How Do I model Buildings that are on Sloping Terrains

Hi Gary,

Below is a Sketchup project I've been working on for weeks now, and it's the Baptist Montclair Hospital which is 3 mile south of runway 36/18:


BMC.jpg



There are about 6 or 7 buildings that occupy the project and sits on a hill 3 miles south of the airport. It being on a hill, and where the terrain is so uneven, and is not flat at all, has made it really hard to get everything to line-up and be at the correct height. Notice that the parking deck is lower than the main hospital and how the left side terrain rises as you go up-hill. I had to take all of this elevation into consideration and since the ground elevation changes so often, I could not measure from the ground up. I had to pick an object, such as the top of the highest building and measure from that point down, using that as a reference. Many times, the top of one building would not line up properly with the building next to it, and had to start over. It's not perfect but it's as close as I can get it, based on the information I got from google earth pro.

I was wondering if there's a technique, or a plugin that I can install in sketchup that will make the terrain change as it does in the real world, maybe using elevation data. The way I'm having to do it is to draw square faces that rise with the ground, and it's sort of like drawing or having block faces, if you understand what I mean. If the ground rises or decends in 2 or more directs at the same time, it's not possible to get a face out of it because everything's is out of plain. You'll noticed that the terrain surrounding the parking deck is not quite connected to the terrain above it, and that's because I've haven't finished that part of it.

Below is a Sketchup view of the parking deck where cars enter the ramp:


Parking Deck 1.jpg



I've left these white so that you can see how I've been drawing the changes to the terrain. Cars enter the ramp either from the left entrance or the entrance on the right, which is about 9 feet higher the one on the left. In the real world, changes to the rise of the terrain dose not rise as I have it drawn but this is the only way I know how. Look at the photo below and see the real world of how the terrain changes:


Parking Deck 2.jpg



If there's a plugin, or a technique, could you give me some advice? I am using Sketchup version 8.0.16846

Ken.
 
Last edited:
https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...at-are-on-sloping-terrains.446082/post-829766

Hi Gary,

Below is a Sketchup project I've been working on for weeks now, and it's the Baptist Montclair Hospital which is 3 mile south of runway 36/18:

(Image not included in quote)

There are about 6 or 7 buildings that occupy the project and sits on a hill 3 miles south of the airport. (The site) It being on a hill, and where the terrain is so uneven, and is not flat at all, has made it really hard to get everything to line-up and be at the correct height.

Notice that the parking deck is lower than the main hospital and how the left side terrain rises as you go up-hill. I had to take all of this elevation into consideration and since the ground elevation changes so often, I could not measure from the ground up. I had to pick an object, such as the top of the highest building and measure from that point down, using that as a reference. Many times, the top of one building would not line up properly with the building next to it, and had to start over. It's not perfect but it's as close as I can get it, based on the information I got from google earth pro.

I was wondering if there's a technique, or a plugin that I can install in Sketchup that will make the terrain change as it does in the real world, maybe using elevation data. The way I'm having to do it is to draw square faces that rise with the ground, and it's sort of like drawing or having block faces, if you understand what I mean. If the ground rises or descends in 2 or more directions at the same time, it's not possible to get a face out of it because everything's is out of plane (not co-planar). You'll notice that the terrain surrounding the parking deck is not quite connected to the terrain above it, and that's because I've haven't finished that part of it.

Below is a Sketchup view of the parking deck where cars enter the ramp:

(Image not included in quote)

I've left these white so that you can see how I've been drawing the changes to the terrain. Cars enter the ramp either from the left entrance or the entrance on the right, which is about 9 feet higher the one on the left. In the real world, changes to the rise of the terrain does not rise as I have it drawn, but this is the only way I know how (to 3D model the site). Look at the photo below and see (how the terrain changes in the real world):

(Image not included in quote)


If there's a plugin, or a technique, could you give me some advice? I am using Sketchup version 8.0.16846

Ken.

Hi Ken:

I have edited your quoted text in a few places to show what IIUC, you meant to convey; please let me know if I have misunderstood you in my posted interpretation. :scratchch


The multi-object site you are creating for your KBHM project area is too complex to render at run time in FS.

The 3D models of the buildings would best be segmented into separate grouped objects for export as *.KMZ files.

