Should I buy and install FS Global 2010 FTX mesh?

[hwh86]

Would it be a wise and beneficial investment? Can it be installed retrospectively after all the ORBX FTX scenery, I have the disk space required to handle the size of the file. Developers, please let me know what you think.

[Stillwater]

Would it be a wise and beneficial investment? Can it be installed retrospectively after all the ORBX FTX scenery, I have the disk space required to handle the size of the file. Developers, please let me know what you think.

Good question, I join you in being interested in the feedback here.

[Tim Harris]

Can it be installed retrospectively? Yes, mesh is independent to most scenery and can be installed at any point, you will need at least 25GB of space to hold the global mesh

 

Would it be a wise and beneficial investment? If you dont already have a complete global mesh go for it!

 

From a personal point of view if you have FTX_Vector + FTX_Global already.. the worldwide mesh is a no-brainer, it really opens up the rest of the world, all thats currently missing to complete the 'globe' is FTX_landclass (coming soon)

[CrownCityMisfit]

I have found that the FSG 2010 mesh ends up creating "plateau" issues at many airports. Apparently there is no solution, as I found out in this support forum. Wish I had known this tidbit before spending 90 bucks.

 

FSX only supports flat airports. Since the mesh is geographically accurate, and many airports are not built on perfectly flat ground, the terrain plateaus around the edges. This will happen to varying degrees, depending on the airport. See image below.

 

If I am misunderstanding this issue, please correct me.

 

Good luck making a decision. The mesh will improve your sim otherwise.

 

[hwh86]

Can it be installed retrospectively? Yes, mesh is independent to most scenery and can be installed at any point, you will need at least 25GB of space to hold the global mesh

 

Would it be a wise and beneficial investment? If you dont already have a complete global mesh go for it!

 

From a personal point of view if you have FTX_Vector + FTX_Global already.. the worldwide mesh is a no-brainer, it really opens up the rest of the world, all thats currently missing to complete the 'globe' is FTX_landclass (coming soon)

Thanks Tim, I was hoping that this might be the case. Should I get anomalies of the kind described by BladderBoy, what solution would I have to work around it?

[derekG]

Does the "flat airport on a plateau" thing happen often enough to become annoying or isolated enough to be ignored, and does BladderBoy's screenshot show a fairly typical example or perhaps a bit more extreme?

I just had an email from The FlightSim Store offering discount on FS Global 2010 Mesh for purchasers of FTX Vector and I'm weighing up the pros and cons. 

[StormVR6]

From what I can find on the web, Global FS mesh isn't worth the cost to both wallet and HD space. I'm interested in buying it myself, but unless I see some decent before and after shots (I couldn't find many at all during my research) I won't bother with it. Apart from many reports stating the only significant difference is messed up runway elevations (correct maybe, but if they don't blend with the surrounding landscape, then I'd rather have incorrect that does blend) and peaks/valleys that are moved around a bit, I don't see much else in the way of significant - i.e. beneficial and worthwhile - changes.  

 

I'm going to buy Vector later today. If anyone here manages to convince me that Global FS 2010 is worth adding to the mix, then I'll get that too.

[StormVR6]

Can someone show me where the significant benefit of Global FS mesh is in the shots shown by Orbx in the Vector before and afters, on the home page? Based on those, the answer to the OP question, "Would it be a wise and beneficial investment?", is no.

 

I can clearly see the difference made by Global Base and Vector, but the difference that the mesh offers is next to none in those shots. A couple of extra lumps and bumps on distant hills and mountains does not seem worthy of such a big download. 

[StormVR6]

Vector is worth every penny and actually makes Global a viable option over not owning the full fat regions, especially once the OpenLC areas are released. Of course, if you're flying a Cub around Portland, then the PNW full fat package is still the optimal choice, but if you're not too worried about landmarks outside of your own country (like me) then Global is really starting to look like the only necessary FTX product.

 

Does anybody, who owns Global FS 2010, have anything to say about it? I'm happy to add software that adds a significant boost to FSX. Global base and Vector have definitely achieved that.

[Paul K]

From what I can find on the web, Global FS mesh isn't worth the cost to both wallet and HD space. I'm interested in buying it myself, but unless I see some decent before and after shots (I couldn't find many at all during my research) I won't bother with it. Apart from many reports stating the only significant difference is messed up runway elevations (correct maybe, but if they don't blend with the surrounding landscape, then I'd rather have incorrect that does blend) and peaks/valleys that are moved around a bit, I don't see much else in the way of significant - i.e. beneficial and worthwhile - changes.  

