FSXA Questions About QGIS

[GaryGB]

That's interesting. I figured after calibrating those coordinates, although an old image from 1970, would align almost perfectly with the current images of today, especially roads that existed in 1970 and still exist today, such as East Lake Blvd. Of course, portions of East Lake Blvd is inside the ANG and the airport boundary. But back in the day, that entire street was for traffic.

I was searching on google earth about this. I put in the search something like, "Is it possible to align coordinates from an old imagery with current imagery," and found this video that may explain that issue. According to what I understand from the video, one must use Global Mapper to get the correct precise coordinates before importing them into SBuilderX to calibrate. I'm not sure if this video is related, but here's the link:

Christopher Britton (aka "Rotornut44") certainly made another good tutorial (Thanks, Chris for your generous efforts to share info ).

I think this is what you're referring to. I have many add-ons that were created back in the days of FSX, such as 707s, 727s, DC-8s, DC-9s and many others that no one cares to creates anymore. We need a lot more of these add-ons because I know there are a lot of us old timers out there that demand a lot more of these older aircraft. You can only have access to them if you've purchased them back in the day. FSS does have a Freight and passenger version of the 727-200 for MSFS2020, and I have it. One has the option to set it to where the flight engineer, or 2nd officer, dose his work flow while you, as the captain, perform only your duties. There are no really good 707s, DC-8s, nor DC-9s for MSFS2020. The other thing I don't like is that new add-ons hardly provide you with pdf documentations anymore. They're now mostly online, and I don't like having to go online to read a html document when it's much better to read it as a pdf on my own PC. I want files and add-ons directly on my PC, not streamed from the internet. Although it may be possible to convert old scenery add-ons to MSFS2020, it think it would require a lot of extra work but I still may try it at a later date. All I can say is that I prefer FSX and P3D for the time being. But I still do on occasions fly MSFS2020 and I have created a much better scenery for KBHM than what came with the product using Blender version 3.1.

Your preferences are certainly valid, as there is indeed a greater amount of choices for classic aircraft in FS2Kx compared to MSFS.

Converting aircraft is such a highly specialized skill that it may result in many FS enthusiasts continuing to use FS2Kx rather than MSFS.

HEADS UP ASOBO; most FS enthusiasts are older demographically, and may prefer flying classic aircraft over shiny new ones for "Gamerz".


Even Alex Marko (aka "Thalixte") with exceptional knowledge of FS2Kx / MSFS apparently found FS2Kx to MSFS aircraft conversion complex.

As the author of a utility to convert such aircraft, IIUC, he found it so complex that he has not pursued that project beyond basic levels.

And as a result, a converted aircraft from FS2Kx I had personally wanted to enjoy in MSFS, does not perform as well as in FSX.


AFAIK, with very few exceptions, there continues to be problems with nearly non-flyable aircraft physics on all default MSFS aircraft.

That is why I always prefer to fly in 3rd party "professionally made" aircraft by Got Gravel / Got Friends in MSFS ...because they "work".


Honestly, I actually considered getting a refund when MSFS 2020 was released because the default aircraft were nearly totally non-flyable.

But I consider FS always a Work-In-Progress (aka "W.I.P."), and did not want to give up on a FS version providing such gorgeous scenery.


But my 'personal' preference is to still encourage Asobo to keep fine-tuning its product and the SDK, so I press on and hope for the best.

And, our focus here is on your project.


There is a way to download web content based manuals to on-disk web archives that are able to be viewed via web browsers locally.

Also, one can print web pages to PDF if you have required print drivers installed in Windows; the resulting PDFs can be linked via shortcuts.

I've been using FSX and P3D for years and one of the things I can think of is that switching views are much easier and faster in FSX and P3D than MSFS2020.

That is a control assignment issue that can be remedied by use of Asobo's obscure GUI; IMHO, they should have used the GUI from FS2Kx.

I can't think of any inability to achieve a successful flight simulator scenery experience, other than getting the elevation correct.

Please explain "getting the elevation correct".

I thought the OSM would be more precise. I was thinking that since it's hard to find a free accurate old satellite view with streets, I could use an OSM from around the 1970s to align my roads.

OSM is a graphic map somewhat like a Topographic map made with vector data and rendered as a raster image in the workspace.

Your KBHM project likely will refer to (2) Topographic maps we ID'd, and a mix of B+W 1970's aerial- as well as current satellite- imagery.


I cited OSM because it was the "kinda' accurate" vector data used by Asobo to replace highly inaccurate default FS2Kx CVX vector data.


