Mike Davis
commented
in reference to scenery pack
94235on March 22, 2023 1:32 PM
ESRI image does not agree with current FAA data 2/23/23. Runway width shown by FAA as 150 ft. pushes the runway width into trees on both sides at the southeast end. The dark gray ESRI OpenStreetMap airport boundary is insufficient to contain the runway's published length of 1725 ft. It also eliminates apparent hangars at the northwest end of the runway, but does include a large cultivated field to the east.
I have reduced the runway width to the visual 100 ft. and shortened the runway length from 1725 ft. to 1495 ft. to keep the runway within the ESRI OpenStreetMap boundary, and expanded the airport boundary to the east to incorporate one hangar, while eliminating the apparent hangar to the northwest.
This OpenStreetMap image needs to be examined and updated along with the FAA data which is clearly wrong.
You must be logged in to participate in the discussion
ESRI image does not agree with current FAA data 2/23/23. Runway width shown by FAA as 150 ft. pushes the runway width into trees on both sides at the southeast end. The dark gray ESRI OpenStreetMap airport boundary is insufficient to contain the runway's published length of 1725 ft. It also eliminates apparent hangars at the northwest end of the runway, but does include a large cultivated field to the east. I have reduced the runway width to the visual 100 ft. and shortened the runway length from 1725 ft. to 1495 ft. to keep the runway within the ESRI OpenStreetMap boundary, and expanded the airport boundary to the east to incorporate one hangar, while eliminating the apparent hangar to the northwest. This OpenStreetMap image needs to be examined and updated along with the FAA data which is clearly wrong.