elevated lakes

[defaid]

25 minutes ago, hgschnell said:

I doubt about.

Sbuilder9 can change the altitude different of every single polygon.

 

 

 

 

 

Oh honestly... you're confusing flattens with LWM elevation.

 

As I wrote above, in what you've just quoted... if you alter the LWM, that will alter all waterbodies in that bgl. We've already established that flattens work in a different way: adding a flatten doesn't alter the entire HP***. bgl

 

On the other had, you are exactly correct in yor replies to leuen about the interaction between mesh and LWM.

[jgf]

29 minutes ago, hgschnell said:

No, the mesh doesn't create the elevated lakes, but the elevation around them.

I have seen lakes in holes too, because of mesh around them.

 

[hgschnell]

32 minutes ago, defaid said:

Oh honestly... you're confusing flattens with LWM elevation.

No, not the flattens, working with flattens is possible, but not necessary.

I ran a quick and dirty test and changed one lake to 900M and the other to 2000M just to proof my way.

And it worked (both kakes in the same HP9....,bgl)

 

 

[jgf]

24 minutes ago, defaid said:

 

Forgive me if I misunderstand and I don't mean to be condescending but:

 

The lakes you show in India are in a different bgl...

 

.....

 

Yes.  I have this issue worldwide, and know it is a mesh problem (I have screenshots of lakes and airports either in pits or on mesas on every continent).  Years ago I corrected many as i found them, but have been away from FS for a couple of years and forgotten the procedure (thanks for the tutorial).  It's basically live with the default, often inaccurate and usually low detail, mesh but everything fits, or use accurate mesh and constantly tweak scenery to fit it. 

 

I had not tackled correcting the airports since, as best I remember, I was told a flatten only moved the airport graphically and runways, lights, navaids, etc. stayed at the original elevation and must be manually edited one at a time til everything was properly placed;  I am not that familiar with the software.

 

This is compounded when you throw Ultimate Terrain into the mix;  now you have roads crossing lakes (without bridges), railroads across runways, dams sitting in fields miles from the river, buildings in rivers or just offshore, etc.

 

 

[defaid]

51 minutes ago, hgschnell said:

No, not the flattens, working with flattens is possible, but not necessary.

I ran a quick and dirty test and changed one lake to 900M and the other to 2000M just to proof my way.

And it worked (both kakes in the same HP9....,bgl)

 

 

I apologise, and I appreciate the correction. I've only used SBuilder to correct a few favourite islands' coastlines. I moved directly to ADE from adding flatten rectangles in scenery.cfg so skipped a lot of stuff in SBuilder.

 

 

44 minutes ago, jgf said:

I had not tackled correcting the airports since, as best I remember, I was told a flatten only moved the airport graphically and runways, lights, navaids, etc. stayed at the original elevation and must be manually edited one at a time til everything was properly placed;  I am not that familiar with the software.

 

 

 

Yes. Flattens do not affect runways, taxiways, lights, ILS and probably a few other things. ADE will change all of them in one go when you alter the airport elevation so there's no individual editing.

 

All that's left then is to reshape the terrain to meet the new airport elevation (because it's pretty certain not to be flat). You can do it either by adding a flatten or, if the difference in elevation is not huge, placing aprons under the rwy etc will also force the terrain to the airport's elevation. They only have to be a couple of inches wider than the runway so are not obtrusive. The apron method looks a bit strange if there is a big difference and is best reserved for when humps of ground errupt through the runway.

 

Library objects will certainly also be adjusted automatically if they are part of the airport bgl. If they are in a separate scenery bgl, I'm not sure. It's a long time since I placed scenery objects but I think they are likely to have been set to 'zero feet above the terrain' so they should follow the mesh. Someone else will know for sure.

 

If you've used AfCad then you already know how to use ADE. The size of the manual makes people think the application is difficult to use, and that makes them trot out the old 'steep learning curve' cliché, which everybody then repeats without trying it for themselves. The manual is a reference and a look-up, not a compulsory textbook.

 

I'd be happy to go through it should that ever be necessary.

 

[johnhinson]

2 hours ago, defaid said:

 

Yes. Flattens do not affect runways, taxiways, lights, ILS and probably a few other things. ADE will change all of them in one go when you alter the airport elevation so there's no individual editing.

 

All that's left then is to reshape the terrain to meet the new airport elevation (because it's pretty certain not to be flat). You can do it either by adding a flatten or, if the difference in elevation is not huge, placing aprons under the rwy etc will also force the terrain to the airport's elevation. They only have to be a couple of inches wider than the runway so are not obtrusive. The apron method looks a bit strange if there is a big difference and is best reserved for when humps of ground errupt through the runway.

