The CIFP threshold coordinate is accurate.
You can add as much pavement beyond it as you want to get the runway beyond the threshold long enough. CIFP validation only validates where the threshold is, not where the pavement starts.
Its a *warning, not an error. Its that way so you can choose to ignore it in case you are certain you know better. Note is also says *recommended and not mandated.
Only if you were to get an error (which you will get it you get the threshold itself wrong) you have to comply. Try and move the threshold and you will note the difference.
"Warning: Runway 26 end not within 10m of location recommended by gateway CIFP data. ...".
I've placed it according to attached document (from AIP Sweden).
My guess is that the CIFP data does not account for the displaced threshold of 22m.
walleboom June 6, 2018 12:49 AM
(And the THR aligns perfectly with my overlay image)
Philipp Ringler June 6, 2018 9:05 PM
The CIFP threshold coordinate is accurate.
You can add as much pavement beyond it as you want to get the runway beyond the threshold long enough. CIFP validation only validates where the threshold is, not where the pavement starts.
walleboom June 6, 2018 11:04 PM
I'm not sure I follow along, this is what I got, it does not validate and I've placed it according to the AIP document.
Michael Minnhaar June 6, 2018 11:42 PM
Its a *warning, not an error. Its that way so you can choose to ignore it in case you are certain you know better. Note is also says *recommended and not mandated.
Only if you were to get an error (which you will get it you get the threshold itself wrong) you have to comply. Try and move the threshold and you will note the difference.
walleboom June 6, 2018 11:46 PM
Ah, I see, thank you Michael!