Overrun/Pavement issue @ KPAO


#1

UPDATE: Found the issue, it was in the code.

I noticed an issue at KPAO. There seem to be something missing (pavement or overrun value) on that end.
Also the 13 end shouldn’t have threshold markings.

Not sure if this is an issue in our code or in the data at this point, would be great if one of you could quickly check the data.


#2

I’ll check it out


#3

I just committed a new version of KPAO. It should fix the threshold at runway 13, plus I added a blastpad (exists in real life), checked with WEDBing. As for runway 31, it might be something on IF’s part. There is a displaced threshold there, however it doesn’t show up. This is what it looks like in WED:

Markings on both ends are non-precision (US), if that means anything.

I recall having an issue like this before. Pretty sure at WSSS the runways had blast pads but they didn’t show up in IF.


#4

I emailed you a while back about this - displaced thresholds weren’t showing up in IF, whereas blastpads were.

By the way, nice runway numbers ;)


#5

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#6

We (editors) haven’t added any :)


#7

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#8

I think the format of the numbers or the way they’re placed has something to do with which markings you choose (precision, non-precision, UK & US, etc.)


#9

Runway numbers are in the runway description so we can procedurally render them. This is the document I am following to render runway markings based on runway definition.

Here are a few guidelines:

  • do make sure runways and pavements are the right position and size and that it has the appropriate properties

  • do not simulate different kind of taxiway lines yourself, it will be done in IF based on the type of the line; for now we render all of them white or yellow but it will change in the future.

  • do not create lines for blast pad chevrons or displaced threshold arrows. Those are standard and can also be generated procedurally.


#10

Thought nobody would notice. Not sure it will make it for this release, next one for sure.


#11

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#12

@Swang007 did you add the blastpad on 13? There was definitely an issue in the code where the runway was translated in the wrong direction to account for the length with overrun. Bellow is the same airport with the fixed code.

I also fixed the condition when runway edge markings are displayed. Edge markings should only be present for precision approach runways or when the full width of the runway can’t be used for landing/taxiing (meaning when the runway has shoulders). KPAO is an example where edge markings are not present (you can check on google earth).

Feel free to let me know if you spot other issues.


#13

Looking good! I’ll add the guidelines you replied to John with to the editing guide (they’re clearer than how I wrote it).

I believe there are also some issues with taxiway edge lines that some editors have encountered… I’ll follow up on that and get some more information to you about it later :)


#14

@Swang007 I think I found the issue. As you pointed out Rwy 13 is currently tagged as Non-Precision approach. It should be tagged as “visual approach” instead. See here.


#15

Both runways were tagged as non-precision. I only changed 13 to visual approach. And yes, I added the blastpad to runway 13