David Megginson wrote:
On 02/02/06, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hope this will get easier for the tools once different data for
oceans and lakes is being used. Can you at least affirm that the shape
of the lakes is almost correct ?
Yes, it's more or less correct. Are w
On 02/02/06, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hope this will get easier for the tools once different data for
> oceans and lakes is being used. Can you at least affirm that the shape
> of the lakes is almost correct ?
Yes, it's more or less correct. Are we still using vmap0 for the
Gr
Hello David,
David Megginson wrote:
> It looks like the TerraGear tools are misreading the coverage types of
> the lakes, treating them (incorrectly) as ocean.
I hope this will get easier for the tools once different data for
oceans and lakes is being used. Can you at least affirm that the shape
In the current scenery build, the elevations of the Great Lakes are
broken -- the FlightGear scenery has them all at sea level, with the
surrounding terrain increasingly higher as you move inland, while in
reality the surface of Lake Ontario is a bit over 200 ft MSL, while
the surface of Lake Super
4 matches
Mail list logo
