweaked.>>>>This has already been covered. Short answer: If you have not>>applied tweaks that involved renaming, removing, or editing>>(non-cfg) files you are probably OK.>>>>Do an Advanced Search on "SP1 clean install" and you should>>quickly find the carcass.>>>>-Doug>>>Doug,>> Nothing in "sp1 clean install" Do I read this right that>after all the waiting SP1 will not fix the activation problem>? >>>TonyDid you do an ADVANCED Search?The activation stuff is something I have little awareness of, so I really cannot comment.-Doug

>Will changes made to FSX configuration and Add On products>affect SP1? I also wondor what the Beta testers are using? My>hunch is that they are working off a clean unchanged version>of FSX and not one that has been tweaked.This has already been covered. Short answer: If you have not applied tweaks that involved renaming, removing, or editing (non-cfg) files you are probably OK.Do an Advanced Search on "SP1 clean install" and you should quickly find the carcass.-Doug

>I am confused really. One time all the pundits say that>programming for multi core is #### difficult, tricky and takes>lot of time yet again in about 2 months they convert a program>entirely written for single core to take advantage of multi>core? What happens to those deadly shared memory and lock>issues?You seem to be thinking of this in black and white (not multi-core / fully multi-core).There has been work toward SP1 to take SOME advantage of multi-core. This was very difficult work, and the code that received this treatment had to be chosen very carefully. The result of that effort is in beta testing.-Doug@ACES

>>Hi. I have the registered Deluxe Edition FSX and had the>>original SDK installed. I was trying to get the tutorial>>working for the stopwatch.After having difficulty I found>out>>from another user, here,that he had a different version SDK>>than I had. I downloaded the SP1 update and tried installing>>it as a repair. I get an error that one of the Temp folders>>with the Microsoft Flight Simulator X SDK SP1.msi is not>>available. I searched and yes it is not there. How can I>>install the update? I hate MS's installers Why can't they>just>>supply the update files and let us install it ourselves?>>Thanks, regards, Bob.>>>I am sorry it was not clear to you in the above post, Doug. I>was talking about the SDK SP1 update which has ben previously>released, not the upcoming patch for FSX. Regards, Bob.My apologies. We are in SP1 beta mode and I did not read your original post (which was clear) carefully enough.Quantumleap is correct. Let us know if you have further problems.-Doug

>Hi. I have the registered Deluxe Edition FSX and had the>original SDK installed. I was trying to get the tutorial>working for the stopwatch.After having difficulty I found out>from another user, here,that he had a different version SDK>than I had. I downloaded the SP1 update and tried installing>it as a repair. I get an error that one of the Temp folders>with the Microsoft Flight Simulator X SDK SP1.msi is not>available. I searched and yes it is not there. How can I>install the update? I hate MS's installers Why can't they just>supply the update files and let us install it ourselves?>Thanks, regards, Bob. Bob, please remember the beta team is under NDA, which does not allow for communication in public forums.Moderators, please delete this thread.-Doug

>Would it be too much to ask for the installer to have a>readme that details the files that are modified by SP1?Not sure. I'll pass the request on and see what happens.-Doug

>Phil,>Can we "confidently add" things like TreesX and various>planes, scenery, land class, etc., and not be concerned about>whether the SP1 will conflict?>That is, does the update require a relatively Virginal FSX, or>can we just go about our addon business, and SP1 will be able>to be added without incident?>Do you know what I mean? Hopefully, I'm being clear on this>point because I've seen it discussed on this forum.>SP1 installation requires that the default FSX files are where the RTM installer put them, and that the files are in the same state that they were originally in.So, if you've installed add-ons that do not modify the default files, chances are you'll be just fine.If you've applied some of the various tweaks to the default files, you've got to un-tweak (or re-install FSX). This is unfortunate, but the way our current patch technology works requires that the files be in their original state. For those who are concerned about the activation limit, worst case should be you might need to activate by phone.-Doug

