Bridges in FS2004

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 henri Arsenault wrote:

Ha that's nothing, the Coronado Bridge in San Diego is not there at all!

I've seen this for myself, now. It's not the only one, either.

Thanks to Henri and all who responded on this point. I hadn't been
keeping tabs on the FS web-based forums so I had no idea this was such a
well-documented problem. I've now looked at a few forums and websites
and it really does seem to be fairly major.

What's curious is that now I've come to examine the Tokyo bridge issue
in detail, and looked at the FS2004 model more closely, the actual
TOPOLOGY of the new model is really OK. In fact it's arguably closer to
the real thing thanks to the increased polygon count. However the
GEOMETRY of it is way off. If this really is a pseudo-autogen model it
looks almost to my untrained eye as though the 'anchor points' (or
whatever the technical term is) have been put in slightly the wrong
place.

I've uploaded some comparison photos to the gallery at the following
website

http://idle.thehueys.com/bridges/Missing-Bridges-2004

and it seems to me that if the bridge towers were placed closer to the
bay coastlines like their real-world counterparts all of the other parts
of the structure would 'stretch' into place. It would look almost spot
on.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable in FS scenery construction could take
a look and let me know if I'm barking up the wrong tree on this issue.

What interests me further is that we have dozens of bridges reported
missing in action, yet the first page of the gallery link above shows,
among other things, an EXTRA bridge where there shouldn't be one. And
it's a fairly complex model as well, almost as though it's been
specifically designed to go somewhere and ended up somewhere else. Does
anyone recognise it, and perhaps know where it should be in the real
world?

You can perhaps see where I'm headed with this. We have at least one
bridge that's in the right place but the wrong geometry. We have several
reported cases of bridges that aren't where they should be, and at least
one that is where it shouldn't be. All of which suggests to me that many
of the bridge problems could well be down to simple *typos* in the
scenery database. Even issues with bridges in the right place but of the
wrong type could be explained by this, if generic bridge types are
defined by a flag pointing to a generic model and the flag is wrong.

Could this be the case, or am I putting 2 and 2 together and getting 6?
As I said, I know nothing of FS scenery design or implementation. If I'm
way off target, please let me know.

Because the way I see it, if these are simple database errors rather
than complex modelling errors, they should be relatively straightforward
to fix. Certainly more straightforward than defining exclude files and
designing models from scratch which is, I believe, the way scenery
problems are normally tackled.

--
Kev
__________________________________________________ ________________________
"If you won't tell me who told you that, it's not worth the paper it's
written on." Malcolm Rifkind

Kevin Reilly wrote in message ...

You can perhaps see where I'm headed with this. We have at least one
bridge that's in the right place but the wrong geometry. We have several
reported cases of bridges that aren't where they should be, and at least
one that is where it shouldn't be. All of which suggests to me that many
of the bridge problems could well be down to simple *typos* in the
scenery database. Even issues with bridges in the right place but of the
wrong type could be explained by this, if generic bridge types are
defined by a flag pointing to a generic model and the flag is wrong.

Could this be the case, or am I putting 2 and 2 together and getting 6?
As I said, I know nothing of FS scenery design or implementation. If I'm
way off target, please let me know.

I strongly believe you are right. Why? Because of what I have found
with regards to the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway near New Orleans. The
Causeway, at 24 miles long, is the longest bridge in the world - but
it doesn't show up over the waters of Lake Pontchartrain in FS2004.
Yet, the bridge *does* show up, over *land*, moved exactly 24 miles
north of where it should be! It's as if it hop-scotched over itself.

Is this a lat/long problem? Or is it a bit more complex? If it's
some sort of toggle in the code or database, it would explain why the
bridge is there, but not where it should be. So I would tend to agree
with you on your conjecture.

Krunch

Flight Sim Friends,

Another area to look at is Tampa/ St.Pete. In "real" life are three bridges
from Tampa across Tampa Bay to St.Pete/Clearwater. The bridges vary in
length but all are around 5-7 miles long. The first mile or so is over land
jutting into the bay. This area is portrayed in FS 2004 but the bridges are
no there. Try a flight out of KTPA, use RWY 18R and make a right turn after
departure to see what I mean. So what is everyone's guess? Will MS issue a
patch for the obvious problem? Also, why is all of the water aqua in color?
Does anyone know if the beta version floating around had the bridge problem?
I wonder how such an issue escaped MS. Overall, the simulation is GREAT!!!
Good Flying!
"Captain Krunch" wrote in message
om...
Kevin Reilly wrote in message
...

