• 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.

Multiple flattens in a QMID 11 square.

GHD

GHD

Messages
12,244
Country
england
Some time ago I reported a problem where only half of an airfield was being flattened. Now I have the situation where the flatten for certain airfields is not being applied at all.

In particular, I have problems with the following flattens:



(Note, there are associated exclusions which have been switched off in TmfViewer)

Doug, could this be because I have each flatten in a separate cxv file and only one of the files is being loaded per QMID 11 square?

George
 
Golf-HotelDelta said:
Some time ago I reported a problem where only half of an airfield was being flattened. Now I have the situation where the flatten for certain airfields is not being applied at all.

...

Doug, could this be because I have each flatten in a separate cxv file and only one of the files is being loaded per QMID 11 square?

George
Click to expand...

FS should load multiple cvx files just fine. Perhaps you did not use the -ADDTOCELLS command line argument on Shp2Vec, which might cause the scenario you describe (first file for a given QMID11 suppressing all others).

-Doug
 
DougMatthews said:
Perhaps you did not use the -ADDTOCELLS command line argument on Shp2Vec
Click to expand...
Thanks Doug, that's what I thought.

I used -ADDTOCELLS only for the exclude and flatten for each single airport contained in one bgl. Are you saying that all airfield's exclude/flattens should be in one bgl?

George
 
Golf-HotelDelta said:
Thanks Doug, that's what I thought.

I used -ADDTOCELLS only for the exclude and flatten for each single airport contained in one bgl. Are you saying that all airfield's exclude/flattens should be in one bgl?

George
Click to expand...

-ADDTOCELLS is per-bgl. Did you compile additional bgls (non-exclude/flatten) for the same areas? If you have any that were not compiled with -ADDTOCELLS you are signing up to provide replacement for (or do without) ALL lower priority vector data in intersecting QMID11.

It is generally good practice for all vector data for a given area to live in one bgl file, but that is not a requirement.

-Doug
 
Hmm, I always use -ADDTOCELLS when creating cvx files, however, I have a feeling that multiple bgls in QMID11 area may not always be loaded.

Whilst generating each cvx I checked in sim and they looked fine. However, when checking earlier airfields, some which did work no longer did.

I will create a single bgl with all of the exludes/flattens for each of the areas 0501 and 0601.

George
 
Golf-HotelDelta said:
Hmm, I always use -ADDTOCELLS when creating cvx files, however, I have a feeling that multiple bgls in QMID11 area may not always be loaded.

Whilst generating each cvx I checked in sim and they looked fine. However, when checking earlier airfields, some which did work no longer did.

I will create a single bgl with all of the exludes/flattens for each of the areas 0501 and 0601.

George
Click to expand...

I'll have a look.

-Doug
 
Hi Doug,

I created a single bgl with all of the flattens/excludes and it works fine. However, this could be a big problem if multiple designers were to realease excludes/flattens for the same area, there would be no guarantee that they all would work.

George
 
Golf-HotelDelta said:
Hi Doug,

I created a single bgl with all of the flattens/excludes and it works fine. However, this could be a big problem if multiple designers were to realease excludes/flattens for the same area, there would be no guarantee that they all would work.

George
Click to expand...

Thanks George. Please check your Private Messages.

-Doug
 
I am sorry Doug, out of 47 cvx files I found that three had been compiled without the ADDTOCELLS switch, re-compiling these three has fixed the problem.

Thank you for your attention and I apologise again for wasting your valuable time.

George
 
DougMatthews said:
It is generally good practice for all vector data for a given area to live in one bgl file, but that is not a requirement.

-Doug
Click to expand...

This brings up a question I have had. (don't want to threadjack too bad...)

How big of an area? If I have a scenery area I'm working in that is the size of, say, the state of Colorado, would it be ok from a performance-standpoint to have a bgl for SE colorado, a bgl for NE colorado, and so forth?

Or is it no performance problem, only an organizational issue?
 
Mace said:
This brings up a question I have had. (don't want to threadjack too bad...)

How big of an area? If I have a scenery area I'm working in that is the size of, say, the state of Colorado, would it be ok from a performance-standpoint to have a bgl for SE colorado, a bgl for NE colorado, and so forth?

Or is it no performance problem, only an organizational issue?
Click to expand...

Ours are packed in QMID7 size. The case you describe sounds reasonable. I cannot give a hard and fast rule. It's not desirable to have hundreds of bgl files for, say, a QMID7 sized area (too many files to process). It's not desirable to have one bgl file for, say, a United States sized area (too much digging in the file to find the small percentage of relevent data).

-Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top