Re: Flight Simulator X Highly Compressed Free Download Only 13 Mb
Carmel Kittell
However, in Xplane 11, I can't see a difference in the resolution or clarity of the orthophoto, the difference is probably very subtle. I boosted the texture size and anti-aliasing to max yet still no difference.
Most screens have a screen resolution of 72 pixels/inch which limits what you see on screen. If your image is set at 1000 pixels/inch it will only display at screen resolution. With higher resolution screens, there is still a threshold issue.
With WED 2.0 you are now seeing your original image - while with WED 1.7 you got a downsampled version of it. And yes - I would fully expect its not making any notable difference, due to the way you created the image to start with ...
You almost certainly downloaded the original image as highly compressed .jpg images. This compression removes a *lot* of small scale image detail. So much, that downscaling it by 2x or even 4x doesn't really remove any additional detail at all.
You will need to download the imagery at least one, preferably two zoom levels higher than what you want to use in X-plane, sharpen, downsample and resharpen the image again to create a truely single-pixel sharp (actually - slightly oversharpened is best) image to start with. Only then will you benefit from the full sharpness that DDS textures and WED 2.0 can deliver.
In fact we used the same image in FSX 10 years ago and the result on the ground was closer to what we see in OrbX scenery, although their imagery could be much higher res. If I remember, but could be mistaken, the FSX process involved some LOD.
@triplemon This is an example of what I'm speaking of. As you see, WED cut the tile perfectly; just the image pulled into any photo editing program looks way better, but looks awful in the sim. The preview also looks good in WED, but still the same result occurs. Any info/tips would be appreciated! Thanks!
The X-plane illumination engine will neccesarily have to render the same texture brighter/darker and possibly even with different contrast or saturation, depending on sun angle and sky conditions. Just like things appears more vivid in real life under certain illumination conditions, but rather dull and flat when the sun is high in the sky.
So back in the old days when rendering engines were very primitive and pretty much showed textures 1:1 without any shading or illumination - it might be that things looked more appealing for some tastes.
The only thing you can do here is to bump contrast or saturation of the source image and re-export in WED. At this point you'll see the benefit of WED 2.0's capability to re-cut the orginal image for you - you can edit your whole orthoimage in once piece, greatly simplifying such tweaking tasks.
This article explained the human error and problems we've had in the past through out the constuction of certain aircraft causing control reversal. It only briefly touched on supersonic speeds and didn't "get to the point" which is the frustrating thing for me. i have since found a few websites which i'll post later which kind of explains it in a little more depth.
just talked to an FA/18 pilot on the weekend and proved that there infact no control reversal at transonic and supersonic altitudes. There is a slit stream effect which defys beouli's law where by the 2 air particles do not meet up on the triling edge on the aerofoil. This causes a low pressure around the trailing edge of the aerofoil making the controls become completely useless. To counter-act this problem they actulally make the "whole tip" (leading edge to the trailing edge) of the wings a combination of ailerons and elevators and they use the same concept for the rudder.
What was experienced by most soud barrior breaking pilots in the early days was something called the mach tuck where by the lift over the aerofoil caused by the sheer speed of the air over it, was so great that they had to fly with their nose down to keep it's altitude. This usually resulted the the plane being obliterated because force is not ment to be exerted on the top face of the aircraft.
the problem occurs when the amount of airflow over the wing becomes great enough that the force generated by the ailerons is enough to twist the wing itself, due to insufficient torsional stiffness of the wing structure. For instance when the aileron is deflected upwards in order to make that wing move down, the wing twists in the opposite direction. The net result is that the airflow is directed down instead of up and the wing moves upward, opposite of what was expected.
And since an F/A 18 most likely is not constructed to suffer from this effect, I wonder how a pilot could dismiss a theory (let's cal it a theory for the moment) like this so easily. What arguments did he give you?
You can get elevator reversal. It is cause when the load/forces on the elevator are large enough to cause a twisting moment on the deflected elevator surface. It causes a reverse in the aircrafts pitch attitude.
Well, know im not interested to know, I've seen this before and I have an extreme passion for aviation and have my PPL's. Im just merely saying this is a worthless and outdated topic not worth replying to.
I can see why you might be concerned about the idea of control reversal after breaking the sound barrier. However, let me assure you that while there is a phenomenon called "control reversal," it's not quite as dramatic as it might sound. Let me explain this in more detail.
Control Reversal is a term referring to an aerodynamic effect that can occur when an aircraft transitions from subsonic to supersonic speeds. This effect does not cause the aircraft's controls to reverse in the literal sense, but it does alter the way the control surfaces respond to input from the pilot.
When an aircraft travels through the air, it generates shock waves, which are disturbances in the air pressure. At subsonic speeds, these shock waves propagate ahead of the aircraft. However, as the aircraft accelerates to supersonic speeds, the shock waves are compressed and travel with the aircraft, creating a shock cone.
This shock cone can cause the aerodynamic center, which is the point where the lift forces on the wings act, to shift rearward. Consequently, the aircraft's pitch stability can decrease, leading to a situation where the pilot's control inputs might produce unexpected or counterintuitive responses from the control surfaces.
For example, in some cases, if a pilot were to input a nose-up command using the elevator, the aircraft might respond by pitching down. This is due to the altered pressure distribution on the control surface, resulting from the rearward shift of the aerodynamic center. It is important to note that this effect is highly dependent on the aircraft's design and the specific conditions at which it is flying.
Modern supersonic aircraft are designed to mitigate control reversal effects through various means, such as supercritical airfoils, variable-geometry wings, and advanced flight control systems. These technologies help to maintain stability and control effectiveness throughout the transition from subsonic to supersonic speeds.
To sum up, while control reversal is a real phenomenon, it is not as alarming as it might initially sound. Advances in aircraft design and technology have made it possible to manage and mitigate these effects, allowing for safe and controlled supersonic flight.
If the question and answers provided above do not answer your specific question - why not ask a new question of your own? Our community and flight simulator experts will provided a dedicated and unique answer to your flight sim question. And, you don't even need to register to post your question!
Be sure to search for your question from existing posted questions before asking a new question as your question may already exist from another user. If you're sure your question is unique and hasn't been asked before, consider asking a new question.
b1e95dc632