Tom Knudsen

Try reading this thread Ola, then you get a better insifht into texturing and mesh for xp X-Plane 10 HD Mesh v2 - PREVIEW http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?/topic/5341-X-Plane-10-HD-Mesh-v2---PREVIEW Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

But this cannot be used in xp right? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

I think you summened up all things very nicely with this section sir, well said. I guess this is the major fault with us consumer. We do not see the backend, just only what our own eyes see and know what our heart desire. We see cool things show up now and then, and read i.e what Ben writes and make conclusions and wishlist longer than our own noses reach. It is very difficult og limit our needs and wishes if we do not know how things work, the end user only care about product cost and we tend to forget new feature as soon as they have been implemented and used. Think I speak for everybody when I say we appreciate all the effort designers and developers do in order to sell and refurbish their product. As X-Plane is an ongoing product and we the fans are contributing to its success, well we do hope the developer listen to our needs and do what is possible to fix, amend or implement new features. Its a visious circle he he.. Could one edit the default DSF file and add water to it via i.e polygons?

Lol nothing wrong being persistant as long as you get to the finishline Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

I study 3D design and animation right now, this is part of why I ask so much and are so keen to understand everyting. Do you have controll over those rotating shaders or is it auto. I know about rotating matrix in 2D but not sure if you are talking about the same thing or not. Well these lakes has never been in X-Plane, well at least in v8-9 and 10, but they are large and absolutly there in IRL, I have also adjusted this in Openstreetmap so I will be happy if they apperare in HD Mesh v2 for sure (Thanks for doing that btw) So to summen up this discussion I tend to believe there is nothing that cannot be done, it just take a bit longer and cost a whole lot more. But to say certain things cannot be done is just and indication that the person does not have the knowledge or is able to see the final solution (with non perticular in mind) Good luck on your HD Mesh Alpilot, and once again thank you for contributing to the community

Seems to me that the triangler mesh is both a bottelneck and an annoying layer that you always need to do battles against Al (mind if I call you that) Anyway, there are 3 key items I would love to get some feedback on if possible * Repetable texture as Rhard described - I guess this is a blend of the triangler mesh and coding? Would the performance impact be less or better with i.e a typology mesh (not sure if this is even a factor) or even tessellation mesh * Waterclass - I have noticed that with the latest update 10.22 there are many missing lakes and uncorrect "shorelines" in the default update. Have not done any comparrasing to earlier versions, but I did notice this when making OSM scenery (country). OSM scenery is not correct data such as typology raw data from shuttlemissions or similar, but they do try to be accurate. I went kinda away from it as I did notice a sport among 12-14 year old youths that they willingly mess up thinks like Openstreetmap and wikipedia sites.. * Terrain Textures or Landclass - I understand now that triangler mesh tends to brake up (correct?) a texture tile in order to fit it around i.e a mountain peak. One can see this if you look closely at a mountain and then streight down from lets say 3000 feet. In XP I noticed that there are many mountains that have for example a top consisting of several texturebits rotated in several different directions making the rock texture look plausible, but far from realistic. I guess plausible is the Austin way, but i feel this is degrating the overall look and feel of X-Plane. I must add that X-Plane has the most beutiful and realistic default textures in comarasing to other simulators. But it has as Rhard pointed out, several errors. Repeating textures are one annoying factor, missplaced textures are a strong contender. Anyway, I know you have a lot to do and I would imagine everybody els knows this as well. But my question to you is dedicated to this 1. Will there not be a huge effort for X-plane to egange more people to do collobration work? 2. Is even X-Plane adaptable to 3rd party vendors that i.e make ground textures like f.eks. "Ground Environment" that aims to start with X-Plane development 3. Are there possibilities for me to add lakes and small waters into x-plane that are missing?

He he you and everybody else Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk now Free

mabye.....but catching bugs "pre-customer" is something we specialize in I very much try to do things most customers won't even try....ever and put my code through a pretty hard wringer. We do expect hardware related bugs, possibly sound or graphics related....usability bugs, but as far as aircraft complexity or systems bugs....of course we will get a few, but not as many as folks my think IMO. Jan knows how to break stuff like nobody I've ever seen. TomK As I told Morten, I would easly do my best to find them Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

So what if I had access to 10meter DEM data (i do but not sure if it can be publicly used yet), could it be used in XP? PS I think Austin should buy Outerra and merge them for sure Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

First off, let me say I am deeply grateful that you share your knowledge! Second, not a english native my self so excuse any missunderstandings! Seems like more fun than work, but then I do not work with it so to me this is just fancy. I tend to get annoyed with things I do not understand and furthermore go to extended distances to figure things out. In some cases it will in fact be to annoy the heck out of people like you and Ben with question about things I want to figure out or do not understand. So how come X-Plane only have 90 meter elevation data where simulatators like FSX and Prepare3D claim down to 10 meters, 38 by default Well there are many tools out there that fixes SRTM data (patching holes and filling in like above N60) i.e SRTMFill http://3dnature.com/srtmfill.html and SRTMVoid Killer http://www.dgadv.com/dgvk/ But thats not the point! What i am not sure about is if it even exists better data for the world than SRTM90 3arc collected by Endeavour back in 2000 (except SRTM30 for the US that is). Or if they did in fact to a new dataset collection on the last shuttlemission. I know one thing is to want someting better, but my frustration is that I do not know if it is even possible. As you said, purhaps tessellation is the only way out. PS.. How the heck can Outerra do this type of mesh http://www.simflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/k298.jpg where FSX can do this http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/attachments/gaming/1978d1209209108-fsx-add-sandes_sion2.jpg but XP only this https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-aj3OyrOON3k/UjTndfsL_EI/AAAAAAAADGw/0w5_Z7rZp3A/w1597-h832-no/FA-22A_35.jpg NB! Could you do something about the mountain texture only? Looks like someone has sneezed on it with their now full of cocain LOL.. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-VS52wJqGyrQ/UjTnfb6e3pI/AAAAAAAADHU/W6xlVI27TTI/w1597-h832-no/FA-22A_41.jpg

