[OSM-dev] aviation maps?
akos at maroy.hu
Wed Aug 11 17:57:22 BST 2010
On 11/08/10 18:09, Eric Wolf wrote:
> An argument for creating at least a "sister project" to OSM for airspace
> mapping is that, in the USA at least, FAA regulations limit the
> operation of kites and balloons based on airspace. If projects like
> OpenAerialMap and Cartagen are to take off (pardon the pun), access to
> air space information will be key.
in Europe at least, airspace information is freely available, and I'm
sure the US is no different. anyone can get VFR and IFR airspace maps,
either from the appropriate government agency (FAA, Eurocontrol), or
from commercial vendors like Jeppesen.
> Specifically, FAA limits kites and balloons to 150 feet AGL within 5
> miles of a FAA designated airport or helipad. Outside this boundary, you
> can operate up to 500 feet. You can also make other arrangements working
> with the closest air traffic control tower and issuing a pilot's NOTAM.
> But all of this becomes a geospatial/mapping problem.
yes, generally there are restricted airspaces all over, which have to be
adhered to. this is why an aviation map is important to carry around.
using a GPS-enabled smart phone with such a map is of great help.
traditional vendors, such as Garmin, do make such products - but they
are horribly expensive. thus the idea to produce similar solutions on
widely available smart phones. there are already a number of non-free
software solutions that offer such functionality out there.
> The list of FAA designated airports and helipads is constantly being
> updated. Fortunately, it's public domain data that is geocoded, so it's
> easy to work with. Calculating that 5-mile boundary is also fairly easy.
> The trick to NOTAMs is that the ATC like to know the angular direction
> from the tower and linear distance (i.e., 145 degrees, 15 miles). Being
> able to easily calculate that information and generate NOTAMs would
> facilitate hobbyist aerial photography.
yes, this is a good example of why I'd like to see aviation maps around,
in an open environment.
> But this still could be done fairly easily with just OpenLayers and
> maybe at WFS server. Since the information is dynamic (but the ontology
> is fairly static), it doesn't make much sense to use OSM to manage the
I'll look up OpenLayers.
what I still don't understand though - how would I define the nature of
information on either a layer, or on an OSM map? like type of airspace,
low and high altitude boundaries, etc? for navigation points and
airports, the amount of metadata is even greater - names, frequencies, etc.
More information about the dev