Hi,I've just started getting into using photo-real textures and designing scenery for FS2004. I'm currently using Elrond Elvish's Resample tools as my primary front-end program, along with his great Texture Tool utility.Assuming that one starts off with imagery projected in accordance with the WGS84 format (as specified in Microsoft's Terrain Tool SDK) and calibrates the associated lat/long area with precision, ect - how closely should photo scenery correctly match up to Microsoft's default airport runways/taxiways? Would you experienced scenery designers out there characterize the default airports as being very accurately placed or is there a collective consensus that there are routine placement errors with regard to default FS2004 runway and taxiway positions? I'm wondering just how much precision I should go for when designing photoreal scenery and it helps to know how closely I can expect photo-scenery to reconcile with the default airport scenery in FS2004 :)Thanks so much for your observations!

Hi Dianne,I guess it is different for each airport, but for some airports I have seen that the runways were not placed very accurate. In the Netherlands most airports are in general a couple of meters of.For some VFR airports I have seen errors of more then 100 meter, because the RefPoint was used wrong. But I guess this is an exception.But I would not expect that your photos match the airport exactly, you might need to shift some airports a bit as well.

Hello Dianne,Microsoft has used Jepp data for placing airports, so the location of the runways, taxiways, towers, and obstructions should correspond to the precision provided by Jepp.But, there are probably the usual run of errors in the Jepp charts, and the precision is much greater in your part of the world than in most places on the planet. I have seen large and glaring errors here in the Caribbean, and it should most likely not be any better in places like Africa or Asia.However, for your part of the world, and if you use the correct projection for your images, the custom (photo-real) textures should line up very well with the default runway. If they don't, you can always move the runway to the correct location using AFCAD.Best regards.Luis

Hi Dianne,I am redoing Orlando Executive (KORL) since I fly from this airport. I downloaded a USGS aerial photo for this airport and use it as a background bitmap in SceneGenX.In my case, I found the KORL runways to be located accurately but taxiways, ramps, aprons, buildings where generally out of place. I suspect, as others have noted, inaccuracies in the digital data used by MS to populate the aviation world is the culprit.The problem I have with photoreal is where the photoreal stops and the default scenery starts. I find, in most cases, it produces a noticeable discontinuity. Of course, discontinuities exist in the default scenery as well. KORL is surrounded on all sides by main roads. None are in the correct location. I could change them to match the downloaded bitmap, but how far does one got to make the terrain match the actual. To answer my own question, "It depends on the time, tenacity, and desire to devote all ones time to the project"!Maybe I'll just go fly over the real airport instead!W. Sieffert

In the case of KPVD (my local airport), things lined up great!In the case of NH69 (my girlfriend's dad's airport), things were about a 1/4 mile out of alignment.I would wager that the more major airports are fairly accurate. But the private and small airfields will most likely have errors. In either case, the USARoads package that many folks have aligned PERFECTLY with the photo scenery I was using to create new coastlines.

In the other thread, you were given insight as to the reprojection of utm images into geographic projection. Until you do that you can't expect the imagry to lay down properly over the fsworld. In small areas, the errors are small, so it can look very nice, but once you have enough area to capture two pinned points in the world...like two airports, it will not work out.I have found situations where nothing I did worked out...Sometimes you have to cheat a tad. Good luck,Bob B

Thank you to everyone for your observations! This really helps me out a lot in knowing what to expect when placing scenery.