"Tarmac" vs. "Airport Runway" vs. "Airstrip / Runway"

[Mike S]

"Tarmac" vs. "Airport Runway" vs. "Airstrip / Runway"

Any rhyme or reason for the proper use, overlap and/or interaction of these three categories?

-Mike

[Nuclear Moose]

I use airport runway in airports which have some additional infrastructure - perhaps a terminal, tower, a hangar or refuelling capabilities. The Airstrip/Runway I would use for airports that are really nothing more than places to land and take off. They have no associated buildings or services.

Since there are no categories for taxiway or apron etc. I use tarmac. The tarmac and runway polygons play nicely together. I will also use "airport" or "regional airport" or "international airport" as the primary category for a boundary encompassing the footprint of the airport. 

[rjhintz]

See also archives for discussion on how the ICAO uses terms associated with "aerodromes."  This discussion is associated with the larger issue of rationalizing categories/features, including hierarchies and duplicates.

Airport Runway is a duplicate of Airstrip/Runway.  Tarmac, which is a paving material now indelibly associated with airport ramps/aprons, is not for runways.  The tarmac category can be materials other than real tarmac, such as concrete, PSP, and so on.  NHK is the authority here, but global, authoritative mappers rarely show up in this forum anymore.

--

Rich 

[Aleksandar Jovanović]

For many country this edits is in chaotic condition... For Google Maps service it`s a minor and unessential problem for mapping airports (in aspect for flight crew members and their needs). In Map maker we don`t have advanced category for mapping and official moderators with adequate knowledge who will approve edits. For now this is a battle with windmills.


Aleksandar

[assa...@gmail.com]

Should tarmac be cut out from the actual runway so you have adjoining polygons?

Or is it permissible to have the travel ways that cross runways overlap?

I am guessing its the former.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

[Nuclear Moose]

I currently draw tarmac in such a way that it winds up with several polygons with minor overlap on runways to ensure there are no gaps. However, I'm fairly certain that runways have rendering priority so they show above tarmac. It would be worth some experimentation to see how efficient it is to draw out airport taxiways and aprons/ramps in this way.

Example:

1. Create tarmac polygon that covers runways, ramps, aprons, taxiways, runways and the infield areas between everything. Use "Cut Out" tool to remove infield areas and then draw runways over top. OR...

2. Draw runways, then draw everything else with as many polygons as needed.

Funny that when you start out, you build something in the best way you can come up with, and you wind up sticking with that method even when you are more experienced. I am going to re-examine my methodology when capturing or fixing airports to see if I can find a way that is both accurate and fast.

[Geoffrey Perez]

I wonder why the tarmac polygons aren't rendering properly in this example here (Livermore Municipal Airport, Livermore, CA USA): http://goo.gl/cBu74

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "General Map Maker" Google group.
 
- To post a public reply in this same thread:
Reply to this e-mail and your note will soon be posted.
 
- To post a note to the group on a *different* General Map Maker topic:
Visit http://goo.gl/DeX9Z and click on "New topic"
or
E-mail google-...@googlegroups.com
 
- To unsubscribe from this list:
Send email to
google-mapmak...@googlegroups.com
 
- To see additional useful options:
Visit http://goo.gl/GDnr and click on "Membership."
 
Thanks for using Google Map Maker! :-)

[Saikrishna Arcot]

I'm creating individual polygons for each taxiway name. For the intersection between taxiways/runways, I create a separate "intersection" polygon so that the polygon node limit doesn't get hit and an individual intersection can be edited instead of the whole taxiway.

See here. Note the taxiway rendering stopped a long time ago.

[delta fox]

Why do you use "tarmac" instead of "runway" for runways ?

[LVI56]

I was curious and tried mapping a bit at my local airport Changed the runway from tarmac to runway, and it did change color. However, the tarmac portion I added along side won't render. Prior to the runway being changed, it did render properly.

[Saikrishna Arcot]

They were already created as Tarmacs. Nonetheless, I'm changing the eastern half of the airport runways to Runway.

