[New Page] Places/Airport

Moderator: USA Champs

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby dfw_gis » Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:35 pm

jm6087 wrote:
==Scope==
Airport area places should be drawn for all public-use airports, regardless of size or facilities. Private-use airports should only be mapped as Area Place if a large clearing and/or easily-recognizable aviation-related structures are visually obvious from public roads or satellite view, or the airport offers services to the general public such as flying lessons or demonstrations. For how to distinguish between public-use and private-use airports, see Names.

===Category===
The airport category should only be used either for facilities that qualify for airport area places or on point places for airline terminals. For other airport-associated business places, such as charter services or air freight forwarders, a different category should be used.


Cleaning up the strike-through sentences this reads very well. I believe this is clear and concise as far as the base fundamental breaking point between whether to map an airport or not. Individual examples that are on the fence can be handled within local leadership.
dfw_gis(5)
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ]

U.S. Country Manager - Based in South Central Region
dfw_gis
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:05 pm
Location: North Central Texas
Has thanked: 161 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby dfw_gis » Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:56 pm

One of the original issues that came up as an example is some very rural, unlit, unmanned clearings in Alaska that while having an FAA identifier they lack support facilities or even utilities for that matter. In essence, they are someone's clearing on their property. I believe, if I recall correctly were do they actually meet the criteria of an airport category while only having a grass strip on private property. Somebody else add to this if needed.
dfw_gis(5)
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ]

U.S. Country Manager - Based in South Central Region
dfw_gis
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:05 pm
Location: North Central Texas
Has thanked: 161 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby dfw_gis » Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:24 pm

And we can always clarify the search results with a specific description for those private fields in the naming convention akin to what was mentioned earlier - "Private Airfield - Anderson Lake 0AK1" or
"Private - Anderson Lake Airstrip 0AK1".

The airfield name remains searchable if needed.
dfw_gis(5)
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ]

U.S. Country Manager - Based in South Central Region
dfw_gis
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 3:05 pm
Location: North Central Texas
Has thanked: 161 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Tue May 09, 2017 6:08 pm

Thanks, it is good to have something on this.

It would be good for this page to resolve a conflict I've noticed over the years. Some folks like for the airport Area Place to "look" like an airport. The most extreme example of this is when an editor lovingly traces the tarmac outline, including runways, taxiways, and terminal areas. Some of this detail is lost in app rendering, but not all. Two downsides are (a) this doesn't match our conventions for other Area Places and (b) a "form fitting" Area Place may end up smaller, and if it ends up smaller it will render with less significance on the app.

Other folks think the AP should reflect airport property, sometimes as expressed as "mapping to the fence line". One possible downside is the inclusion of airport tenant businesses that commonly --but not always -- involve aviation. Mapping to the "fence line" includes these areas because they are technically on airport property. A related downside is that large amounts of open and/or unimproved space that are technically under airport authority will be mapped as part of the airport.

Either approach can involve a terrific amount of work. Twice I have had all my work on an airport boundary deleted (using the "fence line" principle) -- one of which had been locked at 6! -- so I have lost interest in mapping airports. But it would be nice to settle the question of fence-line versus "airport-like" subset.

Personally, I favor the "fence line" principle because it is simple and I think the upsides outweigh the downsides. I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise, but it could be a lot harder to craft guidance for "airport-like" Area Places.
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Tue May 09, 2017 7:12 pm

Kartografer wrote:I'm not sure how including airport tenant businesses in the airport area is a downside.

I'm with you, but somebody sure thought it was a downside at one of the major airports I set up. Wiped out all the detail boundary that I'd mapped from official sources and replaced it with a rough seat-of-the-pants outline that more or less looked like the runways.

How about something like this?
Each airport should be drawn as a single area place, covering all airport-managed property and including any open space, parking lots, runways, taxiways, terminal buildings, control towers, orairport tenants, and other structures. This will ensure visibility on the map.


[EDIT: Added parking lots for good measure.]
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Wed May 10, 2017 4:37 pm

OK, I've made the changes to the area-extent paragraph in the Kartographer draft article. Thanks to Kartographer for the great work and to everybody for their comments.

tcalvert317 wrote:Is it possible that airport wipe-out might have been from a galaxy far, far away, and might not be a factor anymore?

I don't know. The name associated with the airport after the horrible loss of data was that of an R6 Global Champ who is still active but, in my experience anyway, uncommunicative.

I hasten to add that, of course, it may not have been the GC who erased the outline work; the GC may in fact have tried to rescue the airport in haste after some R4+ editor really messed it up (at least I think it had been locked at 4).

Regardless, I have encountered work by other editors that suggests they like "airport-looking" Area Places instead of mapping property boundaries, so I do believe this is a useful clarification.

(The other two airport wipe-outs in my experience -- both San Francisco and San Jose International Airports -- appeared to have resulted from visiting R6 editors "rubber-stamping" Place Update Requests and unintentionally approving "trojan horse" deletion requests. No wiki article in the world will keep that from happening.)
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Wed May 10, 2017 8:23 pm

tcalvert317 wrote:How can we ensure that this is adequately vetted and discussed so that changes aren't made then undone?