(1) grouped object should be exported at a time ...with all other objects temporarily 'hidden' prior to export.


Each individual object *.KMZ file can be imported into MCX, converted, then exported as a FSX / P3D scenery BGL.

The MCX export will contain both the 3D model and its placement instructions inside the same 'hybrid' BGL


3D model placement instructions can then be fine-tuned by Instant Scenery ('Move' mode) and saved to the same BGL.


The multi-object site 3D model will likely prove too complex for both 32-Bit version 8, or 64-Bit version 16 of Sketchup to handle, if you also import a terrain mesh at a grid resolution matching that of FS default (38.2 Meters) or a custom mesh of even higher resolution.

I would recommend that you instead model each building on the single flat planar (sur-)Face of the imported imagery you are using as a background.


NOTE: The default setting for all SDK BGLComp-XML-based scenery library object placement utilities including Instant Scenery, is "AltitudeIsAGL=TRUE", which results in objects placed at 0-Meters AGL, to be rendered in FS on the ground surface provided by any local terrain mesh ...at the assigned Altitude of that terrain mesh.


One can modify the FS ground surface provided by any local terrain mesh using CVX vector flattens ...as discussed here:

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/ground-elevation.444517/

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...at-are-on-sloping-terrains.446082/post-829770

I think sketchup pro has the ability to download the elevation data from google earth as a base

'Google' imagery / terrain data import by Sketchup was discontinued years ago, and the 'new' Geolocation mesh data is also low resolution (min. 90 Meters between elevation data points, so less detail than FS default terrain).

Thus, although it does form a much less dense mesh and therefore has less impact on Sketchup responsiveness, it does not accurately represent the terrain mesh shape one will see in FS at run time.


However, after further consideration of some post-processing options that can be implemented within Sketchup by certain plugin Ruby script features, since Ken's project area measures less than 1 Kilometer on the X-Y axes, there may still be a way to utilize a terrain elevation data set that matches an intended FS terrain mesh grid density and elevation data point grid vertex interval as a function of LOD. :scratchch

I may soon be able to test this and post an update on whether this is practical to utilize within Sketchup. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Hi Ken:

The above linked Oob Terrain extension accesses / utilizes the 'void-filled' "SRTM version 3 Plus" 1-Arc Second (30 Meters between elevation data points) data set, to import "terrain" (and separate 'Image') object layers into Sketchup.

FYI: Although 'Oob' technically uses elevation source data which is 'comparable' in resolution to that used for the FS default USA terrain, it also implements interpolation and smoothing procedures which may result in a terrain shape which does not match that used in FS when terrain mesh is compiled by SDK Resample.


BTW: 'Google' imagery / terrain data import by 'Oob' has the disclaimer: "Google API requests are subjected to daily quota", and the Link to Google elevation data web page states: :alert:

"Notice: New customers will need to contact sales for access to the Elevation API. You must also sign up and create a billing account. See Get Started with Google Maps Platform. "


CAVEAT: The above billing account requirement also applies for access to the Google Maps satellite imagery API. :redflag:


Note as well that OpenStreetMap vector footprints for buildings may not be rectangular, and might not work well in Sketchup for purposes of extruding Faces on- or off- axes ...to achieve accurate 3D modeling from imported 'primitives'


Although like the Sketchup payware default Geo-location feature, 'Oob' does form a less dense mesh and therefore has somewhat less impact on Sketchup responsiveness, it does not accurately represent the ground surface 'shape' and grid vertex positions one will see in FS at run time with a terrain mesh compiled by SDK Resample. :pushpin:


Depending on intended design goals and budget, 'Oob' may be "Good Enough" for some would-be FS Developers.


I would personally be inclined to utilize development methods intended to make FS scenery "As Real As It Gets". :pushpin:

Thus, I shall endeavor to find methods of production via Sketchup which are capable of yielding results that accurately align with FS terrain grid vertices (...as is always inherently utilized within both terrain mesh compiled via SDK Resample and CVX vector sloped flattens compiled via SDK).

