Sloped runways?

[BobKK47 2]

I'm wondering if MS Flight will accurately depict runways that, in real life, have different elevations at various points along the runway, either at the ends or at points in-between. IOW, the runway will follow the terrain of the land, as in reality. I understand that X-plane has incorporated this feature.Anyone have any knowledge of this? Thanks.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

I'm wondering if MS Flight will accurately depict runways that, in real life, have different elevations at various points along the runway, either at the ends or at points in-between. IOW, the runway will follow the terrain of the land, as in reality. I understand that X-plane has incorporated this feature.Anyone have any knowledge of this? Thanks.

No one knows yet and those that do know aren't at liberty to say.We'll just have to wait and see. My guess would probably be no that slopped runways wont de depicted in the stock form of the sime, however in the after market it could probably be done on a case by case basis from 3PDs like Aerosoft did with Lukla or FlyTampa with the Grenadines package.

[G7USL 117]

I think you'll find that almost all runways have a deviation somewhere in their length. I know that Gary Summons was considering it for FSX but apparantly it leads to AI aircraft problems. So, can't be done. We live in hope though :(

[Guest veeray]

Sloped runways and multiple elevations at airports would definitely be cool. Currently there are some "hacks" out there that do this, but they're not 100% reliable. If you fall through a level you most likely have to reset your flight.

[mgh 89]

Just where is Microsoft going to get the infromation from to provide this? At best the published information is threshold elevation and gradient with no intermediate information. The local terrain would have to adjusted to match the runway and then blended in to the surrounding terrain. How many extra sales will be generated if this feature is included compared with the cost of implementing it?

[mmann 72]

Just where is Microsoft going to get the infromation from to provide this? At best the published information is threshold elevation and gradient with no intermediate information. The local terrain would have to adjusted to match the runway and then blended in to the surrounding terrain. How many extra sales will be generated if this feature is included compared with the cost of implementing it?

Perhaps all Microsoft has to do is to allow for an easier implementation of sloped runways. That way they could still leave the runways flat in Flight, but others could easily change that for sloped runways without having to resort to workarounds.Regards, Mike Mann

[Guest veeray]

Actually the data is already there... Microsoft went out of their way to flatten it in the first place, probably to make textured runways easier to implement. Currently in FSX you can make a layer on top of what's already there, but if you fall through the seams FSX loses track of which layer you are suppose to be on. If they could fix those two things it should be easy for any developer to make there runways more realistic. Some of the newer terminal buildings actually have two levels one for aircraft and one specifically for service vehicles. Another is places that have roadways going under the taxiways, I think O'hare is actually like that.

[mgh 89]

Actually the data is already there... Microsoft went out of their way to flatten it in the first place, probably to make textured runways easier to implement. Currently in FSX you can make a layer on top of what's already there, but if you fall through the seams FSX loses track of which layer you are suppose to be on. If they could fix those two things it should be easy for any developer to make there runways more realistic. Some of the newer terminal buildings actually have two levels one for aircraft and one specifically for service vehicles. Another is places that have roadways going under the taxiways, I think O'hare is actually like that.

The relevant data isn't there. For example at Heatrhrow (EGLL) the published airport reference height is 83 ft. Although the runways are nominally level, the published threshold heights are:09L 79 ft09R 75 ft27L 77 ft27R 78 ftThat's 5 levels and EGLL has only 2 runways. Also taxiways and crossing runways need to be adjusted to avoid discontinuities where they meet sloping runways. The situation becomes even more complex if the slope isn't uniform, bearing in mind that this level of detail isn't even published.It would be a lot of work for Microsoft for the benefit of the few.

[Guest veeray]

The information is in the DEM model that surrounds the airport already. Not in the charts but the satellite data.

[mgh 89]

The information is in the DEM model that surrounds the airport already. Not in the charts but the satellite data.

I'm not sure that the resolution or accuracy of the default DEM is good enough for this.

[MatthewS 761]

I'm not sure that the resolution or accuracy of the default DEM is good enough for this.

For the default DEM true, better/safer to just flatten.But it would be nice if Flight allowed developers to turn off airport flattening when they are supplying a custom 'hires' DEM for the tile covered by the airport.

[Kosta 122]

Agreed. It should be possible, at least per scenario. Default flattened, and addons, if developer choosed to hassle with that, possible.

[Marcoh 5]

I hope it will be more easier to make sloped runways, with AI trafic, and crossed taxyway. I think it must be not very difficult if each node (for taxys and runways) have an elevation data. The terrain just have to stick those elevations.For AI trafic, the planes have to be more I.I have made some slopped runway fox FsX, using Gmax ( example : http://marcoh.gratisim.fr/stbarth.html) but the result is that there is no AI traffic and it's very long to make it.

[mgh 89]

That's very impressive modelling. But Microsoft isn't going top go to that level of detail. I must admit I'd forgotten the probklems of getting AI aircraft to use such a runway.

[Christopher Low 5,341]

I don't really care about sloped runways. I prefer them flat anyway, although I would like the terrain immediately to the side of certain runways to have more realistic elevation changes. A good example would be Manchester International in the UK. Runway 05R/23L has grass banks on either side, and also a major drop down near the mid point on both sides where the River Bollin passes through a tunnel underneath the runway.