>your passionate assessment when the SP1 is out, since all of>us will have to reinstall everything (as I understand it).The link you provide as source for this advice is in the context of someone having applied file tweaks (hacks) to their FSX installation.For those who still have an un-tweaked installtion, SP1 should apply properly without reinstalling FSX.-Doug

>Hello,>>How is the display hierarchy of overlapping polygons decided>by FS?>>Can polygons overlap or should their edges by snapped?>>In the attached image, for example, if the white sand overlaps>the black sand polygon ... how will it appear? If the best>way for the two polygons to share the same edge?>>Thanks,>iain>Neighboring polygons should be snapped (share edges).-Doug@ACES

>Thanks a lot for your help guys ... I know how to deal with>GMAX, but I find it sad, that there is no way to make such>signs with fs-internal resources.Submit bugs with suggested improvements (www.fsinsider.com).-Doug

>These airports are in the library which I have fixed the>misplaced Localizer>>CYQB>CYQQ>CYTR>CVXS>CYYJ>>One of the problems with Canada is when FSX moved the Airport>scenery by about 2-3M for proper scaling the Localizers moved>also. However the runways LAT/LON is the same in most cases as>FS9.>>I will look at your list and correct any airport that has a>misaligned ILS that is not an actual offset or LDA type>approach.>>I was holding off on any more ILS fixes until the SP1 is>released. Maybe the SP1 address this problem. I'm not aware of any ILS fixes in SP1. Please submit bugs as you find problems.-Doug

>How can I show a slash "/" on a taxiway sign? If I just type>it, it is interpreted as a "left backward arrow" and therefore>shown as such.You cannot show a slash ("/"). Use a vertical line ("|") instead. See the BglComp docs in the SDK for the valid characters. Note that Left and Right arrows are coded as "& lt" and "& gt" (remove spaces) respectively, which is non-obvious due to html rendering those tags as "<" and ">".-Doug

>It would be even beter (cleaner) if they corrected the>included mesh so you don't need to do it on the fly using>waterpolys! :7 Improving the mesh is definitely desirable, but would not eliminate the need to "flatten" in-game. Perfecting the mesh is simply not feasible on a global scale. -Doug

>> With the right averaging algorithm you get beautiful >> sloping rivers and you loose the spikes caused by >> bridges and dams.>>That's exactly what I said.>>The mesh would be "deformed" as you put it, by the water>polygon that is placed over it.>>Taxiways and Runways already do a similar thing in FSX. They>have a built-in flatten property. I think the same could be>done for water polys, except that it would flatten to a>varying elevation as determined by the surrounding terrain>elevation data.>>I think that is potentially an elegant solution.>That is essentially what we are doing with sloped water. Unfortunately, interactions between our water sloping tool and some problematic DEM resulted in some water polygons that were not properly sloped, which resulted in problems like those found in the Thames river. A number of the more egregious water problems (i.e. Thames, Danube) will be corrected by SP1.-Doug

>>Where was the screenshot taken? What coordinates, or near>>what city/town? I've tried flying around a handful of>>different locations on the west coast of Italy and can't>find>>any areas which have that amount of road detail,>particularly>>the minor roads which can be seen in your screenshot. >>Unfortunately I cannot remember exactly where. I did not label>the pics with the names of their exact locations (next time I>will). But for sure, it is somewhere in Europe I was jumping>placed just for a quick exploration. Sorry for that!>>dito>Using Shift+Z to get your coordinates onscreen (and including in the screenshot) is very helpful.-Doug

>I'll have to go look at the White House. I don't know what is>happening there.>>I do know if there is any slope, we do the same "pick an>end-point to anchor the building and lay it down" without>doing any terrain modification for the foundation. It was my>understanding we picked the lower value so the buildings slid>into the terrain and didn't float.We actually take the elevation sample at the reference point of the object, which in the case of an individually modeled building will *likely* be near the center. Many models have a "foundation" that goes down a ways below the terrain to mitigate these gaps.-Doug