thank you for your swift resolution of suspicious coordinates in reporting point database.
One question/suggestion, if it is not too much :)
Why did you amend the reporting point name with a few letters of the airfied name?
For example: The MS1 VFR reporting point that belongs to Maribor (LJMB) airfield is designated as MS1MA. A similar point ME1 (which also belongs to Maribor), is designated as ME1PT probably because of vicinity of Ptuj LJPT airfield near by, but in fact it does not belong to this airfield. It belongs to the Maribor TMA (airfield).
However, the json structure of the reporting point has a proper format:
It has a "name" field, which should hold the original designations like "MS1" from the example above,
it has "airports" array which (according to my understanding) are "_id"s of airfields that the reporting point belongs to.
So, to interpret this name, one can always use airfield links to amend the reporting point name if this is deemed necessary.
--
VFR points do not necessary always belong to airfields. They could also belong to some control zone. A typical example are FIR crossing/border points. In most cases they are also mandatory points. The points are usually IFR names at FIR borders.
For this reason, I believe that it would be beneficial to add "zones" or "airspaces" array to json, where one could link appropriate zones in parallel to airfields.
Hello Stephan,
thank you for your swift resolution of suspicious coordinates in reporting point database. One question/suggestion, if it is not too much :)
Why did you amend the reporting point name with a few letters of the airfied name?
For example: The MS1 VFR reporting point that belongs to Maribor (LJMB) airfield is designated as MS1MA. A similar point ME1 (which also belongs to Maribor), is designated as ME1PT probably because of vicinity of Ptuj LJPT airfield near by, but in fact it does not belong to this airfield. It belongs to the Maribor TMA (airfield).
However, the json structure of the reporting point has a proper format:
So, to interpret this name, one can always use airfield links to amend the reporting point name if this is deemed necessary.
--
VFR points do not necessary always belong to airfields. They could also belong to some control zone. A typical example are FIR crossing/border points. In most cases they are also mandatory points. The points are usually IFR names at FIR borders.
For this reason, I believe that it would be beneficial to add "zones" or "airspaces" array to json, where one could link appropriate zones in parallel to airfields.
Best regards,
Aleš