 

I'm going to buy Vector later today. If anyone here manages to convince me that Global FS 2010 is worth adding to the mix, then I'll get that too.

 

Yes, I think that just about sums up my own view on the subject. I'll keep the money for more Australian and UK airfields. 

[Kilo60]

I have found that the FSG 2010 mesh ends up creating "plateau" issues at many airports. Apparently there is no solution, as I found out in this support forum. Wish I had known this tidbit before spending 90 bucks.

 

FSX only supports flat airports. Since the mesh is geographically accurate, and many airports are not built on perfectly flat ground, the terrain plateaus around the edges. This will happen to varying degrees, depending on the airport. See image below.

 

If I am misunderstanding this issue, please correct me.

 

Good luck making a decision. The mesh will improve your sim otherwise.

 

 

 

I Concurr....

 

FS Global 2010 put every major AP in my FSX on a major plateau or in a hole or 1/2 the airport on a plateau (KSFO) and the other half in a hole making taxiing a no go!  I'm not referring to obscure remote AP's but major AP's like KBOS, KDEN, KSFO, KLAS etc!   For example, I had the ocean going vertical up the sides of the AP in KBOS, Houses hanging off the edge of a huge cliff in KLAS and a section of KSFO that was below the rest of the AP making taxiing impossible!  Basically, expect any AP over 9m above sea level to have some type of issue...  I verified this as KFLL and KMIA were ok with FS Global 2010.  To make things worse, FS Global 2010 FTX doesn't come with AFM anymore, so there's no manual way to fix any of the odd looking AP's!

 

I eventually deactivated all the mesh regions in my Scenry list and now I'm seriously considering FTX VEctor to fix the problems although I still see Vector has lots of issues still even with FS GLOBAL Mesh for FTX which I own.

[StormVR6]

I presume the Orbx staff aren't aware of these problems, otherwise why would a staff member be so quick to recommend such software?

[JasonW]

The plateaus are annoying but I find these anomalies even more annoying, especially since it's designed to work with ftx global.

[texerrn]

I have what I call the big three.. Pilots mesh, global textures and vector. If I had to do it over I would still get the mesh. There are a few places I go where I see this plateau effect. Overall it is still a big improvement and I like it.

[CrownCityMisfit]

After reading back though this thread, and seeing my own issues with the FSG 2010 mesh verified by others, my opinion is that the mesh is not worth the money. In fact, it makes your simulation worse, assuming you value the integrity of airports. When I contacted support about this issue, the answer (which was 100% honest and correct) was that FSX only supports flat airports. The mesh will create plateaus if the real-life airport isn't built on perfectly flat ground. It is what it is.

 

I did not know that before making this purchase.

 

I bought this addon based solely on the recommendation from Orbx, a company I value and trust. But I can't help feeling disappointed in them for supporting a product that creates such a significant problem across the entire world. Furthermore, they imply that Global and Vector will be taken to the next level if you purchase a 3rd party mesh, more specifically, the FSG 2010 mesh.

 

It did not, in my opinion.

 

I hope Orbx and Pilot's takes this as sincere criticism, and not an excuse to rant and be a dick. I don't intend to bash either of you. The work you do blows my mind. I respect what you do. I will continue to spend hundreds, if not thousands on your products throughout the coming years. So my takeaway is this...

 

I was ignorant.

 

In general, before I get too upset about something (like blowing 90 bucks on something I won't use), I look for what *I* did to put myself in this situation. I try never to blame others for my own misfortune. So... next time, I will to do a bit more research before buying an expensive addon based solely on a recommendation - even if the recommendation comes from a valued source. My own lack of knowledge on the intricacies of FSX bit me in the ass.

 

Done and done. No harm, no foul. I learned my lesson.

 

Onward and upward.

 

[pmb]

I am under the impression we (including customers as well as ORBX as a business) are running into serious trouble with the Vector + Mesh couple. This might have been expected, but seems to not have been taken seriously enough. The crux of the issue is: Vector +  Mesh are not another add-on like full fat regions. As JV once stated, all Global together would give us a "a whole new simulator". This is certainly true, however, the current distribution and communication concept does not reflect this sufficiently, IMHO.

