kevinfirth

Very nice, completely aside from the visuals, awesome audio track. Hope you will redo the XP offer with Laminar perhaps?

I think you'll find its actually gate 6 If so, BUG REPORT: the dashed yellow line into the gate is possibly slightly misrepresented...

I've tried using the horizon mesh with TE-GB. it is more detailed and shows up terrain features more clearly. Where I've found problems though, is that the irregular shaped buildings that orbx use models to depict, often seem to stick out of the ground too far. This is particularly true in some places around uk2000 airports, where of course the terrain is blended with the airport using flattens that match the horizon mesh and not TE-GB.

Seems to work for me Rod, thanks

Agreed! https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=CwKv91cA&id=81305A50D40AD2FF55C046F6B72DB7C83B6E81A1&thid=OIP.CwKv91cAkOIgcUC2yyTMZQHaCp&mediaurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saltash.gov.uk%2Fimages%2Fhomepage_ss%2Ftamarbridge1.jpg&exph=346&expw=969&q=tamar+road+bridge&simid=607994697269576420&selectedindex=14&ajaxhist=0&vt=0 It appears to be an extrusion bridge lashed together with some modelling, it appears to have 2 white vertical column supports that don't exist in RL?

I think this was confirmed elsewhere yes.

Excellent news John thankyou :)

With good hardware its not a massive problem, but thats easy to say from my perspective. I dont have XP so the merits of different architectures are not something I can comment on knowledgeably, but it sounds reasonable. Perhaps upcoming P3D versions will improve on some of those aspects.

JV explained in another thread Chris. In a nutshell, the first P3D part was a proof of concept, they can use freely available government imagery in the US so are concentrating there this year to make TE profitable before coming back to europe.

The year 2020 will probably be before that :p

I too would like Europe first (in an ideal world), but your economic argument makes perfect sense :)

Just trying to add a little constructive commentary in areas that I know a little about and I thought there may be an easy win for further improvement :) Im certainly not brandishing any knives John, and I have been careful to make clear my constructive criticism has been well balanced with praise for many other aspects. (to pick an obvious one the colour corrected PR itself is worth the scenery cost alone!) I made sure I flew the scenery for some time before even making a comment. I'm confident that all the extrusion bridges for example dont exhibit the same characteristics. Some have traffic that go over them, others dont. That suggests to me that perhaps its not too difficult to do at this price point (separate debate but I think its actually too cheap!), but is a matter of process and or data? I have an idea for a separate solution as well but I want to be able to test it before making an idiot of myself... I'm always going to try to niggle you for a little bit more detail, no apologies for that, but I also fully understand I'm not entirely representative of your average userbase. :) Thanks for listening, cheers K

We're going to have to wait til next year I think Chris...

Good to hear John, thankyou

I dont have XP so I cant speak certainly, but I dont think thats the problem. Some of the extrusion bridges are just too short, and they characteristically have sharply inclined ramps at each end. It's not the end of the world, but this aspect of the scenery feels...a bit rushed if I'm honest, without the attention to detail that is apparent in other aspects. Either that or they have been procedurally generated without much attempt to have the end results reflect the elevations of these bridges in real life. Hopefully they can be reviewed at some point