Scotland. Another piece in ORBX regional puzzle – similar to Norway, Germany, and their North American regions. Is it equally interesting? Yes. And no. I like Scotland but not quite as much.
Pros and cons
What do I like about FTX Scotland
- detailed coastline, islands, and islets around Scotland
the city of Edinburgh
cities and towns
autogen and buildings with characteristic English / Scottish architecture
enhanced airports (the fact they were corrected, not necessarily how)
What I dislike about FTX Scotland
- elements of the scenery the impression of underlining elements of the scenery (some)
- textures (some)
- scenery objects (some)
They could improve…
- number of scenery objects
- surroundings of some objects
- corrected airports
Purchase, installation and documentation
You can purchase FTX Scotland through ORBX direct system. Use FTX Central to for installation and configuration. The user guide is also available there. It is a standard ORBX PDF file with a description of how to install the software, how to set it up, etc. The addition is a Google Earth file with selected objects is located in the installation directory (sim folder / ORBX / User Documents).
What is in the package?
FTX Scotland is an advanced landclass-based scenery with custom objects. You will get:
mesh (20-meter resolution)
textures of land (landclass)
vector data – rivers, roads, railway lines, lakes
detailed coastline and islands (even the smallest ones)
autogen (custom made for the location)
scenery objects – mapped or “simulated” real objects – power plants, bridges, castles, wind turbines, etc.
Good, but not at par with Norway. Twenty-meter resolution is sufficient in lowlands, but mountains could use 10m mesh. However, I have to say 20m mesh is ok in most locations around the scenery. Calls for improvement, but still much better than default FSX/P3D elevation grid. Thanks to this scenery Scotland become much more hilly and low flights over the highlands are pleasant.
Once again – a good feature, but somehow not living up to the highest standards that ORBX got me used to (with Norway or Alaska). They made the landclass well. I like how the grass-covered hills change into rocky mountains. I’ve compared this scenery with photos and with my memories from a trip to Scotland – it is as similar as a landclass scenery can be. Mostly.
It is a bit worse in places that require precision – for example on small islands (and I spent most of my time in these locations). And near airports (again – an important place to cover with high-quality scenery). Just a tiny improvement would go a long way towards improving our experience. In Norway and Alaska, ORBX has succeeded. Here – it came out worse. The textures used in FTX Scotland are perfect for large areas. It’s the details where they fall short.
Additional objects (3*** / 4****)
Roads and railway lines between the cities made a great impression on me – I do not know if the best among the known ORBX scenery (including Norway they issued later and even the German sceneries). I spent a lot of time flying a helicopter at a low altitude along these roads and they were always great guides (I flew with a roadmap!). Also, the shorelines are among the best elements of the FTX scenery and such a complex coastline like this in Scotland shows how important good scenery is.
Just like in other FTXs ORBX improved the airports and added a few small ones. They are way better than the default in FSX/P3D, but it’s another element that makes me miss other FTX sceneries I use. I do not expect the quality of paid airports. But I have the impression that some airports show a lack of … imagination, creativity or (most probably) of time.
The scenery uses (I have this impression) the same library of airport facilities used in other FTX sceneries. It allows you to add nice buildings, cars, static planes. Even three-dimensional vegetation appears elsewhere. If I love ORBX‘s enhanced airports in Norway why I feel unsatisfied in Scotland?
That’s how it should be! The scenery is friendly. I’ve flown demanding planes and have seen no significant impact on my computer.
People with weaker equipment and FSX should adjust the autogen settings – these houses and (especially) forests can kill if you set Dense or Very Dense. P3Dv4 users should find it performing well even on high settings.
Summary (ocena 4****)
4 stars here – Norway got 5. Alaska got 5. Scotland is almost as good. Almost. In my review of Norway, I wrote that ORBX sets a market standard for such sceneries and I still think so. FTX Scotland is good scenery, which is worth having if you are interested in flying over Scotland. But Norway is better.