 

Present Vector/Global Mesh users try to unify two worlds in one simulator, which just do not unify. On the one hand, they have default FSX/P3D1/2 default mesh, full fat ORBX regions, ORBX airports, add Aerosoft + FSDreamTeam airports and all that. All these are based on the same – flawed, but consistent – elevation model.

 

The recent Global Vector/Mesh combo for the first time gives us a correct elevation model. This is fine, as long as you only use whichever simulator + Global Base + Global Vector + Pilot's Mesh + future OpenLC. All these are consistent. They are correct, but lack the VFR fun of, e.g., detailed regions.

 

Trouble begins, where you try to mix both worlds. People (including me) are not inclined to start that AEC tool for correcting every other airport they want to land on. These are two disjunct worlds, which IMHO just cannot be married.

 

While I am far from wanting to tell John how to run his business, here are three non-solutions, just for the record, in growing order of intrusion. All of them are based on the idea to keep both incompatible worlds apart. Unfortunately, all three will not work the way I state them for one or another reason.

 

1. Include Vector + Mesh into the FSX Central "Global Switch". Inside regions like Oceania, Vector + Pilot's Mesh are useless anyway and can be switched off (i.e. taken out of the library). Flying in e.g. Germany, switch on all the Global stuff, but don't use AUS/IRL. This will be hard to communicate, though. Folks are just eager to get rid of the unloved switches, not to give them additional value. There remains the problem how to persuade third-party makers to adapt their airports to the proper Global elevations. Thus NON-solution 1.

 

2. Start with John's words: "Consider this a whole new simulator". Actually, there is one such simulator in development. It's called Prepar3d2. All its modifications and incompatibilities could be seen as a chance. Clearly stated: Leave the old world (old elevations, full fat regions, airports by ORBX or another make) to the FSX/P3D1 users. Strip present AUS/NIR... regions off of their P3D2 installers. Remake them with proper, i.e. Global Vector/Mesh compatible, elevations one by one and release them in P3D2 Global only versions. Same goes for airports. On the other hand, remove the FSX/P3D1 installers from Global Vector/FTX Mesh making them P3D2 only products.

 

This would keep both worlds apart without any AEC tool. Third parties can go on selling their FSX/P3D1 versions based on "wrong" elevations. They would have to make special P3D2 Global versions, though, based on proper elevations. Given, that's hard to communicate. Besides, ORBX will miss Global sales from the (still) majority of FSX users. Users themselves will complain they bought region XYZ for P3D2 but cannot use it anymore etc. Thus NON-solution 2

 

3. Here comes an even better NON-solution: ORBX + Pilot's could partner with LM providing P3D2 with a correct Mesh from the outset, i.e., integrating it into the core simulator (maybe adding up-to data navigational data, too). This would be a really clean solution. All ORBX + 3rd party P3D2 products would have to adapt to proper elevation (and, possibly, navigational) data. FSX/P3D1 users could go on with what they have, perhaps not quite exact, but working. While this would be a clean solution, it will certainly not work out from the administrative/economic point of view. Competitors will cry out loud and, maybe, boycott P3D. Thus NON-solution 3.

 

Sorry for the too long post and kind regards, Michael

[CB183183]

Hi guys,

 

Back when I had FS9 I frequently used mesh from FSGenesis and was pleased with the results.  Has anyone had better luck with this mesh in FSX while coupled with FTX Global or are people still having similar issues that have been reported with FS Global 2010.

[Spirit Flyer]

I am running FSGenesis (version 1.2) and having no problem whatsoever. It is gorgeous.

 

Last evening I flew along the kicking Horse Pass in BC and it looked like the real deal!. No problem and worth the expense if you don't already own it, which I did.

 

Kind regards,

[pmb]

Hi CB183183,

 

I am not sure if it was in FS9 or FSX, but I recall terrible steps/walls around Aerosoft Madrid with FSGenesis Mesh (as well as other addon meshs). Others had them, too. Same went with some smaller Aerosoft German addon airfields. I finally gave up.

 

Kind regards, Michael

[StormVR6]

After reading back though this thread, and seeing my own issues with the FSG 2010 mesh verified by others, my opinion is that the mesh is not worth the money. In fact, it makes your simulation worse, assuming you value the integrity of airports. When I contacted support about this issue, the answer (which was 100% honest and correct) was that FSX only supports flat airports. The mesh will create plateaus if the real-life airport isn't built on perfectly flat ground. It is what it is.

