Actually USE the suffixes of procedures

[erikquinn]

Given a procedure ANKER, users should be able to enter SID ANKER1Q and/or STAR ANKER1Q, depending on the type of procedure. Such was the intent of the suffix property, but it was never really fully hooked up, and airport creators have worked around it by creating individual procedures PIK27X, PIK27D, PIK23X, PIK23D, PIK21X, PIK21D, etc. Completing the functionality of the suffixes would eliminate the need for them to do this.

Originally reported in zlsa/atc#655.

[erikquinn]

Depends on #193.

[n8rzz]

@erikquinn @indianbhaji given the following procedure (from egll):

"BUZAD": {
    "icao": "BUZAD",
    "name": "Buzad",
    "suffix": {"09L":"3K", "09R":"4J"},
    "rwy": {
        "09L": [],
        "09R": []
    },
    "body": [["_LONR072D10", "A30+"], "BUZAD", "WOBUN", "DTY", "HON"],
    "draw": [["_LONR072D10", "BUZAD"]]
},

if a command was issued STAR BUZAD3K, that would work out to the BUZAD star with runway 9L.

Am I understanding this correctly?

[eliuuk]

@n8rzz Yes

[panther2]

With reference to #422 I am just adding the problem that ocurred on EDDL, as discussed on slack: There is only one suffix for multiple (two) runways there. This occurs on every STAR.

At EDDL (but not limited to it) the correct assignment to a runway is managed using approach transitions from the STAR's Initial Approach Fixes (=start of the approach transition) to the Final Approach Fix (=end of the approach transition). But as we don't code those approach transitions but only the STARs we need a solution for the "one suffix for multiple runways"-issue.