I will be testing several potential work-flows to achieve a local terrain mesh accurate to that which may be used in FS, for your project area cited in this thread, and will post an update on progress as soon as feasibility can be verified. ;)


PS: It would be helpful for testing purposes, if you would please export your "Baptist Montclair Hospital" 3D model project area as a Sketchup *.KMZ file ...and send me a link to download it via a Private Message (aka "PM"). :coffee:

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
I think sketchup pro has the ability to download the elevation data from google earth as a base
Hi nz255,

Google Earth Pro provides elevation data at the bottom right of the screen, but I'm not sure just how accurate it is.

Ken.
 
'Google' imagery / terrain data import by Sketchup was discontinued years ago, and the 'new' Geolocation mesh data is also low resolution (min. 90 Meters between elevation data points, so less detail than FS default terrain).

Thus, although it does form a much less dense mesh and therefore has less impact on Sketchup responsiveness, it does not accurately represent the terrain mesh shape one will see in FS at run time.
It seems that even the Pro version of Sketchup is no better than the elevation data I can get from google earth pro.

I wanted to ask you Gary, just how accurate is the elevation data and the measuring ruler, in both 2D and 3D modes of google earth pro? Regarding that elevation, I would get a difference by as much as 5 feet, and some times more, between the 2D and 3D modes.

However, after further consideration of some post-processing options that can be implemented within Sketchup by certain plugin Ruby script features, since Ken's project area measures less than 1 Kilometer on the X-Y axes, there may still be a way to utilize a terrain elevation data set that matches an intended FS terrain mesh grid density and elevation data point grid vertex interval as a function of LOD. :scratchch
Well, the may thing I wanted to get correct is the positions and altitudes of each of the individual buildings in the Z direction in relation to each other. When I first started the project, I didn't think about these things until I realize that the height of certain things were not in the correct place, or did not line up as in the real world. That was because I was modeling the buildings as though they were on a flat surface. But when you have terrain that differs by as much as 10 feet or more, I found that I cannot work from the ground up. I use the 3D mode in google earth to get the height of buildings, although just not sure how accurate it is when using those laser images, I believe it is. Regarding your first post, I think it would make since, and would be better for me to group each of the individual buildings and then place them in the sim using Instant Scenery. But my other question is that will Instant Scenery allow me to adjust in the Z, or up and down directions so that I can place each building based on the terrain?

Ken.
 
https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...at-are-on-sloping-terrains.446082/post-829788

It seems that even the Pro version of Sketchup is no better than the elevation data I can get from google earth pro.
Trimble knows the Sketchup user community is not satisfied with the current Geo-location data sources.

IMHO, we must import our own GIS data for imagery and elevation etc. from other sources projected in (EPSG:3857) "non-warped" GIS format ...for more precise results, with an overall easier-to-visualize background (and less eyestrain).


https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...at-are-on-sloping-terrains.446082/post-829788

I wanted to ask you Gary, just how accurate is the elevation data and the measuring ruler, in both 2D and 3D modes of google earth pro?

Regarding that elevation, I would get a difference by as much as 5 feet, and some times more, between the 2D and 3D modes.

Google Earth Desktop Edition has greatly improved the Ruler tool, and the 3D Path feature works with good precision on the LIDAR- derived 3D models to determine X,Y,Z dimensions, providing one allows for irregularities in derived geometry seen at the base or other parts of the rendered 3D object, which sometimes calls for an "educated guess" as to what would 'probably' be the real world measurement in Feet or Meters when a building is constructed.

When 'Feet' are the units for ex: North American buildings, typically one's units used are an 'even' number of Feet.

I tend to use an even number of 'Feet' as units for dimensions in Sketchup, as it then seems faster for the inferencing engine to compute / ID / display tool-tips for 'Midpoints' on objects when using the Tape Measure or other tools. :idea:


Regarding 'accuracy' of elevation data in Google Earth, see my comments at the bottom of this post. ;)

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...at-are-on-sloping-terrains.446082/post-829788

Well, the may main thing I wanted to get correct is the positions and altitudes of each of the individual buildings in the Z direction in relation to each other. When I first started the project, I didn't think about these things until I realized that the height of certain things were not in the correct place, or did not line up as in the real world. That was because I was modeling the buildings as though they were on a flat surface. But when you have terrain that differs by as much as 10 feet or more, I found that I cannot work from the ground up. I use the 3D mode in google earth to get the height of buildings, although just not sure how accurate it is when using those laser images, I believe it is.

