Yes, there are definitely complications, but right now our data has N=none, V=vasi, P=papi, so I'm planning to start simple.
What I'm looking for is somethingn to the effect that a VASI light bar is a row of "n" lights spaced "x" meters apart. VASI light bars are spaced "y" meters apart along the length of the runway. And if I'm really lucky I'd get the difference in degrees in alignment between the two/three light bars. I.e. bottom bar turns red at 3 degrees, top bar turns red at 3.25 degrees (or something like that.) Regards, Curt. David Megginson writes: > Curtis L. Olson writes: > > > Does anyone have any specific dimensions for the layout and size of a > > VASI system? > > > > >From what I've been able to find, the VASI/PAPI system should be 50' > > off the side of the runway and about 950ft/285m from the threshold. I > > know that each of the 4 PAPI lights is spaced about 9m/30ft apart. > > Here's another complication: there are different VASIS and PAPI > systems for different aircraft sizes. Here's an excerpt from the > Canadian AIP: > > Approach slope indicator systems provide safe wheel clearance over > the runway threshold. The vertical distance from a pilot's eyes to > the lowest portion of the aircraft in the landing attitude is called > the EWH, and this distance varies from less than four feet to up to > 45 ft for some wide-bodied aircraft, such as the B-747. > > [snip] > > Visual Approach Slope Indicator System (VASIS) > > V1: 2-BAR VASIS intended to serve aircraft with EWH up to three > metres (ten feet). > > V2: 2-BAR VASIS intended to serve aircraft with an EWH up to 14 m (45 > ft). > > V3: 3-BAR VASIS intended to serve wide-bodied aircraft with an EWH > up to 14 m (45 ft). > > AV: AVASIS intended to serve aircraft with EWH up to three metres > (ten feet). > > > PAPI (Precision Approach Path Indicator) > > P1: PAPI for aircraft with EWH up to three metres (ten feet). > > P2: PAPI for aircraft with an EWH up to 7.5 m (25 ft). > > P3: PAPI for aircraft with an EWH up to 14 m (45 ft). > > AP: APAPI for aircraft with an EWH up to three metres (ten feet). > > I imagine that the main consideration is runway length -- if the > runway is 8,000ft, it doesn't hurt a C172 to come in 40 feet too high > over the threshold, and if the runway is 2,000ft, transport jets won't > be landing on it. > > There are aerodrome standards online, and those probably include VASIS > and PAPI placement. I could point you to the Canadian ones, but I'm > sure the FAA has the U.S. ones online as well. > > > All the best, > > > David > > -- > David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
