Blue Angels over Europe

  • Hi pilots,

    while you are waiting for geoconvert I want to show you some results of my tests. During several nightshifts I converted seamlessly central europe from low res images , FSET 4. Since this is huge and all done with FSET it will not be published. Also I do not know whether the image quality is good enough for VR, but definitely suitable as base layer for aerofly FS 2.
    See this virtual flight of Blue Angels over europe.

    Taking off at Aeroporto Friuli at the mediterranean sea in Italy.

    Venice, the city of love.

    Cortina, the famous winter sports location in the Italian Dolomites.

    Passing Grossglockner, the highest mountain of Austria.

    Leaving the northern Alps at Salzburg, Austria.

    Ingolstadt, home of Audi in Bavaria, Germany.

    Berlin, capital city of Germany, is the northern turning point of the flight.

    Frankfurt, largest airport of Germany.

    Nice ridges in the western Alps in France.

    Reaching the end of the trip in Nice, France.

    Hope you enjoyed the flight.


  • Yes,

    and you can do this at any time later. This is one of the examples which I did:

    A large area of NAS Whidbey from FSET 4, representing levels 9 and 11 in aerofly.

    Later I downloaded the USGS images with a resolution of 1m and added them, representing the levels 12-14.

    Visible edges? This depends on the image quality like colors and fitting.


  • Can't say I like what I see, sorry. Too low res, sharp edges here and there due to different coloring and I seriously hate flat photoreal. ;) Might be nice when you fly at FL320 though... I am looking forward to the regions that Orbx is thinking about. Nevertheless, it is great to have this option, of course!

  • No problem with your opinion.

    I think only few people will actually use geoconvert.

    For me it is fun instead of flying around I love to fiddle about with the program.

    I added my home area and other interesting points with high resolution, accepting the image quality, especially as I don't use VR.

    The USGS images are much more consistent than the earth services.

    And having the entire Alps in aerofly is far from flat photoreal.


  • That sounds good.

    I understand "low res. - sharp edges - different coloring. But what do you mean by "flat photoreal"? What is the alternative to flat photo?

    Ah, sorry for being not more clear. With flat photoreal I mean scenery that is ONLY flat photoreal so no 3D buildings etc. on top of it. In that regard even Alps can be called flat photoreal, despite the mesh. ;)

    Rural area's are less of a problem here, although I still do prefer to see 3D trees where trees should be, but urban areas look seriously awful imho (!) if only photoreal has been used. Like that last picture of Nice... Flat photoreal doesn't look real at all to me: it is as if a nuclear bomb has been droppen the day before. Quite often you can't even see if you are close to a city or already flying over it! Specially cities that have high buildings in reality look nothing like the real deal with flat photoreal. You should see cities from miles and miles away already. At certain high altitudes this is less of a problem but even then I notice it: even at FL320 a flat city looks really different than a city with 3D buildings.

    Needless to say I spend most of my time around LOWI now... ;) I sincerly hope Aerofly will offer autogen soon for all its high res regions.

  • I think he meant the urban areas, all buildings look flat. And J van E is right here of course.

    But this is my roadmap pushing IPACS ;););)

    After geoconvert has been released we may sort out all questions around usage.

    Let's get airports into aerofly.

    How's about the xref library and the 'autogen' buildings?

    It's clear, we cannot reach the target tomorrow, it will take time and I accept that kind of progress.

    I know how hard all of the guys do work at IPACS.


    You have been faster, J van E!:thumbup:

  • Exactly, that's something that needs to be done as a next step.

    In the meantime what I would appreciate seeing from you is detail pictures of the compiled scenery corners, both when "standalone" in the middle of default low res satellite ground texture and also at places where there is an overlap with an existing DLC, for instance your scenery patch between LOWI and the Swiss DLC.

    It looks like the LOD level during compilation defines the priority, for instance resampling up to level 14 obviously gives priority above the Swiss DLC, while with level 11 the Swiss DLC keeps displaying on top, but there are odd things too...

    Thanks in advance.



    Config : i7 6900K - 20MB currently set at 3.20GHz, Cooling Noctua NH-U14S, Motherboard ASUS Rampage V Extreme U3.1, RAM HyperX Savage Black Edition 16GB DDR4 3000 MHz, Graphic Card Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1080 8GB, Power supply Corsair RM Series 850W, Windows 10 64 bit.

  • Antoine,

    images 1 and 2 show the border between default scenery and FSET 4.

    Images 3 and 4 show the border between USGS 1m and FSET 4.

    Please take into account, that I did no image editing, and the screenshots here are 800 kb JPG recalculated from 5.7 MB BMP.
    I forgot to mention this also for the first images shown above.

    The images between LOWI and Switzerland are really bad. I will download another earth service set hoping to get better material.