Is Ulimate Terrain USA / Canada worthwhile purchasing?

***mrogers*** · June 26th, 2011, 22:45

I'm doing a cross country hop eastwards across Canada and then will do the same across the USA westward returning to my original starting point. Along the way I download and install appropriate airports and scenery for the places that I'll visit along the way. Now I got to thinking about purchasing Ultimate Terrain for Canada and the USA. Is there anyone here who has UT installed and can they tell me if they are worthwhile having? Would there be any compatiability problems with it in regards to airports and scenery installed in fs9? Thanks.

***alastairmonk*** · June 26th, 2011, 23:51

Hi Mark,

That depends ....

Certainly the two UT packages will enhance the US and Canada, however if this is essentially a one-off trip, and you have no plans to visit North America again, then you may want to consider the cost.

I've had all the UT packages installed for some years and wouldn't be without them, and they're certainly well worth the price.

As for compatibility, be aware that they include accuracy corrections for the roads and waterways, so in some cases you may find coastal items in the wrong place and roads cutting through the airports. This is due to the rivers and roads being in the wrong place rather than a "problem" with UT. And the same features "etched" into photo-real scenery may not fully match those of UT at the borders of the two scenery types, but other than that you shouldn't have many problems. Many add-on airports are designed with UT in mind.

Alastair

**AndyG43** · June 26th, 2011, 23:53

Yes, it's worth having.

There may be the occasional compatibility problem, but I've not identified anything major so far.

***PeteHam*** · June 27th, 2011, 00:25

I've only got the UT Can/AK.

It's a must have and the first thing that I add with a fresh install.

Plus FS Genesis - North America FS2004 Terrain ( 2 DVD set ) which covers all the US , Canada and Alaska.

Pete.

**CG_1976** · June 27th, 2011, 00:26

Originally Posted by AndyG43

Yes, it's worth having.

There may be the occasional compatibility problem, but I've not identified anything major so far.

Both are well worth it. Both my Fs9 and FSX are loaded with ultimate terrain. In Fs9 Canada provides me a better representation of the Arctic and Yellowknife as the US provides better in RW Re Montana, Idaho.

***mrogers*** · June 27th, 2011, 02:54

Thank you guys for your replies.
What made me think of UT was that I've installed some airport sceneries in my travels across Canada up to this point where I'm half way through Canada. They were made to fit UT by their designers. They still look fine albeit some slight mismatch with the default roads and scenery but these are very small and are nothing major to worry about. They're perfectly passable to me.
Does UT have its own mesh?
If so I probably would have to disable my FSGlobal 2005 mesh for that country?
I had a look at pictures of UT USA and Canada on the UT website and it looks impressive!
I've seen the price, so I will just leave it for the moment and think about it for a little while.

**AndyG43** · June 27th, 2011, 03:20

Originally Posted by mrogers

Thank you guys for your replies.
What made me think of UT was that I've installed some airport sceneries in my travels across Canada up to this point where I'm half way through Canada. They were made to fit UT by their designers. They still look fine albeit some slight mismatch with the default roads and scenery but these are very small and are nothing major to worry about. They're perfectly passable to me.
Does UT have its own mesh?
If so I probably would have to disable my FSGlobal 2005 mesh for that country?
I had a look at pictures of UT USA and Canada on the UT website and it looks impressive!
I've seen the price, so I will just leave it for the moment and think about it for a little while.

No, UT doesn't have it's own mesh (at least in the way I understand it); I use it in conjunction with FS Genesis meshes (I have all 3, USA/Canada/Europe) and the results are superb. Are you using the brilliant Flight Ontario sceneries? In which case, as you've already identified, they were designed with UT in mind - I think you'll like the results.

***mrogers*** · June 27th, 2011, 03:56

Originally Posted by AndyG43

Are you using the brilliant Flight Ontario sceneries?

Yes, I am! And I plan to install more of their scenery!
Oh, and I'm also using CanUK's scenery as well and they were designed with UT in mind too!

**AndyG43** · June 27th, 2011, 04:11

CanUK is a new one on me - just taken a look at their website, and it all looks rather nice.

It reinforces a comment I've made elsewhere - why do I need to run FSX, when I can have FS9 with ALL of the bells and whistles, and sliders maxed out on all settings. This sim is far from dead yet, while people are still putting out freeware work of this calibre.

***mrogers*** · June 27th, 2011, 04:20

Quite right Andy! FS9 is far from dead, still has so much to offer with so much excellent scenery produced for it still around. And aircraft too I might add.

***Maarten*** · June 27th, 2011, 06:43

Hi there,

Definitely worth having. I have all three UT sceneries (US, Alaska/Canada and Europe). I like to fly around over Ireland and it struck how well the region around e.g. Belfast and the Mourne Mountains have been modelled.
At the moment I'm flying in the CalClassic a.o 1950's/1960's scenery, which I really love, but as soon as I have a new PC I'll install both the contemporary UT sceneries as wel as the CalClassic sceneries.

Cheers,
Maarten

***awj112*** · June 27th, 2011, 09:23

Originally Posted by AndyG43

Yes, it's worth having.

There may be the occasional compatibility problem, but I've not identified anything major so far.

What Andy said. I also have UT Europe. Some airports do have UT updates but for the most part, default and addon airports don't give a lot of issues. I am using it with FS GlobalX 2010 for my mesh.

***aeromed202*** · June 27th, 2011, 11:15

I believe there is a consensus here, but I'll add another thumbs up for UT. Made a big grin appear when finally up and running. I use Rhumby's mesh for everywhere and though there are a smattering of issues (with some cemented-in default airports and the like) together they are very much worth having.

The only draw back I can think of is that UT is a comprehensive install. Before, I used to keep a copy of the main texture, scenery and stuff in case I bungled some new addon. I could just paste the old one back in. Now if I reinstall FS, UT has to be reinstalled as well. Or if I can't resist some small scenery tweak I don't know how UT will accomodate it. There is a flip program to toggle between default and UT files if so desired, but I don't know if it can differentiate between strictly default and whatever you were using just prior to adding UT, if that makes sense. But really, after UT, I felt no need to flip back to anything. Save your dimes and grab it I say.

**CG_1976** · June 27th, 2011, 15:51

Originally Posted by mrogers

Quite right Andy! FS9 is far from dead, still has so much to offer with so much excellent scenery produced for it still around. And aircraft too I might add.

Ah indeed. When FSX tick s me off or burns my biscuits I can always rely on the trusty Fs9 and long live Fs9 for sure. I have never forgotten Fs9 nor will I ever

***mrogers*** · June 27th, 2011, 17:14

Thank you guys for your replies!
I'm looking at UT Canada for a start...my FSGlobal 2005 should be OK with it. I can live with minor issues regarding non-UT scenery compatiabilty with UT.
Most of the airport addons I have for Canada and Alaska are designed for UT or can be upgraded to fit UT and I also see its still possible to use non-UT scenery with minimal issues.
Would compatiabilty with Misty Fjords be an issue? Tongass Fjord and Glacier Bay are OK with UT as far as they're concerned.