Regarding your first post, I think it would make sense, and would be better for me to group each of the individual buildings and then place them in the sim using Instant Scenery.

Indeed, even visually sharp imagery may still have been captured "off-nadir', and may require modification of work-flow to determine what the dimensions and corner positions of an object footprint actually are in the real world.

MCX will package the 3D model and its placement inside the same BGL, and in FS the object can be found "nearby" in IS3, then its position can be fine tuned as desired in "Move" mode.

Also, if desired, one can consolidate the source MDLs for such 3D objects into a single library for a project or project area using other FS utilities.

Although one may group and export 3D objects in a multi-object "scene" separately, it may still be desirable to assemble and align edges of all those multiple objects within a Sketchup project ...prior to export.

This may be done relative to a 'flat' work plane Face set at the Origin of Axes in Sketchup to become the lowest elevation in the project area.

The 'flat' foundation / base for a 3D object which is at the lowest Altitude in the real world will be modeled in alignment with that work plane Face set at the Origin of Axes in Sketchup.

That "base plane" can be as large in the X-Y axes as the outer-most extents of all 3D objects in the project "scene".

One can work from there with other 'flat' work plane Faces set at a relative elevation in the real world for other nearby buildings / objects to be 3D modeled, allowing all measured 'heights' to be relative to the single large base plane.


Alternatively, if desired, the entire set of 'flat' foundations / bases for 3D objects can be offset from the Origin of Axes in Sketchup at a distance correlating with their real world Altitude.

After each 3D model is exported separately, one must use the MCX Move tool to 'center' the object base after import.


Otherwise, each object must be exported into a separate Sketchup project file and 'centered' at the Origin of Axes:

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...in-reference-point-of-imported-models.441368/


https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...at-are-on-sloping-terrains.446082/post-829788

But my other question is that will Instant Scenery allow me to adjust in the Z, or up and down directions so that I can place each building based on the terrain?

Ken.

Indeed, IS3 allows one to adjust "Elevation" (Altitude AGL) relative to the local FS "ground" surface, because IS3 internally outputs BGLComp.exe-compatible BGLs with a AltitudeIsAGL=TRUE" mode of operation, which results in objects placed at 0-Meters AGL, to be rendered in FS on the ground surface provided by any local terrain mesh and/or CVX vector flatten ...at the assigned Altitude of that terrain mesh and/or flatten.

Thus a normal 'positive' elevation value raises a 3D object relative to the local FS "ground" surface

And a 'negative' elevation value lowers a 3D object relative to the local FS "ground" surface.


Typically, one would 3D model (construct) a building 'foundation' and sink it into the ground ...as done in the real world.

NOTE: 3D models placed at a 'negative' elevation / Altitude AGL ...no longer exclude nearby Autogen :pushpin:


See: C:\Program Files (x86)\Instant Scenery 3\readme.pdf and refer to: Page 18 of 39

"Setting advanced parameters" > "Opening the Object Properties dialog box"

1568997203078.png


FYI: I shall do some further tests today on feasibility of importing a terrain mesh into Sketchup for this site.


BTW: One may find it preferable to derive more precise measurements at a project location for elevation and relative ground / building surface heights (as well as Geographic coordinates) ...than those provided by lower resolution elevation data such as used in Google Earth and "Oob Terrain Extension" or the default Geo-location plugin features in Sketchup.

This can be achieved by using ex: Global Mapper (...even in demo mode ?) to 'view':

* LiDAR surface elevation data (...loaded 1 layer above Imagery):

* Imagery (...located at the bottom layer position of the Control Center)

PS: To work with such GIS data without distortion compatibly with SDK BGLComp via a 3D modeling application or a FS airport design utility, the Global Mapper work-space GIS projection format must be set to EPSG:3857 (non-warped). ;)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Hi Ken:

I have edited your quoted text in a few places to show what IIUC, you meant to convey; please let me know if I have misunderstood you in my posted interpretation. :scratchch
Hi Gary,

I didn't see where you edited my quotes but it seems that you understand what I'm conveying.
 
