Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jjaycee1

  • Rank

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

972 profile views
  1. Ultimate NG only needs to be pointed to in v4 scenery library. It consists of only bgls which are compatible. What is not compatible with v4 is the installer. Considering that NG is advised to be installed outside of the P3D directory but preferably on the same Drive, then the current existing installation should suffice. Just add it to the v4 scenery library via pointing to the path/location ensuring you place it in the correct order and location in the scenery library.
  2. @KavindaJD Thanks. I was aware of the structure image you showed, and am pleased that your summary confirmed the fact that Vector will influence the landclass both default and OLC. Vector has reduced the shoreline in my Havana example, it was not rectified by OLC NA, hence the default 3D objects (in this case.. buildings) were still placed correctly but appear in the water due to the shoreline (Vector) being moved. UTX Central & Carib, however, has corrected the LC and adjusted the shoreline via it's own vector data. The result is no buildings in the water. Anyway thanks for your input. I still however would like to know if Flight Sim World has decent coastlines and NOT straight lines.
  3. We are off topic so i will wait for DGT to hopefully answer my initial question. But just to finally answer you regarding "The problem I have with Vector is that in many coastal areas the resulting "accuracy" of the revised coastlines result in buildings in the water." The sim has default 3d objects placed to the default data, in this case the coastline. Vector introduces a different coastline, maybe 100 yards in from the default. OLC places additional autogen/3d objects ( additional to the default). The default 3d objects remain. If the default 3d objects remain in their original position and then vector moves the goalposts the default 3d objects will be in the sea. I am referencing the response I received from the vector developer. If you know some more I would be most grateful if you would PM me with your solutions. I thought OLC NA was "good landclass" Remember I am only referring to buildings in the sea after using Vector, which redraws the coast lines.
  4. Tend to disagree. Take a look at Vector with OLC NA. When any topic is discussed regarding "buildings in water" the response from the developer of vector is " misplaced 3D autogen in P3D/FSX" Disable Vector in the same location (eg Havana) and the leave OLC enabled, the buildings are on land. So I would assume that it is vector's "accurate" coastline versus the default data that causes the anomaly and not the OLC NA (Landclass)
  5. I am keenly interested from a scenic perspective if the world's coastlines are the horrible straight lined ones that were default in FSX or whether they have been modified to look more realistic. Not necessarily accurate as FTX Vector claims to be. The problem I have with Vector is that in many coastal areas the resulting "accuracy" of the revised coastlines result in buildings in the water. The default FSX coastlines with all their straight lines etc is really off putting from a viewing perspective. What vector type detail is default in Flight Sim World? Roads, pylons etc?
  6. Has it resolved all the scenery problems like UK2000? Hesitating to re-update until i am sure all my current addons (all P3D v3 compliant) will not be adversely affected.
  7. How do i adjust the graphics so that in daytime the sea is not a white shiny texture? Current settings are all on Ultra and Anisotropic and anti aliasing ticked to max. It appears almost the same if I switch off those 2 settings. The sea is just way too bright in daylight, but tones down obviously at dusk, but is still way too bright in my current set up. Are you also reviewing the current darkness of the autogen and ground?
  8. I have had to redo some Profiles but i cannot get SimStarter to stop loading a flight. I want the sim to open up on the Scenario page but SimStarter is opening P3D and loading a flight. My previous Profiles were set where although i had entered into SStarter a default flight it would open P3D on the Scenario page with my default flight airport in the Scenario page. I have ticked for Show scenario in the SStarter General settings, but when I click on my profile shortcut it changes the P3D cfg to show this. [uSERINTERFACE] SHOW_SCENARIO_WINDOW=0 I have tried changing the SHOW_SCENARIO_WINDOW=0 to SHOW_SCENARIO_WINDOW=1and saving but SStarter keeps changing it to 0 again. What part of my Profile do I need to change to ensure that P3D via SStarter does not start loading a flight and that I get onto the Scenario page opening up?
  9. Thanks Luis. I am now educated in the pro's and cons of photoscenery in Hi Res. Very informative and appreciated.Regardsjc
  10. Thanks Luis for your input. I understand what you are saying and would suggest that we are only talking about Hi Res areas, and doing scenery packages out of those ones. Why not a series of Hi Res Cities, areas of countries? FS9 had dozens of Photosceneries compared to what is not even on the horizon yet for FSX. I had Germany, Holland, UK (England/Wales)Southern Spain, Pacific NW, Socal, San Francisco, Dallas, NY etc etc for FS9 but hardly anything so far specifically made for FSX. Why ? Can you enlighten me as to what problems FSX may have caused to prevent producing a lot more photosecenery after 18 months of FSX?I think you have the technical knowledge to help me understand.Regards
