On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 10:34:05 +0200,
Christian Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Culp schrieb:
> >
> > On a related note, here are some airports that the FAA considers
> > "special", as of 1990, and why:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > EUROPEAN REGION
> >
>
David Culp schrieb:
On a related note, here are some airports that the FAA considers "special", as
of 1990, and why:
> [...]
EUROPEAN REGION
AIRPORT COMMENTS
Berlin, Germany Political sensitivity of
David Megginson writes:
> Curtis L. Olson writes:
>
> > For what it's worth, when I was looking into this, I found some
> > examples of runways with their ends literally at least 100' different
> > in elevation. Most aren't nearly that far off, but there are a
> > few.
>
> For a 10,000 ft ru
Curtis L. Olson writes:
> Norman Vine writes:
> > David Megginson writes:
> > >
> > > Norman Vine writes:
> > >
> > > > Have you tried preinserting some of the the higher res srtm1 data
> > > > to terra innide of and on the edges of the airport polygons ?
> > > >
> > > > This shoud be quite
Norman Vine writes:
> David Megginson writes:
> >
> > Norman Vine writes:
> >
> > > Have you tried preinserting some of the the higher res srtm1 data
> > > to terra innide of and on the edges of the airport polygons ?
> > >
> > > This shoud be quite accurate.
> >
> > Maybe *too* accurate -
David Megginson writes:
>
> Norman Vine writes:
>
> > Have you tried preinserting some of the the higher res srtm1 data
> > to terra innide of and on the edges of the airport polygons ?
> >
> > This shoud be quite accurate.
>
> Maybe *too* accurate -- at the resolution, a 747 parked on the
Norman Vine writes:
> Have you tried preinserting some of the the higher res srtm1 data
> to terra innide of and on the edges of the airport polygons ?
>
> This shoud be quite accurate.
Maybe *too* accurate -- at the resolution, a 747 parked on the field
will start to show up in the elevati
David Megginson writes:
>
> Curtis L. Olson writes:
>
> > For what it's worth, when I was looking into this, I found some
> > examples of runways with their ends literally at least 100' different
> > in elevation. Most aren't nearly that far off, but there are a
> > few.
>
> For a 10,000 ft
Martin Spott writes:
> > Further to Curt's last post about flattening rivers, how would
> > everyone feel about flattening airports?
>
> When you look at large airports, say with runways over 3 km, you'll find
> quite a few where the runways follow the terrain at least over a difference
> i
Curtis L. Olson writes:
> For what it's worth, when I was looking into this, I found some
> examples of runways with their ends literally at least 100' different
> in elevation. Most aren't nearly that far off, but there are a
> few.
For a 10,000 ft runway, that would require less than a 1%
Some good examples of un-flat runways:
KATL ( especially 8R, concave )
San Jose, Costa Rica ( steep slope, strong visual illusion )
Guatemala City, Guatemala ( very concave runway )
On a related note, here are some airports that the FAA considers "special", as
of 1990, and why:
Don't recall the specific change in height of the two runway ends, but KMRY
has quite a downslope change toward the West as one real world example.
jj
> For what it's worth, when I was looking into this, I found some
> examples of runways with their ends literally at least 100' different
> in
Martin Spott writes:
> David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Further to Curt's last post about flattening rivers, how would
> > everyone feel about flattening airports?
>
> When you look at large airports, say with runways over 3 km, you'll find
> quite a few where the runways follow the
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Further to Curt's last post about flattening rivers, how would
> everyone feel about flattening airports?
When you look at large airports, say with runways over 3 km, you'll find
quite a few where the runways follow the terrain at least over a differenc
14 matches
Mail list logo
