I believe Lugano is already in the DB, but removed because of the original length of the runway.
Printable View
I believe Lugano is already in the DB, but removed because of the original length of the runway.
Seems to be the same with EGLC.
Does that mean the short-rwy-airports are not removed by A320 FMGS, but by the Aerosoft data base, so only chance would ne to get the Aerosoft database adapted to an (steep approach equipped) A318 as it is for Aerosoft Airbus Extended A318? In that case I could ask if Aerosoft could adapt that database for JeeHell with ToToms A318, too (I know you only support the A320 and sure I understand and accept that!).
Checked it now with the Aerosoft busses. They all (A318 to A321) have LSZA as well as EGLC in the database. So the problem should not be caused by the Navdatabase. Is there any chance to configure the mechanism that removes the airports with the short runways?
How long are those runways?
LSZA: 1420 m = 4648 ft (o.k., T/O not authorized, we will have to bring him to LIMN on the highway :) )
EGLC: 1508 m = 4947 ft (T/O authorized with normal load)
Todays Topcat calculation for a Bizjet A318 (LX-GJC) sparely loaded with 6 PAX + Baggage (Landing Weight 42234kg, Tailwind 1kt) gives Landing distance Required (LDR) (for LSZA Rwy 01) 1167m = 3828ft (at Landing distance actual 700m = 2300ft).
Therefore a suitable limit of shown Airports in the MCDUs database would (to cover cases of emergency) in my opinion be 1000m /3300ft.
THX in advance!
I will decrease the length a bit in next version, but this is highly unrealistic. 1000m long is really not suitable even in emergency...
Problem solved with B 44.2 - THX JL and have a merry XMas!
Hi all,
is anybody able to add runways and any procedures for amazing old QUITO airport???
Thank you
Jiri
Hi all,
I have spent a few days updating the Kai Tak navaids and waypoints. I advise that you backup your original.
I'm trying to add the SID/STARS in but this is going take awhile to work out.
Any problems let me know.
Michael