tonywob

Yes I did have a look through them, those buildings aren't facades but fixed in size, so they're not too suitable to recreate complicated city centres. Also, I'm wary about linking to X-Plane objects as they can be removed at any time during an update etc, and break the scenery for everyone. Cities are going to be very difficult to get covered with a small number of objects, and the best bet is to have nicer looker facades. At some point it will happen, and there is a user "Thomas" who is working on some facades at the moment.

Hi Caruso, Funny you should write about this as I've been doing some experimentation this past week. I basically created a custom config file just for the UK, removed the three sets of facades OSM2XP, Simheaven and others facades, and hundreds of different models from the various libraries (i.e. The R2 Library, FF Library, Blacky75 and Uwespeed libraries) and just used a smallish group of 100 or so UK building models. I was amazed to see performance increase quite substantially, it doubled the frame rates in most instances, and loading times improved also. This I guess is the hardware instancing coming into play, with fewer varieties of buildings to deal with, instancing really kicks in and less of the horribly complicated/inefficient lego brick facades we currently have, it's possible to get decent performance. Additionally, by using fewer varieties of buildings, the scenery looked more realistic, housing estates looked like housing estates with similar houses and not a random mash of coloured buildings from various European countries which look unrealistic. Another important thing I noticed is that it seemed to solve the judder often seen when panning around. I think we've (I've) been going down the wrong direction with world-models and regionalism. Basically, I think the way to get better performance is reducing our object set down to small groups suitable for certain regions and not mixing lots together just for the sake of hiding out facades. e.g. Reducing the German building set to 100 different types of models I think will really improve the loading and performance time (Just, I wish someone could come along and help create/identify these 100 buildings). Instead of trying to get buildings to fix exactly into the footprint, we can lower the tolerance so that more buildings from the smaller set will be used. In v0.7.0, additionally we are going to make better used of facades. The current facade sets we have from the OSM2XP days aren't optimised. So if you have 14-storey tower block, X-Plane will stack 6 lots of 2 storey facade walls on top of each other, basically making the building far more complex than it needs to be, and let's admit, the facades look horrible and like lego bricks, so they won't be missed. Instead, World2XPlane will work with facades like it currently works with objects and pick a best fit facade type for the building, e.g. If a facade specifies it is most efficient at 14-stories high, then this will be used. I've already made a few of these and noticed an improvement in framerates when flying around New York.

It's to do with w2xp placing trees along meadows and farmland. It's likely that around the airport somebody has traced the farmland and fields, and w2xp will randomally place trees and shrubs along field boundaries. It shouldn't place them if the airport boundary has been tagged inside OSM however.

I'll give it a go :-). We are actually removing those blue buildings and replacing them with a new facade set, as they look like plastic lego bricks.

Glah, do you live in the area? If so, can you take me a photo or find a photograph of how the power lines should look including the poles/towers?

Yes, but I'd hate to see the effect it has on framerates ;-), we're already really pushing it. You can define inside a 3D model that a particular surface is shiny, so you could model one of the walls to reflect the sunlight. I'm not sure about facades, but I guess this also possible.

Do you have all the libraries listed here http://world2xplane.com/scenery/, as well as an up-to-date world-models?

There is no version 0.6.1, so don't know which version you are using? I've checked a few other areas, and Daikan is right in that the tagging is very very inconsistent. Some major lines have the voltage etc tagged, but some minor lines are tagged as major lines and no extra information is given. I'm afraid for the most part there are going to be errors until the data in OSM is standardised (Probably never). I suggest you add some filters into the rules you have to generate powerlines so it works in the area you want to generate in Switzerland.

I guess the issue here is that somebody has tagged on the train line power=tower (If I remember from the OSM in the area), so pylons are being placed along the tracks. There doesn't seem to be a standard way of tagging train power lines in OSM, so we can't easily determine which ones are part of the electricity network, and which ones are for electric train lines. Have a look and see if you can see anything specially tagged on these pylons in OSM, maybe they can be excluded?

OK, finally found the problem here, and it's that the line has a mixture of power=tower, and power=pole tags, so the rule at the bottom of the config file needs to be changed from <rule type="vector"><filter type="key-value"> power=line power=tower </filter> <vector-definition>220</vector-definition> <nodes-as-points>true</nodes-as-points> <pass-through>true</pass-through></rule> to <rule type="vector"><filter type="key-value"> power=line power=tower power=pole </filter> <vector-definition>220</vector-definition> <nodes-as-points>true</nodes-as-points> <pass-through>true</pass-through></rule>The problem was that the tags with poles were being skipped, so the line took a big shortcut across the water :-). I've fixed this for 0.6.1, but you can apply the fix yourself above and regenerate.