Even if we use satellite or aerial imagery textures to drape onto terrain, terrain mesh also requires use of vector TINs to modify it precisely.

Additionally, surfaces like Airports and Roads typically require flat (and in some cases 'level') surfaces, some of which may be collide-able.

Your CVX vector data aligned to IRL positions using MSVE will likely be more precise than OSM in most- if not all- areas.

GaryGB

 

[kmanning]

Your preferences are certainly valid, as there is indeed a greater amount of choices for classic aircraft in FS2Kx compared to MSFS.

Converting aircraft is such a highly specialized skill that it may result in many FS enthusiasts continuing to use FS2Kx rather than MSFS.

HEADS UP ASOBO; most FS enthusiasts are older demographically, and may prefer flying classic aircraft over shiny new ones for "Gamerz".

In my opinion, MSFS2020 focuses on eye candy textures with 4k resolution rather than accurate flight dynamics and performance. Having accurate flight dynamics and performance is what flying a flight simulator is all about. Don't get me wrong. It's nice to have those realistic views, which I perfectly like. But I also want an add-on aircraft that accurately simulates the real plane. Add-ons like PMDG and FSS are great add-ons. They are not perfect but they're the closest things we have to real flying. I've purchased the PMDG 737-800 and a few others for MSFS2020. PMDG and FSS should strive towards developing more historic aircraft like the 707s, 727s, DC-8s, and the DC-9s.

AFAIK, with very few exceptions, there continues to be problems with nearly non-flyable aircraft physics on all default MSFS aircraft.

That is why I always prefer to fly in 3rd party "professionally made" aircraft by Got Gravel / Got Friends in MSFS ...because they "work".

I agree 100 percent. I prefer the 3rd party professionally made aircraft with accurate flight performace over the default ones.

That is a control assignment issue that can be remedied by use of Asobo's obscure GUI; IMHO, they should have used the GUI from FS2Kx.

Yes, I do recall there are certain keyboard assignments but I forget what they are. But I don't recall a key assignment that allows you to switch directly from cockpit view to external views.

Please explain "getting the elevation correct".

The problems with the LIDAR elevation and getting it to line up with the ground contours in FSX. It seems that you've discussed earlier that could be rectified in Sketchup. I believe I have all those plugins installed that we discussed earlier.


Ken.

 

[GaryGB]

Yes, I do recall there are certain keyboard assignments but I forget what they are. But I don't recall a key assignment that allows you to switch directly from cockpit view to external views.

I use the Logitech Extreme 3D Pro joystick, which maps MSFS "Cockpit / External View Mode" toggle onto Button 12 on its base.

In MSFS 2020:

{Esc} key > Options > Controls Options > select: controller for MSFS > Search By Name: View > click: Magnifier > Scroll > Camera Mode Switches

Map the MSFS "Cockpit / External View Mode" toggle onto the controller device and/or button or keyboard key ...you prefer.


In Windows Desktop: ( I use Windows-10 Classic GUI Theme via Open-Shell project: https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu )

[Start] button > Run: joy.cpl > click: [OK] button > select: controller for MSFS > click: [Properties] button > Test: Buttons / Axes

Verify any controller's functionality using the Windows 'Game Controllers' dialogs as accessed above.

The problems with the LIDAR elevation and getting it to line up with the ground contours in FSX. It seems that you've discussed earlier that could be rectified in Sketchup. I believe I have all those plugins installed that we discussed earlier.

Using MS' flat / level FS ABP for KBHM AI Traffic is not "As Real As It Gets", looks bad, and puts both of us in a "World Of Hurt ...and Work".

IMHO, Asobo must eventually use some of its sand-bagged FPS performance reserves to implement sloped airfields / ABPs for AI Traffic.


But, MSFS' ABP blend looks much better for KBHM than I have seen thus far in FS2Kx with the default ABP blended into custom terrain.

The original plan for use of old MS FS2Kx SDK methods for manual TIN blending is outmoded, and MSFS' ABP blend looks much better.


I shall scan / log multiple MSFS ground elevation KBHM area data points to match in FSX, how its ABP blends into local terrain.'

I have not done this in MSFS yet, and previously did these from FSX' MAX Altitude to minimize rendering lag during scans.


More to come after I set up a FSUIPC Ground elevation data logging scan at terrain Quad vertex Geographic coordinates.

Once I have the data, I shall see how it compares to the local LIDAR terrain mesh we have for use in FSX, so it can be modified.

GaryGB