First off, see the latter link, Ben is answering my question in a previous blogpost, second most of what you are explaining are more or less quoted from that post. Why is that better than the original raw shuttel mission data from NASA? http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/ In case you already havn't noticed, i am talking about mesh not texture From Bens post First som facts 1. DEM data for the entire world right now is 90meter as it has been since v9 right? 2. We have only Meshtool for v9 i.e it kan only support mesh DSFs. So my questions are.. If you are able to modify the 2d array as shown on the picture above, would not this be modifying just the lat and long quality and not the exactly elevation (would be with respect why i did not notice any difference in elevation quality with HD Mesh v2 vs orgininal mesh) If you are able beyond this to alter the 2D DEM array to even calculate the elevations (raster DEM), would it not be better elevation quality (i.e LOD - Level of detail) with better DEM data such as i.e 75 meter for the whole world? So Textures As you said, this is just pictures placed on top of the 2D raster layer as textures normally are, even with bump maps or speculars.. Anyway The clue must be to individually fit this to each triangle right? But that just if I am correct only affects placement or purhaps distortions??? What I am curious about is what textures can be modified in order to change the picture quality on a global scale? I did this just as an experiment for the states, but dropped it for sake of some OSM scenery while a go, but purhaps I need to retry that experiment. Could not be that difficult, just time consuming which again should be able to be automated I am curious not critising for fun, hope you take my questions as productive and not an personal attack he he.. PS.. Keep up the good work nevertheless. Here is btw a master theses on the subject of tessellation http://dice.se/publications/adaptive-hardware-accelerated-terrain-tessellation/

Just realized We now finally can see the meaning of the "sunglases" in XP Cudos Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

And I do believe you, i'm druling like an old geezer PS, you are aware the you will do bugfixing for months purhaps years after release anyway Tom? First it is the child like symptoms, then childsickness, then it grows and only gets sick once a while Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

LOL These textures are 1000 times better than the stock textures of FSX....... Oh and these are free... Who did compare it to default FSX? I will for sure see what 10.25 looks like, hopefully textures are not shown in this thread Was not aware that Xplane 10 did not use SRTM DEM data for its elevation mesh, cause if it did i bet your HD Mesh is about 3arc or about 90m DEM for LOD ( Level of detail) What kind of mesh typology X-Plane uses i do not know, but I do tend to use 10m DEM data for a Norwegian mesh when Meshtool finally comes out for XP10. Untill then lets hope 10.25 will improve Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

One thing i am sure of, i really need to do something about those horrible xp mountain textures. On another note, hd mesh looks good, what resolution are they at Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Exactly what i did Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Just something small I've been working on, kinda new airline bar purhaps lol click the picture for larger viewing

Will it include a working FMS

I take it that you did not get the irony then Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Forest's mom always said, life is like a box of chocolade, you never know what you gonna get.... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Couldn't agree more, lets hope we can fly the IXEG 737 for a long time too.. There comes to no supprise to anyone that there are many excellent aircrafts out there including one of my favorites (CRJ200, ATR 72-500, Airbus A320NEO and of course the tripple 777 from Ramzess). As a 3D designer I tend to favorise airplanes that are genuine well made, where estetics shows the developers effort. To that i must say, the IXEG as far as I have seen are looking extreemly beautiful. I doubt it! What version is it now, 4.2 or something and they have not managed to correct the fuselarge I have seen pictures of the 3d cockpit and it sure looks good so it may have a future as a freeware! Anyway, I may come out as non-appreciated or even harsh in my critic and statements, but I am a true fan and will allways aim for more realism and spot on dedication to the community. That said, I do want to send a thanks to all developers freeware and payware for making the slightest effort in making any type of aircraft and scenery to X-Plane. You all have my gratitude for sure!

Out with the old, in with the new is my philosophy. I have spent the past 9 years of my life studying the bird so for me it is quite easy to say. Exept the upgraded cockpit, the new cabin, new engines, winglets, longer space between the gears and of course more aerodynamic wings. This means higher cruizaltitude, higher cruizspeeds and lower fuel consuption. In fact the only thing that is in any reference to the classic series is the fuselarge. The the upgraded cockpit, just a pure sight for sore eyes, 6 mdfs that can show different or even combinations of parameters and at the same time function as backup to eachother, genious right. And what about the CFM56-7 or even the new improved 7BE versions with 40% less NOx release. Note the disregard for the vibrations issue at lower rpm. This is just small keyitems on why i love the 737NG. At this point it is important to say that i do love the classic to, but more in a past sense feelings of nostalgia. I can still remember Braathens S.A.F.E was the launch customer for the 400 and 500 back in 83. But today it is just 16 planes left flying with Norwegian and SAS (my favorite and national companies) colors. Norwegian has 10 737-300s that are now on their way out. SAS has 1 400 and I believe 5 500s still in active duty. So to summen up it all. i welcome the IXEG 737 with open arms due to the fact that this will be a fully working 737 for X-Plane 10, and due to the fact that no one seems to want to make an NG series yet, purhaps will see a converted PMDG. Anyway, i cannot express enough how much I look forward to the upcoming 737 MAX series that will be put into Production in 2017 , maybe someone make that one for XP? PS Who does not love doing a CAT3 zero visibility on the HUD display Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Fluid yes, but got several areas that need improvements, like seasonal textures (wintermaxx) lol Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Have hope for this my self, untill then I will look forward to try SkyMaxx Pro when it arrives Good luck

Not yet Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free