Yes, as Jacques posted, save the area you want inside JOSM and then convert it using osmconvert. I often do this when testing small areas. This depends, if you use the default config files then it will generate a full scenery and exclude everything even if your scenery only contains buildings. You can just edit the config file though and at the top you will see the section about what to exclude.

Thanks Glah I think the problem is caused by the point just outside the airport where there is a railway bridge crossing over/under the powerline (I guess it confuses World2XPlane), it seems that after this point it does something really strange and is a bug I need to look into it.

You don't need to do anything. AFAIK, PilotBalu at simheaven used the poly files to generate the 0.5.1 scenery. Just make sure the countries you download are placed above the OSM2XP scenery in your scenery file. If you using W2XP, you should never get buildings twice unless you have specifically removed exclusions from the config file. It might take a little longer to load if you use both, but there shouldn't be conflicts.

You shouldn't need to remove anything. All you need to do is download Italy and the .poly file from Geofabrik and use both to generate the scenery, and make sure you install the generated scenery above OSM Europe. The .poly is also available on sites such as geofabrik.de and if you select it on the advanced tab in World2XPlane it will create proper exclusions (you don't need to use smart exclusions) which won't wipe out neighbouring tiles from other countries (It isn't absolutely perfect as exclusions in X-Plane are rectangular only, but for the most part it works well).

You're going to have a hard time getting it absolutely correct because the aerial imagery used might be very slightly misaligned, and it varies quite a bit in small areas. The worst part is that we don't know if it's Bing's aerial imagery in OSM which is misaligned, or the Google imagery used by Simheaven to generate the scenery. Perhaps in this instance you'd prefer the barrier=hedge tag to work the same as the farmland borders and use shrubs instead, as they are slightly thicker and have some randomness to them which is why absolute precision isn't necessary. Let me know if you want this, and I'll send you a new config file to do this. Additionally have you checked the OS OpenData layer?. Although it doesn't have farm boundaries, it has drains which are often barriers for fields. The OS layer seems pretty well-aligned, but again it isn't absolutely perfect.

Just had a quick look at the small area just North of the airfield I can spot a few problems which would cause the out of alignment: 1) Your fields aren't mapped upto the hedges bordering the roads, but a little back. So not only will World2XPlane push the hedge back slightly, but the boundary will be off and the bushes will appear to be about 0.50 metres or so away from where they should be. 2) The B3306 road is badly aligned. You need to align the road so it goes down the centre line. This is one of the problems I was talking about earlier with badly aligned roads and paths (Although this is tame compared to the some of the areas I've seen). The road being aligned properly is very important to get the scenery looking accurate, as these roads are used internally by World2XPlane when building farmland as well. If you are looking for examples of areas which convert really well to World2XPlane then I've picked out a village here https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.9229/-0.7052. If you open this area up in JOSM, you should get an idea.

Not seen this before, and I built that area earlier to try out and it all looks good to me. Can you give me a specific example I'll have a look, but it's possible it's the rule that trims back hedges when they are close to roads (as mentioned above). Because X-Plane's roads are bigger than the orthophoto roads, World2XPlane has to push boundaries near to roads back a little bit to prevent trees all over the roads, so maybe this is the problem? (The option can be switched off in the config file, but I wouldn't recommend it). I've done the fighting game before with alignment, and it's very hard to be precise, especially on hilly areas because of the parallax effect. I use two layers when mapping in the UK, the OS OpenData and Bing, with the OS OpenData layer set to about 30% transparency.

A GPX track is a route recorded by a GPS device. Many people will go out for a walk and leave the route recording on their phones. People later then upload these recordings (GPX traces) to OpenStreetMap and tag it as a path. This is how most of the roads were originally mapped before OSM had photoimagery and other data sources. The problem with doing this is that these tracks aren't very accurate. You can clearly see how people have left the GPX trace recording whilst they have gone into a shop or to the pub, and the path squiggles across the shops and is often a metre or so of. Some people take the time to correct their routes and maintain them, others don't.

