Jump to content

LC NA Update?

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if there is in the works an update for LC NA because I am tired of flying over the Phoenix area, Chicago area, Des Moines area, Sioux Falls area, really any area that have golf courses because the holes in a lot of cases are cut in half. I know the LC is suppose to be an enhancement and not true representation but come on holes cut in half. Your depiction at Adelaide for example is wrong the golf course on the coast has chopped holes not an enhanced golf course look. If I turn off golf courses in Vector what would be replaced there?  Anything would be better than a terrible display of cut off holes. The LC NA for Prepar3d 4.5 HF 3 is really bad when it comes to golf course depiction so just exactly what is Vector suppose to be depicting when you choose the golf course feature? Is it wanna be golf courses or what? I know your main emphasis isn't Prepar3d products now because most of your products coming out are mostly Microsoft Flight Simulator but how about throwing a bone to us USA Prepar3d customers who have invested heavily in your products. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there,


sorry, but that's the way it works in FSX/P3D when placing landclass features as polygons: we developers have zero control over which part of the tiled texture gets displayed where because that is hard-coded globally. Think of it as a planet-wide layer of golf course textures, and each golf course polygon cuts a hole into the general landclass above, revealing bits of that layer.


The only other option is to place golf courses as raster landclass. That would mostly avoid cutting through features but then the golf course will appear anywhere within about a square mile of its actual location and with incorrect outlines.


Given that it's usually the spatial orientation and position that pilots use to navigate visually we believe the polygonal approach is better for clearly delineated features such as gold course, towns, forestry areas, etc.


If golf courses are 'your thing' then some photoreal coverage would be the better solution for you -- with its specific downsides, like lack of seasons and huge storage requirements... 


Cheers, Holger  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...