We can't. The best we can do is follow the process like we're doing, then hope. Ultimately, we have no central authority that can compel anything.

On the bright side, it has been quite rare in my experience that a highly-decorated editor will come in out of the blue, "keyboard blazing", and unilaterally undo agreed-upon wiki changes with zero discussion or notification. Oh it has happened, for sure. But it's rare.

Much more likely is that leading regional editors will, when they find out about a wiki provision with which they disagree, simply institute a regional departure from the wiki. This is a completely natural human response; the conflict between regional and central authority goes back 5000 years or more.

Finding the right balance between regional and central authority within the national and global Waze volunteer ecosystem is a fascinating question (no sarcasm intended, it's an interesting topic). But probably this thread isn't the best place to discuss it :D
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:09 pm

I suspect I'm notorious at this point for resisting the addition of display objects, at least those I don't think provide sufficient benefit to be worth the downsides. However, my first reaction to this proposal is one of caution.

You're right, historically we've used the "Airport" category to include everything from Chicago-O'Hare to an abandoned mountain airstrip accessible only by 4x4 in the dry season, which typically has the primary name field set to "Arprt". I agree that, just because the original basemap import gave us a lot of "Arprts" doesn't mean we have to adopt that as our editing standard. A lot of these old "Arprt" places don't need to be on the map.

At the same time, from nearby roads, drivers typically can't tell if if a small airfield has a paved runway or not. They CAN tell that there is a big open area with hangars and a wind sock and maybe some aircraft. To my mind, if a driver is passing such a location, it is an asset to have it show up on the app display. It's a large and potentially useful orientation cue, like a park or a body of water.

A separate question is whether we want limit the extent to which the "Airport" category pulls up minor airfields. Maybe -- if we did that, however, I think minor airfields should still get an Area Place if they are visible from neighboring roads. We could give them a different category. That's just brainstorming -- I'm not recommending doing this as I have mixed feelings about it.

Can you describe the failure mode? How is our current guidance manifesting in problems for drivers?
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:40 pm

MacroNav wrote:Here's a couple "airports". Zoom out to 1 and pan around the map with GIS-L airports on. Have a look. Do you think all those dots should be airport area places?

https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lo ... 31.3875866

Those look like fly-in communities. I see multiple aircraft and a few hangar-like structures in what looks like people's back yards.

It is an interesting question how to map a fly-in community where people keep their planes on their own personal property, but those properties abut a single airstrip that by itself is a glorified dirt road. Or even a nice paved airstrip, but the point is that the airstrip is the only shared property, everything else is basically a suburb.

I don't think the editing community has ever addressed this question. We have determined that neighborhoods and residential complexes should not get Area Places. We have determined that airports should get Area Places. But what about a residential complex that has an airstrip?

If a driver from a nearby road does not see a big expanse of open space that is obviously an airfield, but rather a collection of homes that may have visible aircraft next to their houses, garages, SUVs, chicken coops, and Christmas decorations -- and the airstrip itself is not visible from the road but rather effectively in people's back yards -- then it wouldn't seem to me to do any good as an Area Place.

And heck, how would you draw it anyway? Would you include the residential properties, where the aircraft are kept, even though those wouldn't look at all like an airport? Or would it be just a long thin rectangle around the airstrip, even though that looks like nothing from the road? Yuck.

So...yes, I could see guidance that says: we should not map as "Airports" fly-in communities where all the normal trappings of an airport are kept on individual residential properties and the only thing shared is an airstrip whose surrounding open space is largely or completely invisible to passing traffic.
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Re: [New Page] Places/Airport

Postby DwarfLord » Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:48 pm

juliansean wrote:Having the AP lets me as a driver know I'm close and start reading signs or looking for what could be an entrance instead of following the app. Where does this happen the most --- small, private or semi private strips that have very little signage. (Emphasis DwarfLord's -- Ed.)

With respect, there are few (if any?) situations where the community actively uses the display aspect of Area Places as the primary means of guiding drivers on their final approach to their destinations. Our goal is to get the turn-by-turn instructions correct. Area Places are Area Places (instead of Point Places) primarily for orientation. They do assist with final approach, but I don't think we should consider Area Places as a substitute for mapping the destination pin and the approach roads correctly.

But to what appears to be the OP's main thrust here -- what about the specific case of a fly-in community where the only thing shared is the airstrip; the clearing associated with it is invisible from adjacent roads; and all the airport trappings are spread out across multiple private residences? Do "outside" pilots frequently use those? Do they need Area Places to find them with Waze, or would a correct PP with correct road mapping do the trick? If they need Area Places, how would you map them? Would you include all the residences, or would it just be a long thin rectangle around the airstrip itself?
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

PreviousNext

Return to US Wiki Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mapman44