![]() While I understand and respect that position, I would point out that there are international standards on PAPI position, and those state that PAPI LHAs should be installed on the left side of the runway whenever possible - a right-side installation is a variance. For me, I always put them on the right of the direction of travel for the incoming aircraft, even if the runway is a takeoff only one. Also, some people like to put their PAPI's on specific sides of the runway. This isn't an issue with the runway lights, as they are one the same footprint as the runway. For one, when you later decide to expand the runway, you may run into issues with moving a graphic that isn't technically part of the footprint, and yet still has it's own that can block other buildings. PAPI's - No to standard - For a few reasons. Originally posted by TheFrustratedElmo:3. They both can only be placed in one position so they should be a simple click button upgrade on the panel.ģ. Small Gate Stairs and Runway Lights - Yes to standard - I grouped both of these as they both follow the same explanation. Basically, G level is gate, -1 level is unfoundationable, -2 level and lower is allowed.Ģ. You might find them another layer down, so that "level" directly under it could be reserved as unfoundationable due to the reinforcement needed between the gate where the plane is sitting, and a sudden open area below it. Fuel ports - Yes to standard positions - You won't find any open areas under the gates anyway, so that throws the whole blocking foundations argument out of the window. I would say yes to everything except the PAPI's.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |