Transport Tycoon Forums

I noticed a small issue with the intercontinental airport while using my grf. The outer runways seem to use the wrong sprite. See attached image.
It's hard to notice it with the normal sprites.

Left side: fixed one
Right side: current one

I dont think thats a bug. There are a whole sequence of tiles 22,23,24,25,26 IIRC designed to allow for different graphics along the length of a runway. Your patch just seems to be selecting a different one of the available ones.

I cant really see what is the big issue with what you show. It could of course be a problem with the graphic you have replacing tile 22, rather than an error in the sprite structure of the airport.

Can you say in words what the problem is. Your graphic isnt self-explanatory. (Is it line thickness at the edge? If so, what is the problem with the 1 pixel edge, as opposed to your 2 pixel one?)

I never said it's a big issue, just noticed it. Just want to keep a bit constancy in the airport appearance. Might look a bit nitpick.

richk67 wrote:Can you say in words what the problem is. Your graphic isnt self-explanatory. (Is it line thickness at the edge? If so, what is the problem with the 1 pixel edge, as opposed to your 2 pixel one?)

As I understand the sprites in the original grf:
22 = T-piece from the City airport
23 = straight line
So why should there be T-pieces int a straight runway?

Well, I've never seen 22 described as "T-piece" before, and it certainly doesn't look much different to 23 to me. However, as all the other runways are sprite 23 (except large airport which has the 22,23,24,25,26 sequence), then maybe you're right.

Submit this to bugs.openttd.org - otherwise it is unlikely to get actioned.

richk67 wrote:Submit this to bugs.openttd.org - otherwise it is unlikely to get actioned.

I would have done this before, but at first I just want to ask you, cause there could have been a reason for the 22-23.

No probs. Looks like I didnt see that there was a difference between the pieces. You've just about convinced me there is... so bug it is

Hello all,

I really love the extra airports now available in 0.5.0-rc3!

They work very well for me, especially the intercontinental one. However, there is one little thing that seems rather odd to me: aircrafts aproaching an intercontinental airport will fly in a holding pattern that is not adjacent to the runways, in fact it is 45 degrees to it (they fly in a pattern in the direction of the edges of your monitor)
At all the other airports the airplanes fly parallel to the runway in an attemt to get permission to land.

Is this done on purpose?

I attached an example, the aircraft you see is four times the same one, I gimp'ed them into one picture for clarification.

A couple questions regarding the new airports...

1. What happened to working with the queing patch from cobra?

2. Is there a way to change the development of airports? For example, the intercontinental doesn't appear until 2003. However, I know that Heatherow existed far before 2003. The city airport arrives in 1955 and an upgrade doesn't surface until 1980. That just doesn't seem right to me.

Thanks--

Also, my I ask why the District airports aren't on 0.5 (RC1-RC5)?

The answer is on page 4 of this topic.

Vloris wrote:Is this done on purpose?

Yes, it approaches at a diagonal, and only the one that gets landing permission turns in for the approach. The others continue their path.

Holding patterns can be more complex, but it requires more coding in the state machine. This worked, so I didnt fix it.


Re: Queuing patch: No idea.
Re: modifying availability dates: these are easy to find, and a simple patch can change them. I have not set them as configurable items, but that can come in the new versions coming later.

Re: District airport. Not my best design. I have some better ones, that should be coming soon.

Isn't there a way of removing this??

No. I wanted it there for the aircraft to travel around. It stays

Then put something there.

What? You can't have anything tall near the runways; it's simply not safe.[0] The only thing that leaves is helipads, and you don't want those any too close to the runways either.

[0] On that subject, any chance of relocating the transmission tower? Not that I'm sure where it should go instead. The best I can get is one tile in the -X direction.

Maybe this?

No. Runways have clear spaces of grass. If anything, there isnt enough grass around this airport. It stays. Last word.

The radar is usually placed further away from the buildings (or high up on top of them), so that it has a clear line of sight on the approaches.

Dalestan: As for antenna - where would you suggest? Those two runways are the outbound only runways, so the antenna is never in the flightpath - if that makes a difference.

Every square not used as a taxiway should be grass. It's the same for real life. Only near the terminal does it become like a big car park.

Personally, Im not too keen on the square that is half grass and half tarmac. I think it would be better all grass. Its a little distracting with that vertical line.

richk67 wrote:Dalestan: As for antenna - where would you suggest? Those two runways are the outbound only runways, so the antenna is never in the flightpath - if that makes a difference.

As I said, the best I could come up with is one tile in the minus X direction (toward the hangar), but that's not much improved when it comes to keeping it out of the (nonexistent) +Y landing/-Y takeoff paths.
Moving it by <-2,-1> or <-3, -1> would be be better, but has the side effect of making the airport even more irregular.