FSGenesis fix (unofficial beta) updated.

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:03 am

Hi folks,

Following much appreciated feedback from Dillon and Scott I have tried to improve my flatten files for use with addon mesh to retain much more of the terrain around the airport. The mesh I am using is the FSGenesis 38m mesh but these fixes should work with any other accurate mesh.
Any fix is something of a compromise so I offer here 3 options which I hope will cover most peoples settings and preferences.
For UTUSA owners there is a note below.

First delete any previous versions of the fix (Flytampa_SanDiego_FSGenesis.bgl or ksan*_DEM.bgl.

Then apply ONE of the following fixes. I stress only ONE of the files contained in the attachment should be used.

1. Quick and easy.
Place the file ksan5_DEM.bgl in your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder and go enjoy the scenery!
This only looks okay, however, if you have the default Terrain_Max_Vertex_Level = 19

2. A bit more work but retains even more of the mesh around the airport.
Move the following file out of your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder
(Don't delete it, you might want to move it back if you don't like this fix).
terrain3.bgl
Place the file ksan6_DEM.bgl in your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder.
(If you are using Terrain_Max_Vertex_Level of 20 or 21 ksan4_DEM.bgl will give somewhat better results)

3. The best fix for the terrain but you lose the interstate.
Move the following files out of your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder
(Don't delete them, you might want to move them back if you don't like this fix).
terrain3.bgl
i5.bgl
i5_ani.bgl
Place the file ksan7_DEM.bgl in your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder.
This works fine for any Terrain_Max_Vertex_Level.

The only problem I'm aware of being caused by these fixes is that a triangular portion of the carpark texture in front of the 'Port of San Diego' building becomes airborne. It's altitude seems to be determined by the ground altitude beyond the interstate so I suspect Martin is the only man who could do anything about this.

Note for Ultimate Terrain USA owners.
If you want to see the UTUSA roads around the airport move the following files out of the FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder.
terrain.bgl
terrain_2.bgl
terrain_9.bgl
terrain_ex.bgl

Note on TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL
This is a setting in the Terrain section of the FS9.cfg file.
The default value is 19. Higher resolution mesh looks fine with this setting but will only display it's full detail if the value is increased. If memory serves correctly for 38m mesh a value of 20 is suitable and for 10m mesh a value of 21.

Hope you find these files useful.

All the best,

John

Carob · Post by **Carob** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:43 am

John Burgess wrote:Hi folks,

2. A bit more work but retains even more of the mesh around the airport.
Move the following files out of your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder
(Don't delete them, you might want to move them back if you don't like this fix).
terrain3.bgl
flatten.bgl
Place the file ksan6_DEM.bgl in your FlyTampa-SanDiego\Scenery folder.
(If you are using Terrain_Max_Vertex_Level of 20 or 21 ksan4_DEM.bgl will give somewhat better results)

First you say to use ksan6 and then ksan4? If you have a level of 20 set, which is it? Am I missing something?

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:46 am

Hi there,

ksan4_DEM.bgl will give the better results if you are using a vertex level of 20.

All the best,

John

Carob · Post by **Carob** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:49 am

Okay.

Another couple of questions though...

1) You say that UT users should remove additional files. Does this apply to the orig USA Roads as well or just UT?

2) You say to delete any previous versions of the fix... Does this include the fix available in the downloads section from FlyTampa as well?

Thanks!

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:54 am

Hi there,

Yes, you must definitely delete the version of the fix available in the downloads section.

UTUSA users don't have to remove those files I mentioned, but if they don't they will see the roads provided with the FlyTampa scenery rather than the more detailed UTUSA roads. I would guess the same is true of the original USA Roads. It comes down to personal preference.

All the best,

John

scottb613 · Post by **scottb613** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:28 pm

Hi John,

More changes to try !!!

We will get the surrounding terrain around this beautiful airport perfect yet... I'll give them a try tonight as I also have UT...

I am surprise more people on VATSIM don't fly there - seems everyone wants to use LAX and SFO... I love this little airport...

Looks like your the full time support crew for San Diego... I hope FlyTampa throws a free scenery your way or something for all your hard work...

It's greatly appreciated - sir...