Hi Ken:

When imagery displayed by Google Earth is "off-nadir", use a alternative tilserver Background Map from SBuilderX. :idea:


To output a 1-piece *.BMP of selected tiles from the SBuilderX work-space in a non-warped format for use in ADE or a 3D modeling application:

1.) SBuilderX Menu > Edit > Edit INI file... (SBuilderX.INI opens in NotePad)

a.) In NotePad > SBuilderX.INI > Under [Tiles] section, Edit:

ReprojectMercatorTiles=True

...and change it to read:

ReprojectMercatorTiles=False


b.) NotePad Menu > File > Save

c.) NotePad Menu > File > Exit


2.) SBuilderX Menu > File > Add Map > From Background

a.) Follow usual procedures to download / select tiles (do not compile to BGL)

(1) SBuilderX Menu > Edit >Tile Servers > VirtualEarthSatellite > check: Use VirtualEarthSatellite ? check-box > click: [OK]

(2) SBuilderX Menu > View > Show Background ...F1


3.) SBuilderX outputs non-warped format 1-piece *.BMP / *.TXT into:

[SBuilderX install path]\Tools\Work sub-folder


A detailed example of how to do the latter procedures cited above using SBuilderX, and then importing that imagery into Sketchup as a Geo-located / mapped Material on a Face ...can be posted upon request. ;)



PS: SBuilderX has a Measure Tool comparable to that in GM-13; use it via:

1.) SBuilderX Icon Toolbar > Pointer Mode

2.) SBuilderX Menu > Edit > Measure Tool

a.) Click > move cursor to measure a Length in top right Status Box

NOTE: Heading and Lat - Lon coordinates of end point is also shown in top right Status Box

b.) click to Stop Measuring

Heading and Lat - Lon coordinates of end point display in Status Box until another Measure Tool mouse click is detected.


Hope this might also prove useful at your current project location. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Hi Gary,

Wanted to let you know that I sent you a PM.

Well, I've installed the Baptist Moantclair bgl into FSX, and as I expected, the terrain in FS is way too hilly and needs to be flattened some. The elevation seems to be correct but the slopes are way too exaggerated. Here's a screenshot:


Baptist Montclair 1.jpg



I did have an issue and apparently I did something to cause it. If you look at the screenshot below using the kmz file, when I double click it and opens google earth, it places the project fairly close to where it should be but notice it's not facing in the correct direction and is off by about 30 to 45 degrees:


Baptist Montclair.jpg


I don't know why it did not line up with the actual image but I was able to correct it with IS3. I also noticed that I was able to adjust in the Z direction, which is great. From my understanding of kmz files, I thought they contain information as altitude, placement location, and heading. So, I don't understand why it's heading was off as it was. This install did not include all the buildings that's on the complex, but only the main hospital. I had grouped them into individual buildings just to see how well they would lay in the sim. As a matter of fact, I made components of each of the individual buildings, including the parking decks. It doesn't look too bad, but I would like to get that area of the complex a little more flatter and not slope as steeply as they have it in the sim.

Ken.
 
Hi Ken:

I replied to your PM. ;)

I must now depart for the early portion of this evening, and shall reply to your latter post above ...later. :)

GaryGB
 
Hi Ken:

Regarding the Heading mis-match of your Sketchup 3D model *.KMZ export when opened in Google Earth:

In Google Earth, use Ruler {Line} mode to trace a long side of a target object on ground in GE's imagery.

In Sketchup, use the Move or Rotate Tool to match the angle of the Face footprint 'primitive' for the 3D model base Edge to the same X, Y, Z Heading relative to the default Cardinal N-E-S-W Axes ...as the target object on ground in the GE imagery.

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/sketchup-models-and-their-altitude-point.353776/

https://help.sketchup.com/en/sketchup/adjusting-drawing-axes#align-direction

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/t...s-and-their-altitude-point.353776/post-548995

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/ruby-tuesday-sketchup-plug-ins.70243/post-216431


Re-position Sketchup Drawing Axes to a corner of the extruded Face footprint 'primitive' 3D model you are creating via:

Sketchup Menu > Tools > Axes

https://help.sketchup.com/ko/sketchup/adjusting-drawing-axes



PS: I have been able to import a high resolution 'gridded' terrain mesh (distinct from a 'TIN') into Sketchup for the above project area.

