Hi Frank,> Well... my FS friend did visit last night and we gave this software a
> good going over. We found it interesting and promising, but did not
> prefer it to my everything maxed, near 30fps
I get more or less the same frame rates with the VFR scenery. Are you noticing a drop? You shouldn't, as all it is doing is replacing repetitive textures with different ones. Also it is losing the AutoGen, which costs a bit.
> ,terrain meshed
did you not use your Terrain Mesh with the VFR scenery? It comes with its own, which is a subset of his full UK terrain mesh of some time ago. But I actually prefer the Lago Terramesh, it seems VERY accurate for England -- even the little hills around my house here in Staffordshire seem right!
> and land classed
Land class is for autogen buildings and trees.
> Gary Summons improved rendition of the UK.
Has Gary done a UK rendition now? Where? I have ALL of his UK2000 airports, and they sit most excellently into the VFR textures. In fact Gary himself is promoting the VFR scenery for just this reason.
> Yes, we had a
> moment's fun flying over our present homes and the places where we were
> born and went to school but felt this was a novelty which would quickly
> wear off.
Of course. VFR flying doesn't mean that. VFR flying is working out where you are going from charts and identifying your position and direction via the view out of the window. You CANNOT do that with the default scenery, nor in fact any other UK scenery I know of.
> The constraints of height and speed would not appeal to many
> of our FS friends (vide Ray Proudfoot)
VFR scenery is totally irrelevant for airliner flying at 35000 feet, especially in the UK where there's almost always going to be a cloud layer below. For airliner flights you really need no scenery at all apart from airports!
For this scenery get out you nice slow Cessna or Piper! <G>
> In addition to its flatness - irritatingly evident in take off from
> London City - my friend was not too happy with the colours ( although I
> had no problem with that) and we both missed the trees and buildings.
> Also we spotted some mystical interlopers here and there.
The default London scenery buildings are misplaced, I agree, Buck House is seen in 3D in a different place to the photo scenery, and some buildings fall into the Thames. If you want to VFR central London only, this scenery is no good at all, I agree.
> The camera has caught some passing aircraft - one was spotted on
> approach to Gatwick. How about a new competition - "Spot the
> Interloper"? There must be others.
LOL!
I think, from what you say, you are not really a VFR flyer at all. I agree there is little point in investing in this scenery if you do not want to see roads and rails and fields and ponds and so on where they really are. For me the default FS scenery for England looks all wrong. Mostly the fields are ridiculously small, the colouring is too bland and not at all like you actually see aloft, and, worse, apart from motorway routes you cannot VFR with it at all.
As I said in the other thread, with this scenery I can actually identify every detail from the O/S 1¼" maps!
I like airliner flying too. At 35000 feet I can't see this detail. At 35,000 feet I'm lucky to see anything at all over the UK except clouds. And anyway, at Mach 0.84 I'm not over it long enough to worry! <G>
Best Regards,
Pete
-= VPC OffLine Reader 2.1 =-
Registered to: Peter L Dowson
-OLR.PL v1.82-
Printer-friendly
version of this topic
Bookmark this topic
(Registered users only)
FSFORUM
![[Crew]](http://www.flightadventures.com/Forum/htdocs/dcforum/Images/1bar.gif)
RE: VFC Photographic Scenery
![[Sysop]](http://www.flightadventures.com/Forum/htdocs/dcforum/Images/3bar.gif)
![[Guest]](http://www.flightadventures.com/Forum/htdocs/dcforum/Images/key-s.gif)