google earth

[nzld]

I've been using google earth form my route plans but have found 4 levels of image quality from real good to you've got to be kidding.

I am now using http://www.flashearth.com/ with map source as microsoft virtual earth as a back up.

High quality images and fast loading, no scale or ruler but you do get good quality photo's. Picked up detail I could not get on google.

nzld

 

[cascaderailroad]

I see nothing but a black page, and the worlds slowest loading webpage, that never finishes loading.

 

[nfitzsimmons]

I see nothing but a black page, and the worlds slowest loading webpage, that never finishes loading.

I just looked at the site and had no problems.

 

[cascaderailroad]

I finally got it working, and it shows omly Yahoo maps, and Virtual Earth maps detail, but it has no ruler, nor road town name overlay. Virtual Earth is much better of a site. But Google earth is the best.

 

[Johnk]

Can't help with NZ, but Australian users requiring city and some regional shots should seriously consider Nearmap. They're very high res aerial pics and they'll be appearing in other countries soon.

Link to nearmap

It takes a bit of time to get started, but once you do, it remembers you - cookie users only.

 

[d1dnmdv]

Maps...

Thanks! Works for me in Firefox (once I told Flash Blocker to let it run) and IE v8 (Windows XP Pro).

Another good site for detailed pictures is http://www.bing.com/maps

It works okay in Firefox but you have more options (of course) in Internet Explorer. You do have to install Microsoft's Silverlight to use the website. There are no advertisements/banners/annoying pop-ups and it has street name overlays but no measuring tool.

I use Bing mostly to figure out what the blobs are in "Google Earth" such as when there is more than 1 track or switch and it is close to others...

They do give you a distance legend and you can 'guess-timate' pretty good with it but I prefer to use Bing to help identify 'reference points' I can recognize/measure from in "Google Earth" such as the edge of a road to where track should go in Surveyor in reference to my DEM road/track texture or how much distance is there really between the two blobs in "Google Earth" that are actually switches.

"Bird's Eye View" is the most detailed image but you have to be careful as to what decade it is from as I have found very detailed 1950's images next to a 'yesterday's image'. It is good if you know the area and history but can be frustrating to see tracks, roads or entire building complexes appear/disappear by moving your mouse a little on screen.

I did try New Zealand and Australia but the closest satellite images are only good enough to figure out individual houses and not that they have a bird feeder on the apple tree by the back fence.

 

[Approach_Medium]

I created a prototype route (USA) using mostly GE and MS Bing maps, and TransDem.
As I recall, I needed to use GE to import placemarks into TransDem to create Georeferenced maps. I think there are other formats that TransDem will work with, but I found GE to be the easiest.

As for detail, GE is great in some areas, but lousy in others. For example, in areas of population you can get right down to looking at switches, and sometimes, even signals, but in other places you're hard pressed to find the detail in locating the rail line itself.

In those areas where Google fails, I find MS Bing to give me the detail I need.
But GE is a lot faster than Bing.

FW

 

[nzld]

True GE is good, but if you goto GE look for Wellington (top quality), New Zealand at the top of the bay you have Petone (2nd Grade) now go to the right across the river to Woburn.

You can not get any detail of Waterloo Station the detail comes back at Naenae.

Just big patches of detail gone.

nzld

 

[Approach_Medium]

True GE is good, but if you goto GE look for Wellington (top quality), New Zealand at the top of the bay you have Petone (2nd Grade) now go to the right across the river to Woburn.

You can not get any detail of Waterloo Station the detail comes back at Naenae.

Just big patches of detail gone.

nzld

GE maps seem to be a little outdated for some areas.
Take a look at Bing maps. Much better imagery, but no Birds Eye.

FW

 

[Johnk]

A section the docklands in inner city Melbourne was developed over five years ago, yet Google Earth still sports photos of the pace before the first brick was laid. Very unusual for a major city. That's where nearmap promises hope. Firstly they're aerial photographs and secondly they promise annual updates.

 

[pware]

Unfortunately what ruins NearMaps is the cloud cover. In most of the areas that I am using to develop a route where GE gives poor resolution images, NearMaps gives me only the tops of clouds - is there something down there that no-one wants me to see? So I guess this means that the low resolution GE is still better than the tops of clouds in NearMaps.

But those relatively few areas of GE that are in good resolution still beat the best available from NearMaps. I will be sticking to GE.

 

[PerRock]

There is also NASA World Wind. I used to use but since I'm not doing much prototypical route building I uninstalled it to free up space.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/download.html

peter