You'll get a double up on shrubs if you place barrier=hedge around a field, if you don't join the hedge nodes to the field then depending on the distance, you may end up with 2 lines of shrubs very close to each other but with a visible gap. I'd recommend you tag the field right up to the hedge and visible end of the field (don't join to roads). Attaching one field to the next is also the nicest way to do it and produces the best effect, and this is how maps from Ordnance Survey look. I don't tag the hedges, but I know others do, and it gives you much tighter control. Not all fields will get shrubs around them, some will get a small wire fence. However, since most fields are joined together, you will always get a doubling up at the joining point of two fields. I want to fix this in future versions so it detects this and doesn't double up. But if you prefer tagging groups of fields together and seperating them with a barrier=hedge, then I don't see anything wrong with that, as it still clearly shows the field boundaries. I do know of people who've edited areas specifically for World2XPlane only to be disappointed that the huge area they tagged as farmland hasn't worked as expected. Also, if a field edge is near to a road or airport, the shrub line is pushed back a little bit by W2XP. This is because X-Plane's roads are much bigger than they are in real-life, and if it follows the placement on OSM exactly, you'll end up with trees and shrubs in the roads. I am,yep, I presume Shaun is also doing the same. I'll post some screenshots later, but with XP stock textures, it looks a little odd as the textures don't match the objects. e.g. X-Plane has its own field boundaries in the textures, whereas OSM data has the real field boundaries. You also get the problem where X-Plane covers a town or village with a green texture, and then with the OSM buildings on top, it looks weird. World2XPlane is meant for low-and-slow flight and should be used with the highest quality photoscenery you have space for. There is little point installing this type of scenery if you just fly over it at 30,000ft on the default X-Plane scenery. You won't see much apart from the houses from above about 5000ft, but you'lll still be using resources and hitting your framerate.

Fantastic, looks really good. For the minor issues, yes, please do make a note and we'll get through them when I get back from holiday. Your screenshots remind me of many childhood holidays spent in Cornwall, and I'm very glad someone is concentrating on the area and doing such a good job :-) I can send you just the texture. It looks great when sat on the runway, but higher up it looks a little strange, and not sure how to deal with this without having lots of different .pol files to cover the runway. I know OSM isn't designed for X-Plane, but sometimes when I'm editing, I know how something should work and look good and I know when certain data that won't work too well. The problem is I can't modify the data, because not only World2XPlane uses the data, but I'm sure other applications use it, and for very different reasons. When mapping, here are a few tips that really improve "and help" world2xplane generate scenery and in my opinion is good simply for mapping data: Please don't attach landuse=* tags to roads. The bing aerial image is now detailed enough that this isn't necessary and not only improves the map, but means there is less work for World2XPlane to do, and it's more accurate. It's also extremely awkard when mappers need to adjust/realign roads as the landclass is glued to the road.Be mindful of how you tag roads. A road going to a farm isn't an unclassified road, but a "service or track" road. For connections from main roads to farms and factories, please tag these as service/track roads and not primary/seconday/unclassified roads, unless they really are graded as such.When tagging fields/farmland, here are some simple rules which will really improve the scenery and also are useful for hikers using the map:Trace each field when mapping farmland and meadows. Don't trace huge areas of farmland with many fields grouped together, as this not only doesn't show field boundaries, but also doesn't show on the map where one field ends and the next begins. This not only helps W2XP know where to place hedges, but it also helps topographic maps render correct field boundaries and produce useful hiking/cycling maps.landuse=farmland is generally where something grows, e.g. corn/rape seed oil. landuse=meadow is generally where cattle graze. This is not set in stone, since field usage can change per season, but when mapping for scenery, it determines which types of field cattle is placed on and for scenery renderers, the type of field texture used.If you go on a walk and record you route, please take the effort to the align your route. In the UK there are 2 layers you can use, Bing and OS Opendata. In Poland, you can check geoportal.pl, Germany geoportal.de. Please align your route to fields, woodland and buildings after you upload the GPX track. GPS is nice, but it can have errors up to several meters. This not only produces an inaccurate map, but means that fields, woodland and buildings in X-Plane aren't cut unneccesarily because a path passes through them.For buildings:Tag all buildings with the correct tags. If a building is a house, then tag is as building=house. If a building is a walmart supermarket then tag it as building=supermartket;name=Walmart. Every single bit of a data added is used to not only render the map but also generate scenery.Please only tag the school building as amenity=school. The entire school grounds, such as fields should be tagged seperately.Please don't tag an entire village, industrial estate or farm as building=yes, this has happened everywhere and produces horrible scenery and ugly maps. If somehow you know the height, color or material or a building then please tag it. If you house it 2 stories and made of brick then please tag it as "building=house;building:levels=2;building:material=brick". The more information the betterFor roads:The more you know about the road the better. Tag how many lanes it has, if it has streetlights, if it's oneway, and even where the stop-signs or give-way signs are. All this helps, not only in OSM scenery, but in GPS apps.Read the country rules for the classification or roads before tagging. e.g. A trunk road is different in the UK to what a trunk road is in Germany. At some point these will all be used. I will write a blog article at some point on how best map areas in OSM, but for some good examples, please check areas such as Berlin Germany, North-West Wales/East Yorkshire/Birmingham in the UK, Warszawa/Poznań in Poland and nearly all of the Netherlands.