 

I did not know that before making this purchase.

 

I bought this addon based solely on the recommendation from Orbx, a company I value and trust. But I can't help feeling disappointed in them for supporting a product that creates such a significant problem across the entire world. Furthermore, they imply that Global and Vector will be taken to the next level if you purchase a 3rd party mesh, more specifically, the FSG 2010 mesh.......

 

 

I don't enjoy reading posts like this. You are being a gentleman about it, Bladderboy, but, as far as I'm concerned, you have been deceived by Orbx and Pilot's. Either company will no doubt state otherwise, but such an important problem (and it is a problem, no matter who or what is to blame) should be made very, very clear by Pilot's before purchasing. Not making this significant information transparently clear is plain wrong. Considering Orbx look to be in a "we'll scratch your back if you scratch ours" business relationship with Pilots regarding the Global FS 2010 product, we'd all appreciate it if these anomalies were made clear by them also.  

 

I personally wouldn't trust a company (i.e. a money making business) to tell me the truth about a product they are selling or helping to sell, which is why I spend time researching and browsing threads like these. Although that doesn't make it any easier on those of us who took the plunge after believing the information given by developers was fully inclusive of all important details.

 

Having to spend time finding out what developers DON'T tell us about a product is bad customer service, nothing more.  

[Spirit Flyer]

You know Storm, you have a rotten attitude.

 

First of all, I have been looking and have not found any airports with a plateau problem with FSGenesis version 1.2. Perhaps there are, but I have not found any. I have the screenshots to prove that Madrid looks great too. Any other single airport you want me to test and show you?

 

Michael you can have a test one too. Which one?

 

Kind regards,

 

PS: Mods, how do I upload a screenshot as evidence?

[skelly]

I use genesis global vector no problems as of yet

[StormVR6]

You know Storm, you have a rotten attitude.

 

All I've done is read what people have said and commented on it. I see nothing wrong in my posts; honest, relevant comments. However, you're entitled to your opinion, why you choose to voice personal insults is another matter.

 

I forgive your abruptness, though.

 

Incidentally, isn't this thread discussing Global FS 2010? 

[flyinion]

I've seen the plateau's and in some cases "canyon" airports many times with using FSGenesis.  (I have all of their products up to and including a couple of their new generation meshes due to previously being a 3 year Galaxy member)  For me it's worth it though because you get much more detailed ground than the default rounded hills that FSX has.  Especially in some other areas of the world outside the US where default mesh resolution is really really poor.   I've been thinking about getting the Pilots mesh myself though because I know it's newer.  I'm wondering though, for those of you using the special download edition of FSGlobal 2010 that they made available to go along with the OrbX global products, does it come with their airport flattening tool that the other versions come with? I would think that would solve all of the airport issues.

[StormVR6]

I'm wondering though, for those of you using the special download edition of FSGlobal 2010 that they made available to go along with the OrbX global products, does it come with their airport flattening tool that the other versions come with? I would think that would solve all of the airport issues.

 

Vector comes with a elevation tab in the utility tool, although I've only been using Vector for a short while, so I'm not entirely sure how it all works yet.

 

"The most important thing to remember is that Vector corrects all airport elevations to their real-world elevations."

 

That is quoted from the FTX Vector manual, so surely, if I buy FS Global 2010 (supposedly accurate) then all elevations will be correct, yes?

 

EDIT: Hang on a minute, that won't change the fact that FSX has flat airports, will it? So surely, no matter what we do, we'll always have lifts/dips here and there? 

[flyinion]

 

 

 

EDIT: Hang on a minute, that won't change the fact that FSX has flat airports, will it? So surely, no matter what we do, we'll always have lifts/dips here and there? 

 

 

That's why I was asking if the download version of FSGlobal 2010 that was created by Pilots to go along with FTX Global Vector came with their airport flattening mesh tool that flattens the immediate terrain around an airport to get rid of any valleys or plateaus.  However, I just checked the AFM tool page on the Pilots site and it says the following so I guess I have my answer lol........

 

 

 

ATTENTION! This version of AFM was NOT designed to work with FS/FTX Global Vector installed!We are considering to offer a V2.0 soon.

