vrouleau Posted September 20, 2018 Share Posted September 20, 2018 I did a flight from LPPT. Looks like Lisbon is missing a runway. I did do a database rebuild. /Vincent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiloJuliett Posted September 20, 2018 Share Posted September 20, 2018 Hi Vincent This is most probably due to missuse of certain AFCAD definitions by the scenery developer. I think you are using an add-on scenery, right? Which one is it. Can you find the associated AFCAD file (in the airport info dialog)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewulf47 Posted September 20, 2018 Share Posted September 20, 2018 2 hours ago, vrouleau said: I did a flight from LPPT. Looks like Lisbon is missing a runway. I did do a database rebuild. /Vincent MK Studios LPPT? Please check here: https://forum.aivlasoft.com/topic/3005-afcad/ and use this LPPT file according to EFB v2's specs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayProudfoot Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 My guess is both ends of the runway have been closed for both take-off and landing. AFCADs are often the lowest priority for scenery designers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewulf47 Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 8 minutes ago, RayProudfoot said: My guess is both ends of the runway have been closed for both take-off and landing. AFCADs are often the lowest priority for scenery designers. Yes indeed, that's why I made this corrected AFCAD File for use in EFB v2's AFCAD folder... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayProudfoot Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 24 minutes ago, lonewulf47 said: Yes indeed, that's why I made this corrected AFCAD File for use in EFB v2's AFCAD folder... Sorry, I didn’t follow your link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmaik Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 I don't think that runways which are closed for both takeoff and landings should not be shown on the EFB map. For example when you use the EFB for situational awareness at any airport you don't want to find yourself bumping onto a runway without crossing clearance. EFB1 used to show ANY runway given in the runway.txt file regardless of whether open or closed and this good practice should continue with EFB2. Just another reason why I think that EFB1 is still superior to EFB2. No REAL airport map would hide a runway which exists. Anybody in the world would call the map useless or wrong. The developer can't be serious in providing replacement AFCADs for each every add-on airport in the world. Just show the runway regardless of its closure state, it could be so easy... Best regards draci Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewulf47 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 23 minutes ago, bmaik said: I don't think that runways which are closed for both takeoff and landings should not be shown on the EFB map. For example when you use the EFB for situational awareness at any airport you don't want to find yourself bumping onto a runway without crossing clearance. EFB1 used to show ANY runway given in the runway.txt file regardless of whether open or closed and this good practice should continue with EFB2. Just another reason why I think that EFB1 is still superior to EFB2. No REAL airport map would hide a runway which exists. Anybody in the world would call the map useless or wrong. The developer can't be serious in providing replacement AFCADs for each every add-on airport in the world. Just show the runway regardless of its closure state, it could be so easy... Best regards draci While it is of course not forbidden to express an opinion, it should nevertheless be avoided to "tell stories" so to say, like "it could be so easy" and similar. It might even be advidseable to READ why we created the AFCAD section and what the reason is that "it could not be so easy" to avoid wrong runway depcictions or even missing runwy depictions. You might also trust that we at AivlaSoft are not just a bunch of stupid lads that has no idea what the requirements for an EFB are, and so on and so on... PLEASE READ THIS PROPERLY AND THOROUGHLY before complaining about the what's and whereabouts of the AFCAD section: https://forum.aivlasoft.com/topic/3005-afcad/ It could be so easy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmaik Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 I didn't want to insult anybody, but my opinion did not change, why not leave us the option to display the closed runways in the settings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayProudfoot Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, bmaik said: I didn't want to insult anybody, but my opinion did not change, why not leave us the option to display the closed runways in the settings? Your question should be directed at the scenery developer. Why have they chosen to close both ends of a working runway? Unless of course that runway is non-operational in the real world. I just checked and it isn’t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewulf47 Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 1 hour ago, bmaik said: I didn't want to insult anybody, but my opinion did not change, why not leave us the option to display the closed runways in the settings? I'm sorry but you didn't read everything that was written in the abovementioned AFCAD link. Programmwise we cannot decide whether an Add-On designers has used a runway as "fake" runway or "just" as a "closed" runway for his very own reasons. Furthermore there are designers who do not have runways in AFCADs or even do not provide AFCADS at all. To overcome this situation once and for all we have decided to introduce this AFCAD folder structure into EFB v2. This way we are able to ALWAYS provide a ground layout, no matter what the restriction may be. This is something that was NOT possible in EFB v1. So you have the option for a correct arport layout, just use what EFB v2 offers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.