LIQV also appears to be a real world ICAO (VOLTERRA (MET)). I would recommend picking a fake ID that includes a number to be sure it won't duplicate a real ICAO. Please suggest an alternative.
Is LI92 suitable as fake ID? Otherwise, XLIQA would be an alternative, too. I looked up at airportsbase.org, and LIQA doesn't seem to be used in real world, and isn't used on the Gateway, either.
Airport code changes no longer need to be submitted to have Laminar Research handle them. The airport metadata should be updated in WED, and the revised airport submitted to the Gateway.
Since this airport already had the code XLIBE assigned to it, this has to remain its X-Plane-specific identifier forever. You can change the ICAO metadata field, but it must still be uploaded to XLIBE on the Gateway.
Okay, got it. Then I'll leave the code XLIBE (since there's no real ICAO code assigned to this airport in reality).
Another question: If I have an airport that gets "unlicensed" and has no assigned ICAO code any more, what's the correct procedure from now on? Request the deletion of the "old" airport (including its deprecated ICAO code), request a new "fake" airport code and finally upload the new airport scenery?
None of the above - just remove the ICAO code from the ICAO code field in WED. If the airport has a local authority code, enter this in the local code field. Then submit to gateway.
However, I found out yesterday the code LIBE is used in reality, too (for Monte S. Angelo airport). So, it might be good idea to change it to XLIQV to avoid any future confusion?
You must be logged in to participate in the discussion
Could you please change the XP identifier for XLIBE to XLIQV to avoid any future confusion with real-used code LIBE? Thanks.
An unknown user March 19, 2018 4:49 AM
The scenery is ready to be uploaded. Please advise if I first need to upload a scenery pack for the requested identifier change to be completed.
Jennifer Roberts March 30, 2018 2:39 PM
LIQV also appears to be a real world ICAO (VOLTERRA (MET)). I would recommend picking a fake ID that includes a number to be sure it won't duplicate a real ICAO. Please suggest an alternative.
An unknown user March 30, 2018 3:14 PM
Is LI92 suitable as fake ID? Otherwise, XLIQA would be an alternative, too. I looked up at airportsbase.org, and LIQA doesn't seem to be used in real world, and isn't used on the Gateway, either.
Jennifer Roberts April 12, 2018 7:15 PM
Airport code changes no longer need to be submitted to have Laminar Research handle them. The airport metadata should be updated in WED, and the revised airport submitted to the Gateway.
An unknown user April 12, 2018 8:45 PM
Tried this with new code LI92, but WED returns an error message during upload that LI92 is an unknown ID. What now?
Jennifer Roberts April 12, 2018 8:51 PM
Since this airport already had the code XLIBE assigned to it, this has to remain its X-Plane-specific identifier forever. You can change the ICAO metadata field, but it must still be uploaded to XLIBE on the Gateway.
An unknown user April 13, 2018 7:12 AM
Okay, got it. Then I'll leave the code XLIBE (since there's no real ICAO code assigned to this airport in reality).
Another question: If I have an airport that gets "unlicensed" and has no assigned ICAO code any more, what's the correct procedure from now on? Request the deletion of the "old" airport (including its deprecated ICAO code), request a new "fake" airport code and finally upload the new airport scenery?
Philipp Ringler April 13, 2018 11:04 AM
None of the above - just remove the ICAO code from the ICAO code field in WED. If the airport has a local authority code, enter this in the local code field. Then submit to gateway.
Thanks for adding this to the database! :-)
However, I found out yesterday the code LIBE is used in reality, too (for Monte S. Angelo airport). So, it might be good idea to change it to XLIQV to avoid any future confusion?