[CrownCityMisfit]

 

EDIT: Hang on a minute, that won't change the fact that FSX has flat airports, will it? So surely, no matter what we do, we'll always have lifts/dips here and there? 

 

 

Yes.

 

So really, when you say, "The most important thing to remember is that Vector corrects all airport elevations to their real-world elevations," what elevation is that referring to? The official elevation listed by the real-world counterpart? The average elevation of the property?

 

If you aren't aware that FSX only supports flat airports (which many of us weren't), then you would assume that "correct real-world elevation" includes the entire property. Any reasonable person would think that.

[flyinion]

Yes.

 

So really, when you say, "The most important thing to remember is that Vector corrects all airport elevations to their real-world elevations," what elevation is that referring to? The official elevation listed by the real-world counterpart? The average elevation of the property?

 

If you aren't aware that FSX only supports flat airports (which many of us weren't), then you would assume that "correct real-world elevation" includes the entire property. Any reasonable person would think that.

 

 

The vector manual says it uses an average.  I.e. if one end of the airport is at 150 feet and the other is at 130 feet ASL in the real world, then Vector corrects it to 140 feet ASL in the sim.  You can see these differences all the time on ILS charts.  It will list different elevations for the runway threshold vs. the airport itself.

[CrownCityMisfit]

 However, I just checked the AFM tool page on the Pilots site and it says the following so I guess I have my answer lol........

 

EDIT: Yeah hopefully V2 will help.

[StormVR6]

So at the moment Vector and Global FS 2010 are not compatible? Sorry guys, but you've lost me here.

 

I'm still very interested in getting a good mesh, but if it's still in beta stage then I'll wait.

[flyinion]

Sure they're compatible, they're no less compatible than Vector and FSX without a mesh.  Since vector 1.1 fixed all the airport elevations there's a good chance you'll see the same kinds of artifacts as using a 3rd party mesh since MS's original airport elevations are not necessarily correct.  Now, I personally don't own Vector yet, though it's on my list.  While I do 100% plan on buying it, I'm also likely to wait for 1.2 which supposedly changes the way AEC exclusion works yet again.  I think the only way you'd get it perfect is if Pilots and OrbX team up to make a FSGlobal 2014 or 2015 or whatever that matches the mesh around the airports to the elevation changes provided by Vector similar to how MS did it for stock FSX.  I suspect that's a lot of manual work of some kind or uses tools that MS had that 3rd party developers don't know about and certainly don't have the manpower for if it was a manual process considering how many 1000's of airports are in FSX.

[StormVR6]

Sure they're compatible, they're no less compatible than Vector and FSX without a mesh.  Since vector 1.1 fixed all the airport elevations there's a good chance you'll see the same kinds of artifacts as using a 3rd party mesh since MS's original airport elevations are not necessarily correct.  Now, I personally don't own Vector yet, though it's on my list.  While I do 100% plan on buying it, I'm also likely to wait for 1.2 which supposedly changes the way AEC exclusion works yet again.  I think the only way you'd get it perfect is if Pilots and OrbX team up to make a FSGlobal 2014 or 2015 or whatever that matches the mesh around the airports to the elevation changes provided by Vector similar to how MS did it for stock FSX.  I suspect that's a lot of manual work of some kind or uses tools that MS had that 3rd party developers don't know about and certainly don't have the manpower for if it was a manual process considering how many 1000's of airports are in FSX.

 

Great post, that really helps me, thank you.

 

So, let's say for argument sake that all meshes have a similar amount of elevation anomalies......

 

......assuming that these anomalies are not too intrusive (I can only take your comments as truth on that particular subject) is a mesh really worth the price? I'd love to see some really significant differences but the lack of pictures only lead me to believe there isn't many.

 

Thanks for your input, flyinion, very helpful and informative.  

[flyinion]

It's definitely possible for the meshes to have some serious anomalies as far as airports go.  This is usually in cases where it's a remote airport and many times somewhere outside the US and MS just had some really bad source data.  That's when you end up with airports 100's of feet down in trenches or 100's of feet in the air.  Thankfully I've only ever seen this with really small strips (the ones that are literally just a runway and nothing else).  I don't think I've ever seen a bigger airport suffer from this.  

