• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

How do I change the elevation of default terrain

BTW: Apparently there is a EPSG GIS 'projection' type for a corrected WGS84 that incorporates the EGM2008 Geoid into a working 3D world "shape": :pushpin:

https://epsg.io/3855

"Zero-height surface resulting from the application of the EGM2008 geoid model to the WGS 84 ellipsoid. Replaces EGM96 height (CRS code 5773)"


IIUC, this could become the MSFS 0 Meters (A)MSL to be used for "sea level" in the 3D world; all sim Altitudes could then be relative to this.

I have not yet tested if the MSFS SDK is able to accept source data submitted directly in EPSG:3855 in lieu of 4326; maybe it now "should" ? ;)

I suspect that currently we have to make manual corrections that incorporate EGM2008 calculations when making our EPSG:4326 data sets, that "fool" the SDK about whether the resulting elevation data points in our custom source data set are actually aligned to the WGS84 ellipsoid.

IIRC, FS2Kx Resample is so smart, it can detect internal GIS projection based on testing of data parameters / values in submitted input data. :yikes:

Perhaps Dean Mountford (aka "=Hollywood=" or Sean Isom (aka "theisomizer") may have tested this already ? :idea:

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
IIUC, when we exclude Water Polys, we eradicate the factors that interfere with display of the underlying MSFS terrain elevation point values. :scratchch
Thanks Gary

That is what I thought.
In my example (Sechelt shore line), the shoreline is incorrect which which when corrected with a water exclude polygon covered some terrain elevations.

Can I assume that there is no changing terrain elevations for where water really exists eg. underwater terrain like the Mariana Trench in the Pacific Ocean - that if a water exclusion polygon were to be added in this area then we would not see changes of elevation in MSFS? I hope you understand what I am 'getting at'.

For all your research my brain is now in overdrive and overheating - where is the paracetamol :eek:
What was/is your main vocation/career?

Rick
"The occasions when my AI boats slip under the surface are one of the ways I am able to see this "underworld,"
I also have seen a strange phenomenom at Green Lake (near Whistler) where the elevation of the water changes across the middle of the lake by about a metre and taxiing a floatplane across it makes it almost flip. The change in elevation is in a straight line and the reason was explained to me a long time ago. I think there is another example north west of Vancouver (also in the water) but not as pronounced.
 
Last edited:
FYI here is a before and after addition of water exclude polygon. Gary will remember answering a question of use of the terrain polygon to correct the land elevation at the end of my pier (seen on the left in both images), I now almost, repeat almost, do not require a terraforming polygon so that the end of the pier is not above ground level.
sechelt_without_water_exclude.jpg

sechelt_with_water_exclude.jpg
 
Hi John:

I've heard that in rural Appalachian Mountain towns their coal mining is being replaced by BitCoin Mining data centers, which generate intolerable noise levels from the cooling fans for the rack mounted super computers. :oops:

With all your computational activity, I hope Aussie Blue Mountain folk are more tolerant than them 'thar USA moonshiners. :rotfl:


I have not yet tried a water exclude over the Mariana Trench to see if Asobo included Bathymetry in MSFS' terrain data. :scratchch



I did end up on the ocean floor of the Pacific Ocean off Acapulco International MMAA in P3D recently.

IIRC, since L-M included the most Bathymetry for that area of P3D's globe, I'll load the "sub" offshore South of Catalina Island California.

I've heard the Aliens that recently 'taunted' US Military pilots have a UFO base there; maybe it is in the P3D terrain data ? :laughing:


FYI: The FS2Kx Max/Min range of terrain mesh elevation values is +32767 Meters to -32767 Meters ...relative to 0 Meters MSL.

The original FS2Kx low Earth orbit maximum Orthographic A/C camera Altitude of Top-Down mode was 100 Million Feet AMSL


GaryGB
 
Last edited:
You might want to check your sources, unless we are referring to different UAP/AAV encounters off the coast of San Diego, 2004 is "recent," or alien involvement had ever been confirmed. Below is linked the unredacted report by aircrews, systems operators and other individuals involved in the sightings, which I think comprises the bulk of what humanity has informed itself about the incident, making everything else speculation. Still, it's a fascinating read, love the tin hat part.

To me, the report reads like a thinly veiled demonstration for a new weapon system. Why UAP's that could drop from 60,000 feet to 5 feet in an instant, that could routinely endure accelerations in any axis of thousands of G's, would have the time and patience to take turns with a terrestrial iron airplane, is the question people should be asking. If you could go anywhere in the galaxy in 20 minutes, any direction at all and the place you ended up, happened to have cavemen in bamboo kites flying around, would you really trouble yourself to dogfight them? Wait, I know you would if you were trying to sell them one of what you got, but why bother selling, you could take whatever you wanted. An earthly contractor, that does not yet have his austere base on Mars, might have to negotiate...

And what a perfect opportunity, US Navy live fire training exercises. Doesn't get better than that eh? With not only a flight if F-18's to play with, two flights - and they keep saying over and over again, "this stuff doesn't record." It is like they want to make sure the public knows, the military is doing it's best to stay on watch, except for actually using the "record" button. But we got all this flashy, intriguingly grainy FLIR footage to pour over. I hear "performance bonus," in the glee of the unidentified WSO, when upon successfully locking the UAP in his FLIR he exclaims, "Whoo got it!"

Final points, due to the accelerations, these likely are not biologic, making the aliens robotic, or at least equipped with balls of steel, or and most likely, voyeurs, like we would be with these things. Sitting in some swank conference room with a nice Cuban cigar and a wall sized monitor watching our new tictac mow down Navy F-18's. In fact, the entire event, all of it, could be staged for the Russians to make them think we're making deals over advanced technologies - except it is all fake, just like the B-2. Those Russians go absolutely cuckoo over aliens.

How about ufo's in PD3 or MSFS. That would be awesomeo_O


How about a tictac? Someone could whip that thing up in a day or two, don't even have to model landing gear because it hovers, of course. Max all the performance sliders, no attached effects, and the texturing would be just polygon color 255, 255, 255. I have a detailed list of specifications right here: Length 46 feet.

 
How about a tictac? Someone could whip that thing up in a day or two, don't even have to model landing gear because it hovers, of course.
And we could ask mamu to write the code so that it only appears at set times during the day and follows a path (like the tractor in his LIDL aitport) only with this it would include fast change of elevation as well as horizontal flight lke a true ufo (what ever they are). I hope mamu is watching.
 
I did end up on the ocean floor of the Pacific Ocean off Acapulco International MMAA in P3D recently.

IIRC, since L-M included the most Bathymetry for that area of P3D's globe, I'll load the "sub" offshore South of Catalina Island California.

I've heard the Aliens that recently 'taunted' US Military pilots have a UFO base there; maybe it is in the P3D terrain data ? :laughing:

NOTE: For those not recognizing implications of a topical non sequitur with a "Laughing" Emoticon in the quote above ...I'm joking about this. 👽


Back on topic

John:

IIUC, we can use Exclude / Replace to fix default MSFS Water Polygons where needed, if we always manually disable Water Flattening.

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
NOTE: For those not recognizing implications of a topical non sequitur with a "Laughing" Emoticon in the quote above ...I'm joking about this. 👽
For those confused about humor in all it's glorious shades, I will suggest there are a lot of emoticons on this page. Deciphering them into a DEFCON of slapstick probably shouldn't be proprietary, but is almost certainly a challenge for fledgling developers like me. When in doubt, I like to KISS.

:scratchch
 
Back
Top