Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Lacking (Correct) Data for Military Airports - Quick CFLs #47

Open
ghost opened this issue Jan 21, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Lacking (Correct) Data for Military Airports - Quick CFLs #47

ghost opened this issue Jan 21, 2023 · 4 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 21, 2023

The Quick CFLs for Military Airports found in Positions.xml don't match the real world equivalents.

Darwin Tower. Currently: 5000, Suggested: 18000. Reference: Darwin AD2 Supp, "1.2 Level"
Townsville Tower. Currently: 5000, Suggested: 6000. Reference: Townsville AD2 Supp, "1.2 Departure levels"
Edinburgh Tower. Currently: 5000, Suggested:4000. Reference: Edinburgh AD2 Supp, "2.3 Departure Levels"
East Sale Tower. Currently: 5000, Suggested: 6000. Reference: East Sale AD2 Supp, "Example Airways Clearance"

East Sale TCU. Currently: 21000, Suggested: 20000. Reference: Victoria/Tasmania MATS Supp, "7, 3.2.1.2"
Tindal TCU. Currently: 10000, Suggested: 18000. Reference: Northern Territory MATS Supp, "3.4.5.1"

Oakey TCU. Currently: 12000, Suggested: 6000. Reference: Southern Queensland MATS Supp, "3.7.2"
[Optional since both levels are valid however this will bring it down to level of Oakey Low, similar to how Amberley's Quick CFL is for the smaller "Little AMB" status]

Pearce Tower. Currently: 5000, Suggested: 6000. Reference: Pearce AD2 Supp, "4.4.9.5" & "2.9.4" & "4.3.8.2"
[Standard Level at least for the Mullaloo Lane]

[For future reference: was unable to verify NW, OK, AM, WLM, TN, GIG & WR Tower's standard assignable levels, If I was to make a guess, NW, AM & WLM would have standard levels of 6000].

@codepip55
Copy link
Contributor

Please send links to the sources so we can verify the validity of the data.

@codepip55
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks, will discuss this with the ATS team

@zkgell
Copy link
Contributor

zkgell commented Jan 23, 2023

I am happy to make these changes however, the publications team would like to see these new levels reflected on the SOPs website before they are implemented into vatSys. I would encourage you to put a PR in on the SOPs Github once these are implemented we will commit these CFLs in the following AIRAC cycle

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants