gaputz

I tried to post it here but the bundled scenery was too large for direct upload and I could not get the FTP method to work. Hopefully at some point I will get it into the library here. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks for those very kind remarks.

Thanks for the kind remarks. I received permission to bundle FMEE with the Reunion island scenery. Unfortunately the scenery is now too large to upload directly so it has to be done through the flightsim.com ftp site. That ftp site seems to be down and has been at least for a few weeks given comments on the upload page. So far no response from the library managers but it is summer so maybe they are away. Sorry chaps, for the time being might not be able to post the bundled scenery here. My spouse says I should be getting something tangible from the hours I spend making airports! Happy to share and thanks is all I require.

Hans and Roger, thank you for your kind remarks. Hans, I didn't even think about the editing the default. Will add it to the list of things to fix.

I've not run into any problems such as you describe Hans but that is because I kept my old FS9 computer, which is operating on a Win 7-32 bit platform, for the expressed purpose of doing scenery work. All of my tools are there so they continue to work in their native environment. I have it networked to my primary computer so jobs like you described are done on the old computer and then transferred back seamlessly. Plus I keep a complete mirror backup of my FS9 set up on the old computer. Useless for flying in FS9 but still works great for development work. One of the airports you noted is a scenery I contributed to. All the work was done on that old computer including texture conversions. Just thought I'd mention this in case it is an option for you because it would avoid trying to pound round pegs into square holes when adapting old tools new operating systems.

I realize you want to bulk convert scenery textures to DXT1 but keep in mind sometimes textures require DXT3 to work as intended in the sim. For instance, when semi-transparency or shading is required a grey scale in the alpha channel is needed, which can only be achieved in DXT3 or 32-bit textures.

I second that motion. Roger is a FS9 living legend.

Mark, I still have it but it is dormant on my old dual core computer. Greg

Hi Mark I get slight micro stutters when maneuvering on the ground with with the QW 757 and Avro RJ/BAe 146 at detailed airports on my main FS9 sim computer, which is running Win7-64 but with all the taps wide open. Nothing as pronounced with your example. I do have FS9 on my Win10 machine and it runs with no micro stutters but that installation doesn't have all the bells I have on my Win7 set up. I chalked it up to system stress. Now, having said that, I do recall a quite similar issue that came out of no where on my old FS9 WinXP-32 duo core machine. It operated for ages without such stutters then all of a sudden there they were. I have no idea how or why but I got rid of the problem by disabling the default GPS from the gauge folder. That was not a big deal since I had purchased the excellent Reality XP Garmin units. Perhaps you could try that to see if it makes any difference. If you rely on the default GPS that just replaces one problem for another. As I recall I twigged on to that solution by reading somewhere on the net that it was a problem with the RealAir SF260 and that is how the problem was fixed with that aircraft. I can't find that now to reference it for you but I did find a similar description here. "I remember when the brilliant freeware Commander series came out ( from Milton ) , he had to advise people to remove the GPS from the VC because it was causing something similar to what you are describing.." Greg

Hans, I think this is a function of what conditions were applied to the objects in question by the scenery designer. The object might have been created with a distance condition so that it appears only when the user is within a specific number of meters (ie. Distance to refpoint between 0 and X meters). Alternatively, the designer might have applied an empty LOD to the model to force it to vanish when a certain resolution is reached. I have used both methods in my scenery work. It takes a lot of work to avoid pop-up objects such as those you experienced with the airport in question. Greg

Perhaps it could be a mesh resolution issue and you need to adjust the Terrain_Max_Vertex_Level in your FS9 configuration file. I'd check the CanarySim instructions to see if a higher value of say 20 or 21 is needed to run the scenery properly. Greg

Hans, perhaps an explanation of the two types of photoreal terrain textures is necessary. The answer to your question depends on the type of aerial or satellite imagery applied over the default FS2004 terrain. If the imagery is applied over the default mesh using the FS2004 custom terrain textures SDK but you are limited the low resolution of the default textures (256 X 256). The advantage is that these textures follow the contours of the landscape. The problem is that at low altitudes the ground looks mushy and blurred. You should never have a texture lag problem with these textures. No need to change anything there. As you rightly point out, you never see untextured blotches on this type of terrain textures. These textures are easily identified because they must follow a FS2004 naming protocol (e.g. 000312232100200Su). Some developers place these in the Scenery/World/Texture folder and others in the airport’s Addon Scenery folder. Your problem is with textured polygons placed directly on the default terrain – normally referenced as a ground poly. These are the ones that have to be placed on a flatten because they will not follow the contours of the landscape. That limits their usefulness in FS2004 but the benefit is you can use a texture with a much higher resolution, the maximum being 1024 X 1024. This method is typically used for the area of the airport proper and maybe the approaches, where you’d like to see more resolution when you closer to the ground. If the area is large the developer probably used a great number of these higher resolution 1024 X 1024 tiles. For a detailed large airport, the size of the ground poly and the number of objects that must be rendered can put quite a strain on your computer’s processers (as explained in my previous post). First thing I’d do change any texture that does not need to be DXT3 to DXT1. There is absolutely no need to use DXT3 unless you have a transparency designed to blend into the background. I’d say that is rare in a ground poly, and when used is on the outer ring of tiles to avoid a sharp demarcation with the underlaying default ground. You could reduce the size of those terrain tile textures but then you would defeat the purpose of having the tiles in the first place. You might get away with converting the textures to 512 X 512 and still have acceptable resolution, especially if the developer also has an overlay applied (for grass maybe). If you are like my good friend Roger, and couldn’t give a hoot about photoreal ground textures, you could reduce to 256 X 256 or even lower. I’d say eliminate the ground poly altogether but the developer most likely used it as the basis for laying other features of the airport. Hopefully this explanation is of some assistance.