  11. I must admit I am more in league with Geofa's preference for Photoscenery, as I too find it...real ! I am afraid I am not too big a fan of UTX (outcry I hear) although i had it for FS9 and also have the latest FSX versions for US & Europe. I really like GEX enH as it acts as a more realistic impression of the earth below, but it aint real. I was on a flight out of Palm springs in Megascenery Socal, and flew to where the scenery ends and meets GEX enH..... a world of difference ! Comparing the Default scenery with GEX enH is again a world of difference. Maybe I just cant get the hang of UTX. I look at roads and see thin or broader grey lines that just disect through housing, look as thought the roads run over the tops of trees etc. I use it for the coast line, Landclass (+FSGenesis)and that is about it. Different folks like different experiences with FSX and I personally use it a lot for voyages of discovery. Using FSDiscover I am beginning to learn the geography of many of the photosceneries. 3D'ish effect buildings & vegetation colouring etc may be the efforts of technology but real buildings are in real locations and roads look like roads not grey lines. I feel there is a realistic wow factor which i dont feel when seeing generic scenery. GEX enHance really did help create a new standard and the authors are receiving the deserved accolades. I have noted many people saying in the GEX related posts, things like " I have never flown VFR so much before", " I can follow the road to my house" etc, well I can see my actual house complete with apple orchard and count the number of apple trees i have got flying with Horizon GEN X VFR, and not a grey line in site! Now that is real ! Unfortunately TileProxy is not something i can utilise due to the broadband connection speed I have in my rural location otherwise i would be its biggest user. Again, just my personal preferences being aired based on how I like to use FSX.Regards
  12. As an avid fan of anything that makes the scenery look real in FSX, I own as much current FSX Photoscenery as is available.It appears that the development and release of FSX photosceneries is slow, but when a product is released it usually of top quality and utilises FSX capabilities. It was 16-18 months ago,in Horizons GenX Uk VFR that I first noticed the 3d effect of buildings & vegetation, (the effect currently being raved about in GEX enHanced)and the much greater detail all round. Especially nice on 1920x1200 monitor !Anyway to the point. What would prevent Microsoft developing scenery packages based on their propriety owned imagery from MS Virtual Earth?I am not talking about streaming. I am truly non technical in any aspect here so excuse any ignorance being shown!Why cant you for example take an area like France, gather the imagery, and do what you need to do to make it apiece of software (turn it into bgl's ?) and sell it.This could be done for anywhere that MS VE covers in sufficient detail. Megascenery for example take a specific area and produce a product, so did Horizon)Include advice on best optimal FSX setings and advise of any restrictions to flight altitude etc(in focus/out of focus limitations) Install it over some mesh and fly!I know that if I was offered a piece of scenery that looked like the imagery on Virt.Earth, I would buy it.There has been forum chat in the past about Google Earth and FSX but Microsoft are sitting on a gold mine aren't they when they have their own equivalent source imagery material.Truly simplistic and maybe screwy so I would welcome any of you gurus to constructively enlighten me !Many thanks
  13. Thanks Nick.Basically sounds like if the addon seeks at point of extract/installation," C:Program File " then go with it (my observation of most Megascenery/Horizon/FEX/GEX do that. Others seek the drive on which FSX is placed when installing, so go with that.It also looks like it would make sense to start again and swap the Drives around i.e. put Vista onto the 500Gig HD and FSX on the 250Gig. That way i would have plenty of room for the large VFR scenery files which appear to be "databases" + FEX/GEX etc.UNFORTUNATELY (hint) I run Vista 32Home Prem and the Rig tweak you kindly guided me to is for XP and have never seen any Vista comparison recommendation.I use Ultimate Defrag (used to use O&O when I ran XP)and am the first to agree about the almost silk like difference regular defragging affects the running of FSX (micro stutters on VFR Photosceneries, no autogen, are GONE).I also defrag after each installation. it is amazing how fragmented the HD is when you install even a relatively small program. Re-installed FS Discover earlier and then looked the HD via Ult Defrag, and FS Discover was all over the place. 3 minutes later all defragged and consolidated. Well worth the time and better than any FSX tweak (post SP2).
  14. Have been looking at the Nick N suggestions regarding FSX setup and need best advice please.Currently I have a dedicated 500gig HD with FSX on it and most addons, and a seperate C drive of 250gig for Vista32 Home Prem and Internet access, AV etc.I want to do a "best" reconfiguration of programmes to HDs.Drive D= FSXDrive C= Vista 32.I want to add the following and would appreciate if you could advise which drive to use for which programme:Megasceneries Socal/Dallas/Phoenix/Oahu (27gig)Horixon GenX VFR (all 3 areas (60gig)Swiss VFR X (6gig)FS Altitude western Europe (23gig)FS DiscoverTraffic 2005 for FSX (500mb)UTX US UTX EuropeGEX USCAN enH (2.5gig)FEXX GraphicsUpcoming Addons to install:FSDreamscape 30cm Oahu & Utah (BIG stuff)Any suggestions appreciated..(bigger C drive HD ? !!)jjaycee1
  15. Thanks MeshMan....obvious resolution when you think about it ! Very early in the morning where I am !
  • Create New...