You can perhaps see where I'm headed with this. We have at least one
bridge that's in the right place but the wrong geometry. We have several
reported cases of bridges that aren't where they should be, and at least
one that is where it shouldn't be. All of which suggests to me that many
of the bridge problems could well be down to simple *typos* in the
scenery database. Even issues with bridges in the right place but of the
wrong type could be explained by this, if generic bridge types are
defined by a flag pointing to a generic model and the flag is wrong.

Could this be the case, or am I putting 2 and 2 together and getting 6?
As I said, I know nothing of FS scenery design or implementation. If I'm
way off target, please let me know.

I strongly believe you are right. Why? Because of what I have found
with regards to the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway near New Orleans. The
Causeway, at 24 miles long, is the longest bridge in the world - but
it doesn't show up over the waters of Lake Pontchartrain in FS2004.
Yet, the bridge *does* show up, over *land*, moved exactly 24 miles
north of where it should be! It's as if it hop-scotched over itself.

Is this a lat/long problem? Or is it a bit more complex? If it's
some sort of toggle in the code or database, it would explain why the
bridge is there, but not where it should be. So I would tend to agree
with you on your conjecture.

Krunch

Skyhawk wrote in message
...
Flight Sim Friends,

Another area to look at is Tampa/ St.Pete. In "real" life are three
bridges
from Tampa across Tampa Bay to St.Pete/Clearwater. The bridges vary in
length but all are around 5-7 miles long. The first mile or so is over
land
jutting into the bay. This area is portrayed in FS 2004 but the bridges
are
no there. Try a flight out of KTPA, use RWY 18R and make a right turn
after
departure to see what I mean. So what is everyone's guess? Will MS issue
a
patch for the obvious problem? Also, why is all of the water aqua in
color?
Does anyone know if the beta version floating around had the bridge
problem?
I wonder how such an issue escaped MS. Overall, the simulation is
GREAT!!!
Good Flying!
in ref to bridges being out of wack in FS2004 could this be a national
security type thing?

This reminds me of the first time I went to Minsk for a Congress in
1986 under the communist regime. They gave us a map, but almost all of
the important buildings were in the wrong place! But the streets were
OK. I was told that it was to confuse any potential invaders. so if one
wanted to go someplace, one had to ask a knowledgeable person to show
one where it was on the map.

No wonder the Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight (there are
those who think it was because of the Pope, and some who even think it
was because of Ronald Reagan; in fact it was because no one there knew
whether he was coming or going).

maybe Microsoft hired one of those Soviet mapmakers...

Henri

henri Arsenault wrote in message ...
This reminds me of the first time I went to Minsk for a Congress in
1986 under the communist regime. They gave us a map, but almost all of
the important buildings were in the wrong place! But the streets were
OK. I was told that it was to confuse any potential invaders. so if one
wanted to go someplace, one had to ask a knowledgeable person to show
one where it was on the map.

No wonder the Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight (there are
those who think it was because of the Pope, and some who even think it
was because of Ronald Reagan; in fact it was because no one there knew
whether he was coming or going).

maybe Microsoft hired one of those Soviet mapmakers...

Henri

Remove bridges at http://www.planesimulation.com/

You can then restore FS2002 landmark bridges to FS2004 (USA only for
now). In ceratin cases the FS2002 custom/landmark bridges actually
match the road data (aligned)in FS2004 better!(someone mentioned VTP
points or coastline overlays) The probelm may be that autogen can't
properly make the elevation adjustments from one vtp point to another
and has no "sense" of what road it belongs to. So, weird cyborg
autogen bridges occupy the environment sometimes.

Owain Robinson
http://www.planesimulation.com/

In ,
Kevin Reilly wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 henri Arsenault wrote:

What interests me further is that we have dozens of bridges reported
missing in action, yet the first page of the gallery link above shows,
among other things, an EXTRA bridge where there shouldn't be one. And
it's a fairly complex model as well, almost as though it's been
specifically designed to go somewhere and ended up somewhere else.
Does anyone recognise it, and perhaps know where it should be in the
real world?

I'm a month and a half late in coming into this discussion but I've seen stuff
in another NG about it, which you might be interested in. But first....

You can perhaps see where I'm headed with this. We have at least one
bridge that's in the right place but the wrong geometry. We have
several reported cases of bridges that aren't where they should be,
and at least one that is where it shouldn't be. All of which suggests
to me that many of the bridge problems could well be down to simple
*typos* in the scenery database.

That figures. Some unfortunate grunt or, worse still, a sub-contractor shudder
probably got the unenviable task of putting all that data together.
Tragically, the E and W keys are right next to each other and such a simple slip
would put a USA-based bridge anywhere between Japan, China or Russia!

