Martin Spott wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Tim Moore wrote: > >> Some of the sea surface problems may be partially my fault. In August 2007 I >> added more polygons to the generic ocean tile to more closely match the >> curvature of the earth, in order to prevent AI ships from hovering several >> meters above the surface. I'm not sure this was ever communicated to the >> scenery >> team. > > I suspect the communication agent has failed ;-) > Does your change actually cause a difference between a) the 'border' > between ground and ocean as defined in the Scenery tiles and b) its > visual representation in FlightGear ? If so, of which nature is this > difference ?
Yes and yes. Previously an ocean tile was drawn as two triangles with vertices at the corners of the tile. It's now drawn as a 4x4 grid of quads (each quad is a triangle), dividing the edges of the tile in latitude and longitude. There's also an apron around the tile for hiding the inevitable tiny cracks between tiles and the discontinuity where the the bucket size changes. I presume coastal water is calculated using the old assumption. The visual difference is that the surface more closely follows the ellipsoid, so vehicles that are traveling at sea level now appear to be pretty much on the water. The other undesirable change is the wall of water between coastal and ocean tiles. Tim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
