From: Ron J. <wi...@je...> - 2010-12-10 02:53:09
|
On Thursday 09 December 2010 11:38:49 Martin Spott wrote: > "J. Holden" wrote: > > For an airport like Innsbruck, where the airport automatically > > generated grass polygon juts into the river "cs_lake", or like Honolulu > > or Macau, when there is a "lake" in the middle of the airfield, would > > it be possible to take a lake layer (or the lake layer) and "burn" the > > water texture into the airfield before any of the taxiways are applied? > > Yes, in the not so distant future this should well be possible - at > least technically. > > Yet I'd like to point out that this is going to open a new can of > worms, not only but also because most of our lake/river data is so > inaccurate that we might end up flooding large areas within airfields > which are probably just being crossed by a single, small brook ;-) > > Also note that the grass areas in and around airfields do also serve > the reasonable purpose of keeping random vegetation and other partially > automated stuff away from runways. Therefore I'd recommend not to > generally ditch these grass areas but instead to make them optional on > a by-airfield basis. > > Cheers, > Martin. Martin, One idea I've had, but never implemented, was to scale the grass area around a cutout by the size of the cutout. Some smaller fields, like UT40, have a grass area many times bigger than the airport itself. The real version of this airport (to the extent we can even call it an airport!) is surrounded by trees and houses. The clear area around the cut-out is way too big. Ron |