10 hours ago, Claviateur said:

Maybe I am mistaken but it is not a big issue to make the AI follow the terrain (knowing that Rwys are draped polygons over the terrain).

 Note that Bill writes in the past tense (had to solve/was far easier) not in the conditional.

1 hour ago, MatthewS said:

Link? Thanks.

Sorry Broski. You're just gonna have to do the hard work of watching all the available media like I did. But like I said, its visible in the scenes depicting LAX at night.

3 minutes ago, Noodle said:

Sorry Broski. You're just gonna have to do the hard work of watching all the available media like I did. But like I said, its visible in the scenes depicting LAX at night.

Yeah sure, I watched it all too and you're mistaken, doesn't exist.

But if you think you found something then tell us where, so we can check for ourselves? What's the big secret?

The only thing I've seen is at the very end of the latest "Airports" video, which looks like there is some undulation of the apron, but the runways are not visible. 

1 hour ago, Noodle said:

I've told you where to look. It's most certainly there. The runway lights are clearly angled at the far end of the runway.

That shot is so far away that it's inconclusive and as I said before looks like a graphical artefact to me.

1 hour ago, Noodle said:

Back then you dismissed it as just some "graphical artifact". I'm curious what your answer is now that we KNOW Asobo has included non-flat runways?

So for all 36000+ generic airports the runways are following the underlying terrain?  Where's the evidence of that?  Sure, for the 80 iconic airports, like Lukla, we have evidence of "non-flat" runways.

So unless you provide some evidence for the 36000+ generic airports we are both just spitting in the wind.

Let me know when you do.

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by MatthewS

34 minutes ago, Noodle said:

Oh hey, look at that! We've already had this exact same discussion, back when you were positive that Asobo had "EPICALLY failed" by going with flattened runways.

Back then you dismissed it as just some "graphical artifact". I'm curious what your answer is now that we KNOW Asobo has included non-flat runways?

 

Characterize the evolution of the speculation about the flatness of airports  from August of 2019 to Mars of 2020 in less than 1500 words. You have one hour. You can use your tablet.

54 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Let me know when you do.

Haha. I noticed that for all your bluster, you never returned to the linked thread to admit you were absolutely, positively, unequivocally wrong. Once Asobo called your bluff and announced non-flat runways, you just skulked away like it never took place.

There are no graphical artifacts in the linked image that explain away the obvious and inconvenient truth. You were wrong then and you're wrong now. 

It's ok sport. You'll pin something that sticks on mean ol' Microsoft one of these days!

59 minutes ago, domkle said:

Characterize the evolution of the speculation about the flatness of airports  from August of 2019 to Mars of 2020 in less than 1500 words. You have one hour. You can use your tablet.

BLUF: MatthewS was wrong then and still wrong now. NSTR.

How many here like me, use also the competitor simualtor featuring uneven airports (aka sloped everything in the airport including runways?)

Believe me, it is not obvious even when we are on the threshold the slopes are subtle as they variate gradually.

Unless you go to places in the world where the terrain is obviously changing (coast to hills) you will not see the slopes unless you zoooom from far to simulate the telephoto lens effect that flattens the image and then you observe the curve(s)...

I verified it last evening with few north american airports including my hometown airport here in Canada and this is clearly the case. The terrain is not a mountain or an off road track but the slopes are there...

6 hours ago, MatthewS said:

So unless you provide some evidence for the 36000+ generic airports we are both just spitting in the wind.

You know full well that the only people who could "provide some evidence" are prohibited from doing so because of the NDA they agreed to and signed.

So please, give it a rest already! Continued posting of this topic is coming close to qualifying as SPAM and could well lead to further moderation steps being called for. This is now the second time I've asked you to stop.

My only wish, all seriousness aside,  please,  please dont make it this bad, I'd vomit taking off with my HMD. 

 

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by Casualcas

1 hour ago, n4gix said:

You know full well that the only people who could "provide some evidence" are prohibited from doing so because of the NDA they agreed to and signed.

Well that's a problem. Doesn't invalidate my argument though. I guess the subtlety what I'm saying is lost on many people.  

Anyway, for the sake of forum harmony I'll put a windsock in it....

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by MatthewS
typo: subtlety

The problem isn't your subtlety. 

Something else to consider, to possibly give you a little bit more hope, is that I don't see any feedback comment in regards to "undulating" runways/taxiways in the feedback snapshot.

6 minutes ago, Casualcas said:

The problem isn't your subtlety. 

You, like many other posters, are simply "sniping" because you don't understand my argument or you can't refute it.  I've been waiting since Aug 2019...

2 minutes ago, Kevin_28 said:

Something else to consider, to possibly give you a little bit more hope, is that I don't see any feedback comment in regards to "undulating" runways/taxiways in the feedback snapshot.

Yes, I suspect Asobo have implemented undulation for the 36000+ generic airports, to some degree, depending on the quality of the available data. That's not my argument.

Anyway, this is just going round in circles.