 

Library objects will certainly also be adjusted automatically if they are part of the airport bgl. If they are in a separate scenery bgl, I'm not sure. It's a long time since I placed scenery objects but I think they are likely to have been set to 'zero feet above the terrain' so they should follow the mesh. Someone else will know for sure.

 

If you've used AfCad then you already know how to use ADE. The size of the manual makes people think the application is difficult to use, and that makes them trot out the old 'steep learning curve' cliché, which everybody then repeats without trying it for themselves. The manual is a reference and a look-up, not a compulsory textbook.

 

I'd be happy to go through it should that ever be necessary.

 

I would say there are a few sweeping statements above.

 

If you use ADE's features to the full, you don't need to place aprons under runways and even if you really really really want to do so, they don't have to be wider than runways. You can even place narrow taxi paths there. ADE will adjust the terrain by creating its own file during your compilation of the airport if you want it to.

 

Library objects invariably place themselves in relation to ground level, so no adjustments should be ever necessary. I'm reluctant to use the word "never" but I've not seen any scenery objects that don't adjust themselves (whether in an ADE file or not), and that includes autogen.

ADE is a very advanced editor but can achieve a lot when you use all the features in the manual. It does so much more than AFCAD, and even the bits you might feel you should be familiar with are done differently. The creation of "project" files and the need to "compile" the airport separately to the design changes you make are two things that baffle many. Nobody can just walk in and use ADE without a lot of initial frustration, the steep learning curve is most certainly there. One shouldn't poo-poo that, very few users (including me) have learnt to use every feature.

John

[hgschnell]

7 hours ago, defaid said:

I apologise, and I appreciate the correction. I've only used SBuilder to correct a few favourite islands' coastlines. I moved directly to ADE from adding flatten rectangles in scenery.cfg so skipped a lot of stuff in SBuilder.

No Problem, just an addition;  ADE always is airport based, SBuilder9 is able to change landscape anywhere,

[defaid]

John, if all I've done wrong is to construct sentences that implied what I didn't mean then I'm quite happy. I walked in with very few problems but there are still any number of features I haven't needed. I intended to convey the idea that you don't need a full knowledge of all aspects of ADE and that the manual is best used when you need to look up how to do something new.

 

I use aprons rather than taxiways because they don't clutter up the taxiway network while I'm tinkering.

 

You probably have more experience than any of us at creating scenery & airports. Out of interest, how would you have tackled the terrain mesh v. LWM issue?

 

D

[hjwalter]

Hi Guys,

 

I think I have found the culprit file, which is at least causing my own "elevated" lake with it's steep sides, near the Kenian Naivasha airport HKNV.

 

In the past I've re-organized all my own mesh BGLs, at least all those I could find, into one single folder (cut/Paste) with a low scenery priority but because there were so many of them, it was necessary to rename them all in my efforts for creating a clear and meaningful file organization.

 

My renamed culprit mesh file is: "Kenya1.BGL" and it's file size is 16887 Kb. My other Kenian mesh files in the same series have all been renamed into: Kenya2.bgl - Kenya10.bgl but with a single exception for the separately renamed: "Kenya Mt. Kenya.BGL" but this was done for my own clarity.

 

I believe that if any of you have Kenian mesh files, then the 16887 Kb file size would be the one to search for and to (test-)de-activate it.

 

In my system the Lake Naivasha surface elevation is at 6778 feet and the Naivasha airport's elevation was at 6446 feet, down in a shallow valley. However, my stock Naivasha airport's elevation is at 6380 feet.

 

A flatten statement at 6778 feet for the Naivasha airport and it's not too large (mesh) valley rims around it, did the trick. At least, it did for me.

 

Good luck guys.

 

Hans

[hgschnell]

In my humbly opinion a mesh better detailed than FS9 default should have priority and the altitudes of water pölygons should be adjusted.

 

It is a pity not to use better mesh

[johnhinson]

10 hours ago, defaid said:

John, if all I've done wrong is to construct sentences that implied what I didn't mean then I'm quite happy. I walked in with very few problems but there are still any number of features I haven't needed. I intended to convey the idea that you don't need a full knowledge of all aspects of ADE and that the manual is best used when you need to look up how to do something new.

 

I use aprons rather than taxiways because they don't clutter up the taxiway network while I'm tinkering.

 

You probably have more experience than any of us at creating scenery & airports. Out of interest, how would you have tackled the terrain mesh v. LWM issue?

 

D

Fair enough.

 

Me have more experience than anyone? Not at all! Like most, I have only learnt what I need.

 

Fixing sunken and elevated lakes isn't really a priority for me, I do see them occasionally but I tend to snort and keep flying.   Another wee annoyance are wrongly aligned roads. But as I generally fly at 8000 feet plus, I only really notice these things when taking off and landing.