However, that work-flow requires further exploration and testing before I would post it some time in the future.

Since the prototype work-flow does require installation and use of a GIS application (with an associated learning curve), and since the terrain profile at the Montclair Baptist Hospital is already a relatively lower-grade slope in both FS and in a high resolution elevation data set, it may be more practical for you to just use a sloped flatten along the edges of your 3D model base to blend it into the surrounding FS terrain mesh where needed ...as you had considered above. ;)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Regarding the Heading mis-match of your Sketchup 3D model *.KMZ export when opened in Google Earth:

In Google Earth, use Ruler {Line} mode to trace a long side of a target object on ground in GE's imagery.
This sounds similar to using the "Add Path" in google earth and exporting it as a kml file for Sketchup using the plugin. Is the Add Path what you're referring to? If not, after drawing the line in google earth using the ruler, how do I make that line show up in Sketchup unless I export a kml file?


By the way, do I do this after I've completed my project or when I begin my project?

Ken.
 
Hi Ken:

In this case, Google Earth Ruler tool in {Line} mode is used only to determine the Heading relative to the default Cardinal N-E-S-W Axes of a real world view as seen in Google Earth's view-port, so that value can be used when drawing / 3D modeling in Sketchup. :pushpin:

One should not export the Path or Line from Google Earth as a KML file to be imported into Sketchup-8 via 'KML Tools' plugin, as the result would be in a "warped" and "rotated" GIS (EPSG:4326) format, thus off axis by approximately 1-to-3 degrees counter-clockwise. :alert:

One can have concurrent Windows task sessions of Google Earth and Sketchup running, but one needs a correct Heading value from the "non-warped" / "non-rotated " real world Google Earth view-port first before rotating the Face Edge drawn separately in Sketchup to match the real world Heading ...as described above. ;)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
A

Aviasim

Guest
Is it REALLY worth the hassle to get perfect terrain around here? it's far away from the airport and directly under approach path...it'll hardly be noticed and when it is - the terrain and slopes around the area definitely will not be seen.

Just place the individual buildings using MCX or IS3 or SimDirector - may have to extrude some models so they have some polygons under the Z axis, so like -2M or so to prevent gaps - although I am willing to bet that even gaps wouldn't be an issue.
 
Indeed, sometimes a small terrain 'skirt' textured with local ground imagery is a practical way to cover up where a 3D object is placed on a terrain surface which is not level. :idea:

At in-flight altitudes, certainly Ken would not see such a small 'skirt' object from a cockpit view. ;)


However, that terrain 'skirt' textured with local ground imagery would not change with the seasons and might prove objectionable to some if the extent of that skirt was more than ex: 2 Meters peripheral to the main 3D object.

IIUC, Ken plans to use custom photo-real imagery land class textures for at least several miles surrounding the KBHM airport (possibly with seasonal variations ?); thus he may prefer to use a small CVX vector flatten for such a terrain 'skirt' to blend the base of the hospital scenery edges into surrounding terrain, so that any custom land class textures will drape onto the sloped 'blending' flatten that constitutes- and shapes- local 'terrain'. :scratchch


It is also possible that this object has a sentimental significance pertinent to Ken's personal history as a native to this area; thus he may be motivated to create a more realistic version of this particular landmark. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Is it REALLY worth the hassle to get perfect terrain around here? it's far away from the airport and directly under approach path...it'll hardly be noticed and when it is - the terrain and slopes around the area definitely will not be seen.
That depends on if you want precise terrain slopes. But I'm not going to worry with all of that because just like you said, it's a hassle to make it all work in Sketchup. One problem is that on one side of the street, for example, the terrain is level while just across the street it's sloping, and it's not possible for Sketchup to do all of that since those faces have to be perfectly plan, or you want get a face. If it were not such a hassle, I would probably take the time to do it. But I'm just not going to worry with it.

The hospital is not that far away from the airport runway, the distance being 2.2 nautical miles from the threshold. Before the runway was lengthen, it was about 3 miles. Anyway, I have it all installed now and it doesn't look bad at all, even with the exaggerated sloping. It's not that noticeable, especially to those who have never been there, but people like me that know the area can spot them. But it's not that noticeable from the air. I'll post it here today so all can see it.

Ken
 
Top