Re: Airports, Scenery and Aircraft
Scott Giese <[email protected]> Fri, 24 Jul 2026 19:41:49 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.flightgear.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============7584866806427797408== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------NJmoJc0MaAsNp9S8U1sfzgeA" Content-Language: en-US This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------NJmoJc0MaAsNp9S8U1sfzgeA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Pat - You're kind of all over the place and these areas are complex. It may be better to just focus on one piece you want to improve. The cliffs or berms are caused by: - The airports are not flat - they are more "wavy" on the surface, but the slopes are usually relatively small. -- WS2 cut a hole into the terrain where the airport would be placed. Then the surrounding terrain would be stitched together with the airport terrain. Sometimes the elevation between airport and surrounding terrain would be significant enough to cause these cliffs and berms. -- WS3 overlays the surrounding terrain. To help prevent the surrounding terrain from poking through the airport terrain, the underneath terrain is lowered. This results in the ditch you see along the airport boundary lines. airports on scenery tile boundaries: - What specifically is the issue? mesh generation for airports: - TerraGear is used for this, which is a WS2 workflow. - We need to update the workflow to utilize the WS3 terrain. - The Threshold files need to be reproduced - The Traffic files need to be reproduced - Models need to be re-positioned... they float at many airports. I'm guessing due to the fact that WS2 used a geodetic model while WS3 uses a geocentric model. My preference would be to use WS3 geodetic models. - painted lines (and/or surfaces) have lots of z-fighting issues due to poor positioning. You can adjust your view to enable wireframe You can use the UFO to sample terrain elevation and coordinates. Scott On 7/24/2026 5:11 PM, Patrick Callahan wrote: > Are there any widely seen discrepancies in aircraft, airports, or > scenery, especially at landclass borders or seacoasts, that we might > be able to improve globally? > > I'm thinking of things like this: > > - Numerous aircraft needing new models for HDR/PBR > - Greenland's coastline, characterized by long straight seacoasts. > - Areas surrounding airports with vertical cliffs or berms that are > not part of the real landscape, KBED on 2024.1/ws2.0 also next/ws3.0 > > - Airports located on scenery tile boundaries (see BIKF on next/ws3.0) > > -Pat > > One thing I've learned recently is that the most available elevation > for runways is not a single number. The touchdown Zones and the > thresholds have separate elevations. > BIKF is one example > Runway 20 Threshold 163, TDZE 164, slope -.3° > Runway 02 Threshold 137, TDZE 160,slope .3° > Runway 29 Threshold 171, TDZE 171, slope -.6° > Runway 11 Threshold 111, TDZE 127, slope .6° > Overall Airport Elevation is listed as 171, which is the highest value > for Threshold or TDZE elevations. > > How would you characterize the generation of a mesh for Airports on next? > > I'd like to compare the available geodata we are using for the > coordinates of each Threshold and TDZE number, as well as the numbers > we have available in Airports.dat. > > I'd also like to look at any exact elevations available from Terrain > at various points across the airport and map the geodata points > against the airport outlines in Airports.dat. > > Finally, I'd like to be able to click on a location in Flightgear's > Scenery or Airport in Wireframe tessellation mode and see the > elevation of the point I click on in the running app. It might help if > the entire scene could be rendered in wireframe without applying > scenery textures. > How could we add features like that to the debug menu? > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --------------NJmoJc0MaAsNp9S8U1sfzgeA Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> </head> <body> <p>Pat -</p> <p>You're kind of all over the place and these areas are complex. It may be better to just focus on one piece you want to improve.</p> <p>The cliffs or berms are caused by:<br> - The airports are not flat - they are more "wavy" on the surface, but the slopes are usually relatively small.<br> -- WS2 cut a hole into the terrain where the airport would be placed. Then the surrounding terrain would be stitched together with the airport terrain. Sometimes the elevation between airport and surrounding terrain would be significant enough to cause these cliffs and berms.<br> -- WS3 overlays the surrounding terrain. To help prevent the surrounding terrain from poking through the airport terrain, the underneath terrain is lowered. This results in the ditch you see along the airport boundary lines.</p> <p>airports on scenery tile boundaries:<br> - What specifically is the issue?</p> <p>mesh generation for airports:<br> - TerraGear is used for this, which is a WS2 workflow.<br> - We need to update the workflow to utilize the WS3 terrain.<br> - The Threshold files need to be reproduced<br> - The Traffic files need to be reproduced<br> - Models need to be re-positioned... they float at many airports. I'm guessing due to the fact that WS2 used a geodetic model while WS3 uses a geocentric model. My preference would be to use WS3 geodetic models.<br> - painted lines (and/or surfaces) have lots of z-fighting issues due to poor positioning.</p> <p>You can adjust your view to enable wireframe<br> You can use the UFO to sample terrain elevation and coordinates.</p> <p>Scott</p> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/24/2026 5:11 PM, Patrick Callahan wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CACt=GQr6O3byj5pOpj2SJYE4WxgDU=aS2+2KZLDa9Z7FyjmzPw@mail.gmail.com"> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr"> <div>Are there any widely seen discrepancies in aircraft, airports, or scenery, especially at landclass borders or seacoasts, that we might be able to improve globally?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm thinking of things like this:</div> <div><br> </div> <div>- Numerous aircraft needing new models for HDR/PBR</div> <div>- Greenland's coastline, characterized by long straight seacoasts.</div> <div>- Areas surrounding airports with vertical cliffs or berms that are not part of the real landscape, <span style="background-color:transparent">KBED on 2024.1/ws2.0 also next/ws3.0</span></div> <div><br> </div> <div>- Airports located on scenery tile boundaries (see BIKF on next/ws3.0)</div> <div><br> </div> <div>-Pat</div> <div><br> </div> <div>One thing I've learned recently is that the most available elevation for runways is not a single number. The touchdown Zones and the thresholds have separate elevations. </div> <div>BIKF is one example</div> <div>Runway 20 Threshold 163, TDZE 164, slope -.3<span style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial;background-color:transparent">°</span></div> <div>Runway 02 Threshold 137, TDZE 160,<span style="background-color:transparent"> </span><span style="background-color:transparent">slope .3</span><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">°</span></div> <div>Runway 29 Threshold 171, TDZE 171, <span style="background-color:transparent"> </span><span style="background-color:transparent">slope -.6</span><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">°</span></div> <div>Runway 11 Threshold 111, TDZE 127, <span style="background-color:transparent"> </span><span style="background-color:transparent">slope .6</span><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">°</span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">Overall Airport Elevation is listed as 171, which is the highest value for Threshold or TDZE elevations.</span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">How would you characterize the generation of a mesh for Airports on next?</span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><font color="#333333" face="arial">I'd like to compare the available geodata we are using for the coordinates of each Threshold and TDZE number, as well as the numbers we have available in Airports.dat.</font></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">I'd also like to look at any exact elevations available from Terrain at various points across the airport and map the <span aria-invalid="grammar" class="Lm ng" style="border-style:none;background:none">geodata</span> points against the airport outlines in Airports.dat.</span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">Finally, I'd like to be able to click on a location in Flightgear's Scenery or Airport in Wireframe tessellation mode and see the elevation of the point I click on in the running app. It might help if the entire scene could be rendered in wireframe without applying scenery textures.</span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial">How could we add features like that to the debug menu?</span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> <div><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial"><br> </span></div> </div> </div> <br> <fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset> <br> <fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset> <pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel</a> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html> --------------NJmoJc0MaAsNp9S8U1sfzgeA-- --===============7584866806427797408== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============7584866806427797408== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --===============7584866806427797408==--