• 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.

More flexible ground layouts

arno

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
32,883
Country
netherlands
When trying to make airports using only the latest SDK tools that is almost impossible. The main reason for this is that the BGLComp XML format is much to restricted when it comes to making ground layouts. If you want to make something that looks more realistic than the default scenery it is not possible.

So I would like to see the BGLComp XML format (or whatever we get in the future) to be more flexible. This way a lot of problems caused by using old techniques for airport design would be solved and it could also just make things easier.

I would suggest at least the following items be added:

  • More choices of surface texture type, the current set is to limit if you want to represent a real airport that can have different shades of concrete or a GA airport with specific tiles.
  • Maybe even better would be to allow adding your own textures or else let users overwrite the default textures by placing a copy in the local texture folder of their project.
  • Allow more control over the mapping of the texture, when making a concrete apron it should be possible to map the texture so that the tiles are in the right direction for example.
  • Allow more flexibility when making markings. Now we only get yellow lines that are linked to the taxiway paths. For realistic airports we would also like to be able for example red safety or clearance lines, white tow lines, etc. And to be useful it should also be possible to draw just line segments, without them being linked to a taxiway or so. That way it would be possible to make realistic markings (that often have a much more complex shape than the taxiway path).
 
Messages
377
Country
unitedstates
Speaking of textures, it would be great if we had a parking lot texture for building airports with long-term parking.
 
Messages
997
Country
us-missouri
  • More choices of surface texture type, the current set is to limit if you want to represent a real airport that can have different shades of concrete or a GA airport with specific tiles.
  • Maybe even better would be to allow adding your own textures or else let users overwrite the default textures by placing a copy in the local texture folder of their project.
  • Allow more control over the mapping of the texture, when making a concrete apron it should be possible to map the texture so that the tiles are in the right direction for example.
  • Allow more flexibility when making markings. Now we only get yellow lines that are linked to the taxiway paths. For realistic airports we would also like to be able for example red safety or clearance lines, white tow lines, etc. And to be useful it should also be possible to draw just line segments, without them being linked to a taxiway or so. That way it would be possible to make realistic markings (that often have a much more complex shape than the taxiway path).


I strongly second this list...it is the 1 development-related thing I'd like to see in FS11.

I hope someone at Microsoft sees this or knows about this.

Hacking the .mdl is not a good solution. Using FS2002 SDK is also not a good solution.
 

Paavo

Resource contributor
Messages
192
Country
estonia
Yes, Arno has indeed listed some of the core issues.
I always feel rather frustrated when members of the ACES team encourage us to use the latest SDK tools while the tools don't offer the amount of flexibility older tools and methods offer. If FSX is not a step in backwards direction, then why do I have to rely on FS2004-era scenery code to have conditional objects in my scenery? What becomes of my custom windsock (there's something horribly wrong with the default ones) when the old code gets dropped?
 
Last edited:
Top