search

VATSIM-UK / UK-Sector-File

UK Sector File
GNU General Public License v3.0
64 stars 121 forks source link

EGCC SMR Update #1612

Closed cpawley closed 3 years ago

cpawley commented 5 years ago

Summary of issue/change

From #2524:

Reference (amendment doc/official source/forum) incl. page number(s)

EG AMDT 2019 04 Part E P9/P10

From #2524:

EG AMDT 2020 06 Pt B P112

Affected areas of the sector file (if known)

Airports/EGCC/SMR/..

cpawley commented 5 years ago

Note - this is place 'on hold' until scenery developers catch up!

NathanInnes commented 5 years ago

Updated the comment to Part E of 1904, previous link was for part D

kye-taylor commented 5 years ago

Just had a check-up on some scenery on the Xplane Forums, Looks like some scenery developers, thought its freeware, might be a good idea to take second look at this?
Here 1020245322_b738-2019-07-0213_35_15 jpg 067ce8475cc7a704dafb106cee3fbc2f

Keanu73 commented 4 years ago

Have they catched up yet?

trevorhannant commented 4 years ago

Not sure on the split of X-Plane vs FSX vs P3D users but the latter two don't have up to date scenery as yet - and likely won't for some time.

jamest00 commented 4 years ago

UK2000 have said on the facebook page that they are planning to remake Manchester and update it to v5

PLM1995 commented 3 years ago

I'm running default xPlane11 (no addons) and I have some of the new stands (101-113): ManchesterScenaryXPlane11

And now there is also a scenary for MSFS2020 by Macco (https://maccosim.com/product/egcc-manchester-airport-msfs2020/) in early access which looks to be fully up to date with stands 901-919 as well: ManchesterScenaryMacco

The Macco scenary boasts "Latest VATSIM compatible taxiways and ground markings" so possibly time to update our SMR?

I'd be happy to do this.

GeekPro101 commented 3 years ago

I'm going to close #2524 and merge its details into this one.

PLM1995 commented 3 years ago

Can I just check before getting started on this:

Do we want to add an 'old' SMR option (like we have at EGLL) with this issue?

My opinion: I think we probably should.

Reasoning: The changes include the removal of a fair few stands. I would normally suggest just changing the old stand's label colour to red or whatever. Howvever, in this case, some of the new stands are over the top of the old ones. So I think having both old and new versions visible at the same time would be pretty confusing and unclear.

I do think controllers ought to be able to see the old stands if required, given AFAIK there is no updated scenery available for FSX or P3D.

Desc. Image
Current (20/13) SMR EGCC_SMR_20-13_North
Latest (20/06) chart EGCC_Parking_20-06_North
GeekPro101 commented 3 years ago

I've had a think, and I don't think that end of the aerodrome gets enough use (from my controlling experience, feel free to disagree) to justify having a full 'old' region - in this case, I think updating the SMR to the latest chart and adding in some optional stand labels in red, and possibly lines, should be sufficient.

PLM1995 commented 3 years ago

I've had a think, and I don't think that end of the aerodrome gets enough use (from my controlling experience, feel free to disagree) to justify having a full 'old' region - in this case, I think updating the SMR to the latest chart and adding in some optional stand labels in red, and possibly lines, should be sufficient.

OK yeah, that actually makes more sense. I wasn't think the 'old' REGION would have been a full SMR (if that was what you meant by "to justify having a full 'old' region"). But it is pretty unneccessary because the only thing that's changed which isn't a simple apron addition is the part of T2 that outcrops and Pier 1. I hadn't realised/noticed that the current SMR doesn't have any buildings though, so this is a non-issue.

So just some GEO and label changes then. I'm not sure how it's going to would work with the taxiway centre-lines if we had a full set in the main SMR, turning on the old ones would make the view pretty messy. Having a 'common', 'new', and 'old' set would fix it, but that's not really ideal. Perhaps having all of them in a single set, but the old ones a different colour (e.g. red, or very feint so you can hardly see them or something) might be an option. If that didn't look too aweful/cluttered, we could do the same for labels possibly. Maybe the thing to do it try it and see what it looks like.

You're probably correct about traffic levels using this part of the AD. Not many people choose to connect on a remote stand as far as possible from the runway haha. So in light of that maybe my whole two-SMR suggestion is over-complicated/un-necessary.

GeekPro101 commented 3 years ago

I think we might be alright leaving the old NA out - the new one is in effectively the same place, just a little more north (silly airport putting pesky stands there!) - I'm not sure it'll make the difference having the old one in there.

How we deal with the 901 and 903 stands I'm not too sure - seeing as they're right in the middle of the new Z perhaps we might just have to politely ask pilots to move, not that I've ever seen anyone spawn on them.