 

If there was a quick fix for all, I would jump at it. In FSX (if I am allowed to use naughty words here) I used FTX Global from ORBX which fixed the roads, rivers, lakes etc. It used data provided by SATNAV firms if I remember rightly, and it definitely worked with non-ORBX mesh. So it can be done, but it no doubt costs more than would ever be justified for those of us clinging to FS2004, and given the similarities between the two simulators I have wondered (since reading this thread) if the files could be ported across. These days, I don't have the time I used to have for meddling, so there's a good chance I will never actually get round to trying it before I pop off. But dealing with lakes one at a time really isn't something I would spend time on.

 

(I no longer use FSX but the files are safely backed-up.)

 

Best regards,

John

 

 

[hjwalter]

Hey Guys,

 

Has any one of you been able to find a Kenian mesh BGL file with a size of 16887 Kb somewhere within your Kenya scenery or elswhere ? If yes, then please temporarily de-activate it to see what happens to the lakes near HKNV and then post your findings.

 

Thanks

 

Hans

[defaid]

Hi Hans.

 

Land on the lakes with the mesh, and again without the mesh. I'm certain that you'll find the elevation of the lakes does not change. It's the surrounding terrain that changes according to which terrain mesh is in use:

 

[hgschnell]

Good explanation by picture, exact my opinion

[PhrogPhlyer]

5 hours ago, defaid said:

Land on the lakes with the mesh, and again without the mesh.

Very useful easy to understand drawings. 

[hjwalter]

defaid,

 

Thanks for your very clear explanation and drawings. One is never too old to learn and your's was a very good lesson, even after almost 20 years of simming and tweaking myself.

 

I'm now searching through my huge pile of CDs and DVDs to see if I can find the original download ..... and ofcause it's "read me" file.

 

Hans

[jgf]

On 4/28/2023 at 4:29 PM, johnhinson said:

...

 

Fixing sunken and elevated lakes isn't really a priority for me, I do see them occasionally but I tend to snort and keep flying.   Another wee annoyance are wrongly aligned roads. But as I generally fly at 8000 feet plus, I only really notice these things when taking off and landing.

 

...

 

Best regards,

John

 

 

 

Lol, and for me just the opposite;  other than occasional military jets or even more rarely "sardine can" flights (airliners), I'm rarely above 5000 feet;  so all these scenery anomalies stick out like sore thumbs.  But now I've narrowed my flying to a few areas and am trying to fix as much of their issues as possible ...within my meager skills.  Truly FS was never meant for "low and slow".

 

FWIW, I've developed a "combat" system for military jets, using FSScreen as my "gun camera" I stalk airliners, a screenshot with the registration number of the target clearly legible is a "kill".

[johnhinson]

11 hours ago, jgf said:

Lol, and for me just the opposite;  other than occasional military jets or even more rarely "sardine can" flights (airliners), I'm rarely above 5000 feet;  so all these scenery anomalies stick out like sore thumbs.  But now I've narrowed my flying to a few areas and am trying to fix as much of their issues as possible ...within my meager skills.  Truly FS was never meant for "low and slow".

To be fair, what we are talking about fixing is a problem we have created for ourselves by choosing to install add-on mesh. True, we are installing it because it is more accurate, but "out of the box" the lakes, rivers and roads fitted in with the mesh perfectly almost everywhere. "Low and Slow" was entirely possible without those glaring errors, but the terrain wasn't up to the exacting standards of many of us.

 

We should not forget that MS probably had to create all of that in a cumbersome manner - the satellite-based data that add-on mesh is created from just didn't exist when FS2004 was being developed. On top of that, they were distributing the entire game on CD-ROM and were thus limited in the LOD they could provide without drastically increasing the installation discs and installation time, and probably the purchase price too. From memory they did provide some higher detail mesh in parts of the USA, their anticipated key sales area.

 

Today, it is all a question of each person's priorities as to what imperfections they are prepared to put up with.

Best regards,

 

John

[PhrogPhlyer]

6 hours ago, johnhinson said:

Today, it is all a question of each person's priorities as to what imperfections they are prepared to put up with.

True.

[jgf]

11 hours ago, johnhinson said:

To be fair, what we are talking about fixing is a problem we have created for ourselve...

 

Absolutely.  To be honest i think MS could have done better initially but taht would have taken many more man-hours and probably delayed release of FS9 by months, for results that would have been appreciated by a fraction of the customers.  As it is they gave  us a decently rendered world and a file system relatively easily tweaked so the community could create what they wished.  We pick and choose what we want for our world and it's up to us to make all these disparate files play well together.  Which is why I'm here - to learn the simplest way to accomplish this.  As I said I've done a little of this work - created a few simple, single runway, airports, done some scenery editing, but that was years ago;  I need a refresher course.

 

"Anything is easy once you know how."