[bouncing this to flightgear-devel from flightgear-flightmodel]
David Megginson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson writes:
[about sloping runways]
Depending on how much we trust the underlying DEM data, they may or
may not be deliberate ...
We shouldn't trust our DEM data at all even at 3 arcsec for
something as accurate as the slope of a runway. It would probably be
a better idea to flatten airports completely until we have a better
way to enter runway data.
True enough. Although the NASD database (for the US airports, at
least) has elevations for both ends of the runway. So with a little
work, we could get straight runways with the appropriate slope.
That still doesn't work for some airports, like Catalina, that have a
hump in the middle.
Another option would be to heuristically trust the DEMs. That is,
use the elevations as given, but (1) make sure the lateral axis is
flat out to 100 ft. beyond the runway edge and (2) the longitudinal
slope doesn't go beyond some theshold value.
This could be done without too much difficulty -- just write code that
pretends to be a land fill engineer and raises the land around the
runway by the appropriate amount.
Andy
--
Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems
Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com
Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one.
- Sting (misquoted)
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
