Re: [talk-au] [EXTERNAL] Re: Duplicate of the same airport

2020-09-13 Thread Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au 
Thanks Greame for the valuable input!

Can you please, or someone who is familiar with the airport modeling, apply 
changes to other 3 (three) airports?

Thank you in advance,
Nemanja

From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2020 12:36 AM
To: Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) 
Cc: Michael James ; OpenStreetMap 

Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport




On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 18:31, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) 
mailto:v-neb...@microsoft.com>> wrote:

However, according to this Wikipedia 
page,
 it is said that in AU there are 4 such airports.

I'd add Canberra to that list!

One side is Canberra International Airport 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-35.30767/149.19034,
 while the other is still used for military flights 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-35.30218/149.19963

This page 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn,_Canberra,
 says that RAAF Fairbairn was decommissioned in 2003, but it is still the home 
of 34 Squadron who are responsible for most VIP flights in & out of Canberra.

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [EXTERNAL] Re: Duplicate of the same airport

2020-09-11 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick 
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 18:31, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) <
v-neb...@microsoft.com> wrote:

>
>
> However, according to this Wikipedia page
> , it is
> said that in AU there are 4 such airports.
>

I'd add Canberra to that list!

One side is Canberra International Airport
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-35.30767/149.19034, while the other
is still used for military flights
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-35.30218/149.19963

This page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn,_Canberra, says that RAAF
Fairbairn was decommissioned in 2003, but it is still the home of 34
Squadron who are responsible for most VIP flights in & out of Canberra.

Thanks

Graeme

>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [EXTERNAL] Re: Duplicate of the same airport

2020-09-11 Thread Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au 
Hi everyone,

I need the assistance of the community here…
I got a feeling in March this year when military and civilian airports are 
sharing the same strip/area we should keep it as 2 separate polygons. This is 
why I’m using the same thread again.

However, according to this Wikipedia 
page, it is 
said that in AU there are 4 such airports.

  1.  Darwin International Airport 
and RAAF Base Darwin YPDN (DRW)
  2.  Newcastle Airport and 
RAAF Base Williamtown YWLM (NTL)
  3.  Townsville Airport YBTL 
(TSV) - which is tagged as military/civilian
  4.  RAAF Base Learmonth YPLM 
(LEA) - which is tagged as military only

If we do at this way, no problem, however IATA and ICAO will be duplicated (yes 
it can be merged into one polygon at the consumer side), however can someone 
create polygons for other 2 airports to have a consistent data here, or you 
think it is okay to have tagging as it is in Townsville?

Thank you in advance,
Nemanja

From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 10:56 PM
To: Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) 
Cc: Michael James ; OpenStreetMap 

Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport

No, I would leave it as 2 separate airfields, with the same info against both.

If that causes a problem, then take the codes off the airbase, as strictly 
speaking, that side of the airfield isn't an air transport destination.

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 22:10, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au 
mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
Thank you all for clarification.

Thank you James for more local details.

So by your opinion is it better to have 2 separate airports with duplicated 
data (such as IATA, ICAO, etc.), or to combine into one polygon.
Taking into consideration Cleary's and Andrew's answer I would leave as is, but 
since this is isolated case in AU, and some data will be duplicated, I would 
join two polygons. Don't know what to do. 😊

Thank you in advance for the response.

Nemanja

-Originalna poruka-
Od: Michael James mailto:mich...@techdrive.com.au>>
Poslato: sreda, 25. mart 2020. 12:21
Za: OpenStreetMap mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>
Tema: [EXTERNAL] Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport

It is a military base that allows civilian air traffic to use its runway.

As far as air traffic goes it's called Williamtown, only the civilian terminal 
area is called Newcastle airport. (28 hectares of land)

https://www.newcastleairport.com.au/corporate/about/board-governance

Hope that helps, though no map of that land parcel that they lease for the 
civilian side.

> -Original Message-
> From: cleary mailto:o...@97k.com>>
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 March 2020 6:29 PM
> To: OpenStreetMap 
> mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport
>
>
>
> I think the air force base and civilian airport share the same runway
> but they are two distinct entities with separate buildings etc. Same
> applies in some other cities including Canberra. I would defer to
> someone more knowledgeable but I think it remains appropriate to have two 
> separate entities mapped in OSM.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2020, at 7:06 PM, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > There are two relations in OSM that are referring to the same airport:
> >
> >  * 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6263052
> >  * 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4145466
> >
> >
> >
> > The first one has a *aeroway:aerodrome* tag, the second one has a
> > *military:airfield* tag.
> >
> >
> > I’m not sure should I merge these two relations since there are some
> > sporadic differences for the same tag in both relations.

Re: [talk-au] [EXTERNAL] Re: Duplicate of the same airport

2020-03-26 Thread Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au 
Ok, thank you all for the clarification once again.

I will leave then as is.

Thanks,
Nemanja

Od: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
Poslato: sreda, 25. mart 2020. 22:56
Za: Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) 
Cc: Michael James ; OpenStreetMap 

Tema: [EXTERNAL] Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport

No, I would leave it as 2 separate airfields, with the same info against both.

If that causes a problem, then take the codes off the airbase, as strictly 
speaking, that side of the airfield isn't an air transport destination.

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 22:10, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au 
mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
Thank you all for clarification.

Thank you James for more local details.

So by your opinion is it better to have 2 separate airports with duplicated 
data (such as IATA, ICAO, etc.), or to combine into one polygon.
Taking into consideration Cleary's and Andrew's answer I would leave as is, but 
since this is isolated case in AU, and some data will be duplicated, I would 
join two polygons. Don't know what to do. 😊

Thank you in advance for the response.

Nemanja

-Originalna poruka-
Od: Michael James mailto:mich...@techdrive.com.au>>
Poslato: sreda, 25. mart 2020. 12:21
Za: OpenStreetMap mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>
Tema: [EXTERNAL] Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport

It is a military base that allows civilian air traffic to use its runway.

As far as air traffic goes it's called Williamtown, only the civilian terminal 
area is called Newcastle airport. (28 hectares of land)

https://www.newcastleairport.com.au/corporate/about/board-governance

Hope that helps, though no map of that land parcel that they lease for the 
civilian side.

> -Original Message-
> From: cleary mailto:o...@97k.com>>
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 March 2020 6:29 PM
> To: OpenStreetMap 
> mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org>>
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Duplicate of the same airport
>
>
>
> I think the air force base and civilian airport share the same runway
> but they are two distinct entities with separate buildings etc. Same
> applies in some other cities including Canberra. I would defer to
> someone more knowledgeable but I think it remains appropriate to have two 
> separate entities mapped in OSM.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2020, at 7:06 PM, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > There are two relations in OSM that are referring to the same airport:
> >
> >  * 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6263052
> >  * 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4145466
> >
> >
> >
> > The first one has a *aeroway:aerodrome* tag, the second one has a
> > *military:airfield* tag.
> >
> >
> > I’m not sure should I merge these two relations since there are some
> > sporadic differences for the same tag in both relations. Please, I
> > need an extra hand on this.
> >
> >
> > This is an isolated case in whole Australia.
> >
> >
> > Thank you in advance,
> >
> > Nemanja
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-au mailing list
> > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_