Even issues with bridges in the right place but of the wrong type could be
explained by this, if
generic bridge types are defined by a flag pointing to a generic model and
the flag is wrong.

Could this be the case, or am I putting 2 and 2 together and getting
6? As I said, I know nothing of FS scenery design or implementation.
If I'm way off target, please let me know.

I don't think so. Last I heard, someone said that, after finding loads of
bridges missing, they'd found a bunch of them stacked one on top of another,
somewhere in Canada!

I sincerely hope this was wit, rather than a genuine observation because that
would, indeed, be comical. Then again, "Software giant releases half-assed
product" wouldn't exactly make the headlines, these days. But, if it did, you
could expect some cheeky suggestions that their marketing catchprase will have
to change to "this is as real as it gets - for 50 bucks".

I was going to say "what are you doing gawping at bridges when you should be
concentrating on flying the plane" and leave it at that but count this as an
instant retraction. Since the tall bridges represent a genuine aviation hazard,
to be avoided, you do need to be looking at the. All sizes of bridge could be
vital landmarks for approaches into to small airfields with no ILS or navaids,
so they all really need to be got right.

Not to mention that you can do things in a sim which you wouldn't do in real
life, for fear of death, disfigurement, or licence revocation g. How many of
you out there can honestly say that you've NEVER attempted to fly _under_ the
bridges. And not just the Golden gate, I mean like the ones over the Thames in
central London? :-{} You'd think that MS has been in this game for long
enough to know that we do things like that, so this problem was bound to come to
light this quickly (give or take the number of postings I've seen from people
who can't even get the damn thing to run at all).

Many thanks to one and all for saving me the cost of entry into this world of
auto-bodge scenery.

--
regards,

Mark

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 Mark Cherry wrote:

I don't think so. Last I heard, someone said that, after finding loads of
bridges missing, they'd found a bunch of them stacked one on top of another,
somewhere in Canada!

It's true. There's a picture of them at

http://idle.thehueys.com/bridges/Mis...-2004/St_Donat

It looks as though the Martians have landed and are building a new
mothership. Better blow it up before that last piece goes in.

There also seems to be a bridge party going on in Tampa:

http://idle.thehueys.com/bridges/Mis...ges-2004/tampa

I'm not sure what's going on in either of those pictures but it sure
looks to me like a bunch of look-up tables have got screwed up.

I know Microsoft are historically loathed to release patches for the FS
products, preferring to concentrate on the next version and let third-
party folk temporarily plug the gaps. But they really ought to do
something about this bridge problem. It really is out of hand.

"FS2004 - as real as it gets (unless you have a favourite bridge, in
which case cross your fingers)."

Actually I'd like to see some of the bridges pictured on that site
implemented in MS Train Simulator. Especially the ones that stop halfway
across rivers and then plunge beneath the surface. Most entertaining.

--
Kev
__________________________________________________ ________________________
"That's what happens when, in cricketing parlance, the wheel comes off and
you can't steer the boat." Bob Willis

In ,
Kevin Reilly wrote:

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 Mark Cherry wrote:

I don't think so. Last I heard, someone said that, after finding
loads of bridges missing, they'd found a bunch of them stacked one
on top of another, somewhere in Canada!

It's true. There's a picture of them at

http://idle.thehueys.com/bridges/Mis...-2004/St_Donat

It looks as though the Martians have landed and are building a new
mothership. Better blow it up before that last piece goes in.

There also seems to be a bridge party going on in Tampa:

http://idle.thehueys.com/bridges/Mis...ges-2004/tampa

Ta. I've got to go and check those out. Good for a giggle!


I'm not sure what's going on in either of those pictures but it sure
looks to me like a bunch of look-up tables have got screwed up.

Easily done.

I know Microsoft are historically loathed to release patches for the
FS products, preferring to concentrate on the next version and let
third- party folk temporarily plug the gaps. But they really ought to
do something about this bridge problem. It really is out of hand.

Like I said - comical. Do you get the sneaking feeling that they farmed out
the database work to some far-east sweat shop?


--
regards,

Mark


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
address-bots please add these to your database:-

In article ,
Kevin Reilly wrote:

I don't think so. Last I heard, someone said that, after finding loads of
bridges missing, they'd found a bunch of them stacked one on top of another,
somewhere in Canada!

It's true. There's a picture of them at

http://idle.thehueys.com/bridges/Mis...-2004/St_Donat

If you look closely, all of those bridges are replicas of the old quebec
city bridge (it is missing in Quebec). I wonder why there is more than
one?

henri