 

I'll try to see if I can get some comparison pictures of with/without 3rd party mesh this weekend.  It might be easier to do if you have an area in mind.  I can just take a screenshot, temporarily uninstall the mesh for that area, and take another one for you.  You won't necessarily see as big of a difference between MS's default 38m in the US and the 10m that most 3rd party ones are but where it really shines is mountain ranges and places like CA where you have a lot of rugged terrain.  If you're flying over Kansas all the time you're probably not really going to benefit  

 

You'll also see a bigger improvement in countries outside the US  where the default mesh is really poor.  An example is I have 76m  mesh for Australia.  The default MS one is like 156 or something like that.  That's a massive difference in distance between elevation sampling points.  A lot more than 38 vs. 10.

[StormVR6]

Thanks again, I'm gaining an understanding of things now.

 

Basically, with an accurate global mesh, we're always going to have problems with airport elevation unless the creators develop a tool like AFM. And that can hold true with any mesh, yes?    

[flyinion]

Thanks again, I'm gaining an understanding of things now.

 

Basically, with an accurate global mesh, we're always going to have problems with airport elevation unless the creators develop a tool like AFM. And that can hold true with any mesh, yes?    

 

Yes that is correct.

[StormVR6]

I managed to find a small bit of FSX vs FS Global 2010 footage, and I must admit, the huge amount of extra detail in some of the more diverse parts of the world is surprising. The amount of added realism that a higher resolution mesh gives is even more surprising. I find myself wondering why I haven't bought a mesh sooner! 

 

I think the positives outweigh the negatives by a good margin. And if Pilot's release a new AFM tool it's a huge bonus. Flying around fjords is at the top of my flying time list, so I think I might buy Global FS 2010.    

[bailout3]

Wow ! All this information really has me mind boggled mainly because I don't know anything about this technical information but I do know what I like. Orbx regions are amazing...global opened a new world for me to fly in...Vector...hmmm well, I was a little upset when I saw many screwed up elevations which messed up some of my payware airports but by using the AEC tool I have regained my composure. 

 

Getting back to the initial question in this thread I too was contemplating whether to go for the Global 2010 but for me I am more then satisfied with what I have. $100 and a very considerable chunk out of my hard drive memory just isn't worth it. As someone said a few bumps etc isn't worth it especially when most of the time I wouldn't know that these bumps are correctly located or not and the most important reason is the above screen shots...that really would suck.

 

One last thing...I am still intersted in purchasing open LC as long as there are no serious flaws. I won,t have a trigger finger as soon as it is announced either. Just my thoughts and good luck.

[Tim Harris]

why would a staff member be so quick to recommend such software?

 

 

I believe in having a world thats as close to the real-world as humanly possible, this is what a global mesh package provides, simple as that, and I'll always advocate realism over the flat-world theory 

 

 

If you are the type that gets really upset about some minor details within the default FSX world, then a global mesh is probably not for you. my advice would be to stick to Orbx full-fat regions were all scenery elements are lovingly slaved over to achieve near total perfection.

 

 

I personally wouldn't trust a company (i.e. a money making business) to tell me the truth about a product

 

 

I dont make a single cent from the sale of FTXVector, PILOTS Global mesh, FTXglobal, or even FTXOpenLC when it comes, I also dont make a single cent from helping you folks out here on the forums with your various support issues over the last 6-7 years so yes I do take some small offense from (a few of) the comments above, My recommendation comes freely from my heart with no ulterior motives or reward

 

Global mesh products (PILOTS or FS Genesis) have been around for nearly 5-6 years with many many happy users, as has the odd few airport issues, Vector (as far as I know) is the first product to attempt to fix this issue on a global scale in one package

 

 

A small comparison is attached below from two random places in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, I suggest you download the picture and have a close look

 

Regards

Tim

[flyinion]

 

Global mesh products (PILOTS or FS Genesis) have been around for nearly 5-6 years with many many happy users, as has the odd few airport issues, Vector (as far as I know) is the first product to attempt to fix this issue on a global scale in one package

 

 

 

 

Actually, FS Genesis has been around a lot longer than that  I was running their product in FS2004 9 or 10 years ago before FSX was even known about.  

 

p.s. the last two pictures in your set of 4 show EXACTLY what a mesh product can do.  It's not as obvious in those first two but the last two are a prime example of the benefits

[Tim Harris]

Thanks flyonion, you are most correct, I forgot about FS9