[R01k]

I have been wondering the same. I use these three Categories the same way than Nuclear Moose. They could be confusing though.

[Nuclear Moose]

I see that the airport boundary is pending review. Once that goes live, maybe you will see the tarmac render correctly. Look at my tarmac edit - http://goo.gl/dFxnS - it's not rendering but I also did an edit on the airport boundary and it is still pending so we'll have to wait to see what happens.

[Moid]

Hi Guys,

My response is just a slight modification of what Craig proposed. The category 'Tarmac' can be used to mark the ramps, aprons and the infield areas. 

However, you should make sure to cut-out the runway portions. These need to be marked as 'Airstrip/runways'.

Thanks,

Moid

[delta fox]

Moid: 

Do you confirm that runways within an airport are to be marked as  'Airstrip/runways' - not as  'Airport runways' ? If so, what is  'Airport runway' for ?

[djboge]

Good question. Seems like a logical split would be to use "Airport Runway" for... well... runways at airports. "Airstrip/runway" could be used for a standalone airstrip, perhaps in a rural area or some such.

[Nuclear Moose]

Agree with the airstrip/runway @djboge. To me an airstrip generally has no control tower and may have little or no infrastructure.

This is almost a moot thread now given that G has locked all of the airports in Canada (and others too, most likely.)

[Flash]

Since my local airport has been completely reconfigured with a new ramp and taxiway that I'd like to map, I checked my airport this morning by making a minor edit; mine is not locked... ssssshhhhhh, don't tell anyone!

[Nuclear Moose]

Sigh.

I have about six airports on the go because it often takes a long time to get reviews done so I do everything I can and then move on to the next location. The first thing that started to happen was when I corrected the airport names to their official names and was told to undo those changes b/c name changes were a no-no. Incorrect information is better than none, right? :^) Actually, it's not like the names were so wrong that people wouldn't be able to find them. It's just that I attempted to align all the info to the associated web sites and was told not to change names for the time being.

I should go on another golf course binge! :)

[Funkytoad]

I feel your pain! I was having a great time mapping airports! They were my thing. Now I am just stuck. I've gone back to deleting all those silly loops on the roads in BC.

[Nuclear Moose]

Did you post a link in the other thread about this? :) I'll happily chime in on loops. Are they in, <cough>, Kamloops by any chance? 

[fhdogs]

I wanted to wake this up to get some more clarification...

I've got a local airport and some new high res imagery so I wanted to do a little work. Previously only the two runways had shapes (as tarmac) so I figured I'd change them before I drew the aprons and taxiways.

If I change the runway category to "Airport Runway" what I believe should be the proper category (it's a runway at an airport). The plane icon renders for each feature creating a cluttered area with multiple planes. 

So I figured I'd do what Moid said and use "Airstrip/Runways" which to me should be a stand alone airstrip not located at an airport, but when I try to use that category I get an error Feature cannot be changed to this category from the current one.

So the option is to leave the runway as tarmac (wrong),  or change the category to Airport Runway (cluttered and ugly when there are multiple runways plus a POI for the airport)

What should I do?

-Mike

[rjhintz]

The general case, before someone added the unneeded Airport Runway feature, was to mark runways as Airstrip/Runway and the apron/ramp as Tarmac.  We've had long discussions about this in the past, including contributions from at least one real authority on airport/aerodrome features.  We've kinda given up since feature rationalization has stalled.

Depending on how much effort you want to put into this, you can delete features that don't conform, if they can't be changed, then add the correct features.  A lot depends what you can get published without reviews, though I think adding an Airstrip/Runway lately automatically gets you n the "Needs Review" penalty box, even if you have a zillion edits and it's outside North America.

--

Rich

[fhdogs]

Thanks Rich, in this particular case I was in Vermont so I'll hold off before doing anything. This is strictly for visual purposes so I won't bother wasting my time right now. As a partially trained pilot I know there is no value for the flying community in adding the details, but as a civilian who is fascinated by anything flight related I still have an interest in drawing all the bits in pieces of airports. 

-Mike