Page 1 of 1

Flatten Elevation vs Rwy elevation

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:56 pm
by falcon409
I am working on a small bush rwy in Alaska in FS9. Using AFX I have made the rwy and verified it's position in FS. The altitude of the ground in that area is 64ft MSL. . .I set the elevation however to "0". I opened SBuilder and made a flatten polygon to cover the area around the rwy. and set the elevation to "0".

When I load the sim and look at the area, the rwy is sunk in the terrain 60ft because if I allow the airplane to settle to the rwy level it reads 4ft MSL. I began increasing the elevation of both the afcad and the flatten until I had both where they looked correct with no sunken areas around the flatten and the rwy appeared as it should. When I lowered the airplane in slew mode to the rwy however, it continued to drop through until it reached the 4ft level.

So my question is. . .how do I get the flatten polygon and the rwy to settle on the terrain correctly? How do I decide on a correct elevation so both match?

Re: Flatten Elevation vs Rwy elevation

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 5:21 pm
by meshman
Is this an existing airport area or something completely new?

Also, your reading of 4 feet will reflect the eye-point elevation of the airplane itself. The default C172 is 3.6'.

Re: Flatten Elevation vs Rwy elevation

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 5:28 pm
by falcon409
meshman wrote:Is this an existing airport area or something completely new?
Also, your reading of 4 feet will reflect the eye-point elevation of the airplane itself. The default C172 is 3.6'.
Meshman, this is a new airport within Holgers Glacier Bay v2 Scenery (not sure if that's relevant or not). As for the reading of 4 feet. . . .if I set the aircraft down on the normal elevation terrain next to the rwy it reads 68ft. . .if I slew over top of the rwy and then allow the airplane to settle to ground level again, it will drop through the rwy and settle to an elevation of 4ft. (which by your observation is actually "0".)
I have tried adjusting just the flatten alt. to come up to the rwy, adjusted both the rwy and flatten alt and tried adjusting the rwy only, all to the same end. . .a big mess with either no rwy, a rwy that's about 60ft below the terrain or anything in between.

Re: Flatten Elevation vs Rwy elevation

Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 11:12 pm
by falcon409
I actually got more help from my home forum at Sim-Outhouse than I did here and was able to troubleshoot to the point of finding my mistakes.

Just an observation, I don't know how active this forum actually is, but everyone I asked initially about the problems I was having directed me here so I gave it a shot. Maybe it was the Holiday syndrome, maybe it was the topic I was having problems with that kept assistance to zero, not sure, but I was not impressed. I appreciate the work that went into creating SBuilder and now that I have a handle on flattens I'll be using it more. I use other programs to do the AFCADS and scenery placement, but SBuilder seems to be the only one that can handle flattens, so in that sense it's a valuable tool.

I'm sure the regulars here, if there are any, will find my criticism unwarranted and that's fine. . .I am, after all just one person. . . .who won't visit again.

Re: Flatten Elevation vs Rwy elevation

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:39 am
by meshman
falcon409 wrote:I actually got more help from my home forum at Sim-Outhouse than I did here and was able to troubleshoot to the point of finding my mistakes.

Just an observation, I don't know how active this forum actually is, but everyone I asked initially about the problems I was having directed me here so I gave it a shot. Maybe it was the Holiday syndrome, maybe it was the topic I was having problems with that kept assistance to zero, not sure, but I was not impressed. I appreciate the work that went into creating SBuilder and now that I have a handle on flattens I'll be using it more. I use other programs to do the AFCADS and scenery placement, but SBuilder seems to be the only one that can handle flattens, so in that sense it's a valuable tool.

I'm sure the regulars here, if there are any, will find my criticism unwarranted and that's fine. . .I am, after all just one person. . . .who won't visit again.
I'm not sure where you are located, but for me it's a holiday weekend in the U.S.

Your criticism is not warranted and comes acreoss as petty, whining and as a parting cheap shot.

The program you have carries no cost to you, yet you complain that no one is waiting to answer your new user questions. Had you looked elsewhere, say Google, you might have found there are tutorials that help new users work with a free program that tries to address the complexities of a very complex game.

Best wishes for your budding scenery efforts, however long that lasts. I'll still pop in on a regular basis trying to help out others and supporting the developer and his efforts.