Yes of course, take what you like if it helps (I'll upload the field to xplane.org). The runway texture looks good close up but a bit strange from a distance, I think possibly it repeats too much, so I think a few variations are needed to make it look really nice. I'll ask the airfield manager if he can snap me a few more sections of the runway and parking areas so I can make some more varied textures. config-forests-med.xml is for Mediterrean style forests and is only applied when generating that area. You can ignore it. config-hd.xml is the one I use and includes high-definition items for low-and-slow flying and denser trees. The config.xml file is for slightly less demanding scenery (e.g. It removes things like tractors, lowers density of trees, etc). The above shots are all done using config-hd.xml, and this generally works best. I know, it's a pity that only a few areas in the UK are well-mapped and have active communities, however there is a good side to it (believe it or not); When doing maps for World2XPlane I always prefer a blank canvas, because I find people will upload anything to OSM and then not bother to maintain it or even align it or fix it when better sources become available. When I mapped the town I now live in in Poland, the roads were a complete mess, there were tracks running through houses, and streams and rivers completely misaligned. When I started editing it, I had to inevitably edit these tracks so they didn't run through the houses, which annoyed the original author who claimed they were far more accurate than the aerial imagery. A few weeks later, somebody decided to import a load of forests from some datasource but didn't take the effort to fix conflicts, so forests were all doubled up, and again it was a huge mess, that I simply gave up in my area. Of course the same is very much the case in the UK (but with a much less-active community), when mapping agricultaral areas I find it a real pain aligning tracks and drains (often tagged as rivers or streams) which can be really badly aligned, running through houses. I find I can work quicker on a mostly blank canvas, and don't run the risk of annoying others :-)

Here are some shots of my work-in-progress first World2XPlane airfield. The field is XPOK (Pocklington), which is home of the Wolds Gliding Club. The airfield is a former RAF base, and I chose to model it because of the surroundings and because the default airfield in X-Plane is just a grassy blob which ruins the World2XPlane scenery: I've modelled the club house and hangars in high detail based on photos kindly sent by the airfield manager. I've also tried to texture the very weathered old concrete runway, but it still needs some texturing work The parking/taxi way texture needs a bit of work also. The surrounding buildings and trees have all been placed with World2XPlane and fit perfectly with the airfield. I also added some objects in the airfield such as gliders, caravans, parked cars and glider trailers (with the club's logo on them). The textures for the taxiway and parking area really do need some work, and this is generally where my artistic abilities fall over ;-) Taking off, the nearby town of Pocklington is completely mapped by World2XPlane, and looks very similar to the real town. The surrounding countryside is miles of rolling chalk hills, with small villages and farms throughout. Each village, farm, field, obstacle are all again generated from OSM data using World2XPlane. Another small town really well mapped. The area is a joy to fly around which is why I'm wanting to fill out some other airfields in the area. Additionally, OSM contributors are very active at the moment in the area, and things are improving. It would be amazing if we could have all of the UK covered in this detail (Maybe in a few years time :-))

Nice scenery without decent airports to land at is a big no no in my book, and the work you're doing is really stunning, so please keep it up and you already are helping :-). I'm currently doing my first World2XPlane/World-Models airport as well in the UK, I'll post some pictures shortly. The current airport in X-Plane is just a rectangular piece of grass.

Amazing work Shaun, you've really captured the Cornish countryside there, really looking forward to trying this. Let me know if it looks good for you or not when I send you the release, this is initial work on these types of areas so it will certainly need some configuring and improving for the artwork, e.g. X-Plane's random placement of plants might not work too well, as heather tends to grow in large clumps and not just scattered around like shrubs. Also, I noticed someone has recently mapped the Isles of Scilly in high detail, and I generated the area and had a fly around, it looks quite good (but could certainly do with more appropriate building artwork to improve the town and harbour area). Small flights from Lands End to Scilly should become much more interesting :smile:

I believe it is possible to some degree, but would require quite a complicated facade to cover all the wall sizes possible. Yes, you can just go into the config file (i.e. resources/config.xml or resources/config-hd.xml) and remove the rule for landuse=farm for surrounding it with trees. However, in v0.6.0 there are no longer trees, just small shrubs which looks much more real. Trees do make the scenery look nice, but it's well over-the-top and not realistic, the small shrubs looks much better and does not overpower the scenery and I found looks quite realistic. v0.6.0 also has new rules to place heather on moorland and some small brown/woody shrubs on heathland. I'll send you the beta probably tomorrow with the changes so you can try yourself and configure the config file.