Regards,
Scott

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 2:51 pm

Thanks Scott,

Perfect no. Better , hopefully!

I developed a softspot for the airport when beta testing for Radar Contact (www.jdtllc.com - unashamed plug for a great atc add-on, latest version due out any time now!). The extended threshold on runway 27 had us being told to 'line up and wait' when there were clearly ai in front of us.
We fixed it, of course, after hours of me sitting in line at KSAN!

All the best,

John

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 4:42 pm

Oops, I just realised I said to move the flatten.bgl file. That's wrong - you'll end up with bumpy taxiways. Sorry.

Leave it where it is. I've updated my original message to remove that instruction.

All the best,

John

scottb613 · Post by **scottb613** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:38 am

Morn'n all...

I didn't have as much time as I thought last night - but - I did play around with the various fix's...

I did try #2 - removing the BGL's with ksan6_DEM.bgl... The roads do line up - well - between the two packages - and - I switched back and forth a few times to note any other differences... The only thought I had - is it seemed as if the terracing along I5 was a bit more obvious than it was in ksan5_DEM.bgl... It was kinda late - so I could be wrong... I am going to try the UT fix with ksan5_DEM.bgl - to see how it works...

I did not get to option #3 - removing the I5 bridge... I'll give that a go as well... With the detail level I have set - I do not have cars on it anyway... If it improves thing to remove it - ok - with me...

One Note for UT Users - do you guys have the Bridge fix package that was recently released - loaded ??? It works great and it sure is nice getting the default opbjects repositioned correctly - like the Coronado Bridge...

One thought - if both the airport and the terrain are fairly accurate - why do we have this issue in the first place ??? Just curious... Is the elevation data off... I know - there was some flat ground between the airport and the hills leading up to Hillcrest in real life - but in FS - is seems all crammed together...

John thanks for the help on this issue... Kinda what makes the FS so community good... Also - if you can email me off-line - I'd like to hear more about your impressions of Radar Contact and what it actually does... I think my email is available to forum members...

Regards,
Scott

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:41 pm

Hi Scott,

Thanks for your kind words of encouragement

Just got back in from a long day at work

If the interstate isn't important to you then option#3 is the best, it interferes very little with the terrain around the airport.

As for why we get these problems - the FSGenesis terrain is very accurate but FS requires airports to be perfectly flat, which they aren't

Also features like the interstate are designed with the default mesh in mind. Trying to fit it in with the more detailed mesh produced the layering which is obvious in option 2.

I'll e-mail you tomorrow with some details of Radar Contact. There's also info at www.jdtllc.com (including a 200 page manual which is free to download!)

All the best,

John

scottb613 · Post by **scottb613** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:53 am

Hi John,

FIX #3 WINS !!!

This is - in my humble opinion - the best solution...

It looks so much better without the terracing for I5...
I don't miss the bridge...
I am also keeping your UT fix as well...

Works pretty darn good in my book...

Regards,
Scott

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:53 am

Hi Scott,

I agree. Fix 3 is my favorite too - but it's a shame to lose the interstate.
I tried to find your e-mail address in your profile but it wasn't there. Mine should be available if you want to mail me about Radar Contact.

Basically it gives you much better atc than the default. Doug, one the main designers, is a controller in Memphis and is very determined that we stick with real world procedures and phraseology. The version which is about to be released has some different procedures when you are flying outside the USA.
One big advantage of this approach over the likes of vatsim is, of course, the availability of full atc anywhere in the world.

All the best,

John

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 3:31 am

John you did a great job here...

Option 2. works the best for me... I'm going to have to update my fixes and repost...

Thanks for the great work...

John Burgess · Post by **John Burgess** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:45 pm

Hi Dillon,

Thanks for the kind words. To be honest until your post I hadn't realised what I'd done to the approach. Thanks so much for pointing it out. San Diego is a long way from Scotland but once I looked up a few photos of the airport, well ...

Since I have Lago's FSE I look forward to having some more buildings to fly past on approach

All the best,

John

FSGenesis fix (unofficial beta) updated.

FSGenesis fix (unofficial beta) updated.

Re: FSGenesis fix (unofficial beta) updated.