Does P3D model all the airspace types shown in the SDK? I ask because FSX doesn't. It only models those with entries in the Text and Line columns  in the attachment.

 

In particular, it doesn't model Class A airspace.

 

 

I got no reply on the P3D Forum either.

Sorry I can't help on this one :-(

 

I'll try to have a look at the SDK documents...

I'll try to have a look at the SDK documents...

As far as I am aware the P3D SDK is the same as FSX, which is wrong.

As far as I am aware the P3D SDK is the same as FSX, which is wrong.

 

:-/  well... maybe P3D 2.0 can bring us good news in that field...

 

 

maybe P3D 2.0 can bring us good news in that field...

 

Maybe not.

 

Boundaries can change with every AIRAC. Accurate up-to-date boundaries could be needed for some types of training. . Would Lockheed Martin be prepared to update boundaries etc with every AIRAC  cycle and do so free of charge, or might it rely on others to do provide updates commercially?

Maybe not.

 

Boundaries can change with every AIRAC. Accurate up-to-date boundaries could be needed for some types of training. . Would Lockheed Martin be prepared to update boundaries etc with every AIRAC  cycle and do so free of charge, or might it rely on others to do provide updates commercially?

 

As an option, a separate product one could register. (?)

 

Alternatively, room could be made for 3pds to offer products in this area... Those that already provide navaid updates...

As an option, a separate product one could register. (?)

 

Alternatively, room could be made for 3pds to offer products in this area... Those that already provide navaid updates...

 

That's effectively what I said. Market forces will decide.

From the P3D SDK:

 

AirspaceClass = airport's ICAO airspace class: B, C, D, or G

 

 

 

Airspace types are tied directly to airports and are the same as in FSX The LM Official P3D forum has a sub forum for feature requests, so I suggest that you post your request there instead of in the general forum:

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewforum&f=30.0

Boundaries section of the Compiling BGL of my P3D SDK reads

Quote

CLASS A to CLASS G

Also in FSX airspace types are not tied directly to airports but are free standing boundaries as the example shows

 

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<FSData version="9.0"

xmlns:xsi='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance'

xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="bglcomp.xsd" >

<Boundary type="CLASS_E" name="Manchester TMA 2 (CLASS_E)">

<BoundaryStart lat="+53.655" lon="-2.65" minimumAltitudeType="MSL" altitudeMinimum="16.764" maximumAltitudeType="MSL" altitudeMaximum="4419.6"/>

<Line lat="+53.6083333333333" lon="-3.02666666666667"/>

<Line lat="+53.5394444444444" lon="-3.01638888888889"/>

<Line lat="+53.5397222222222" lon="-2.98527777777778"/>

<Line lat="+53.655" lon="-2.65"/>

</Boundary>

</FSData>

 

EDIT: The forum software has changed the formatting when enclosed in <code> tags so I've replaced it with plain text

 

 

My original post was a question, not a request. Why request something without first finding out it's not there

That may be correct, but I don't remember  hearing any ATC referring to anything but B, C, D and G. That could just be an artifact of the default boundaries used in P3D.

 

I'm bit surprised that someone from LM didn't respond to your post there, but in the feature request subforum, you might have better luck.

 

 

That may be correct, but I don't remember hearing any ATC referring to anything but B, C, D and G.

 

That's because FSX (and P3D?)  erroneously only recognises Classes B, C, D, & E despite its SDK listing all of them.

 

Lockheed Martin still hasn't responded.

That's actually pretty interesting in itself. Considering that if nothing else, LM should be interested in MOAs, you'd think that they'd have a ready answer for you. The only other thing that I can think of is to PM (on their forum of course)  Wes Bard, the P3D Software Manager. In the past, he seems to be the one that has answered these types of questions.

 

Boundaries can change with every AIRAC. Accurate up-to-date boundaries could be needed for some types of training. .

 

:unsure:

It seems very strange that this topic does not interest anybody. Instead, for me is essential. I did an update of the CTR Italian and frankly now fly under VFR, for me and something else entirely.

 

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/showthread.php?t=427105

 

I started this post hoping to arouse some interest, but until now I have not seen the desired results. However, I'll go ahead for my own pleasure. B) 

 

Regards

 

Giovanni

 

sorry for my english