Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Display altitude restrictions in elevation profile #298

Closed
albar965 opened this issue Sep 11, 2018 · 12 comments

Comments

@albar965
Copy link
Owner

commented Sep 11, 2018

Let descent and ascent lines follow altitude restrictions in a simple way (always use lowest value - this is not a FMC).
Probably display limitations graphically in profile.
Follow up for #34.

@albar965 albar965 added this to the Release 2.2 milestone Sep 11, 2018

@albar965 albar965 self-assigned this Sep 11, 2018

@albar965 albar965 changed the title Display altitude limitations in elevation profile Display altitude restrictions in elevation profile Sep 12, 2018

@albar965 albar965 added the requested label Sep 12, 2018

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2018

Adjusted elevation profile to display passed, active and circle-to-la…
…nd flight plan legs in the same colors like the flight plan on the map.

Symbols are now on the descending line.
#298

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 17, 2018

Improved scrolling logic in elevation profile. Now remembering last p…
…osition also after zooming back to 100%.

Scrolling range is now based on maximum displayed altitude and flight plan length to allow minimum display of 3 NM for approaches.
Fixed issue in splitter logic which did not update menu item.
#298

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2018

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 27, 2018

Added calculation and display for top of climb to elevation profile d…
…isplay.

Now showing procedure altitude restrictions in profile display.
Climb and descent segments now adhere to restrictions.
TOD is now calculated considering altitude restrictions of approach or STAR. Same for TOC and SID.
Vertical path deviation is now based on calculated path also covering restrictions.
Now giving clear error indication if cruise altitude is too high (i.e. TOC and TOC overlap).

All #298
@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Sep 27, 2018

Whew! This was quite a piece of work. But now it is good. :)
Limitations are displayed, TOD and TOC adhere to altitude restrictions and are calculated considering them.

grafik

@albar965 albar965 closed this Sep 27, 2018

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 28, 2018

Elevation profile now uses same aircraft icon as map.
Changed elevation profile to completely adhere to map painting settings like line width, text size and symbol size.
#298
@Gulliver54

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 30, 2018

Awsome peace of work Alex.

The two sliders at the right side are they functional regarding zooming in horizontally and vertically?

@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Sep 30, 2018

The two sliders at the right side are they functional regarding zooming in horizontally and vertically?

Exactly. There is much more. I also added a context menu, scrolling with mouse drag and drop, zooming with the mouse wheel, keyboard navigation like the map, etc. The profile now has almost as much functionality as the map.
Currently working on #299 where I already added ILS and VASI display.
Alex

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 2, 2018

Fixed crashes for certain flight plan configurations in altitude calc…
…ulation.

Error detection is now more reliable if TOD or TOC cannot be calculated.
#298

albar965 added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 30, 2018

Fixed issues where profile path ended above ILS GS. Now checking alti…
…tude restrictions properly.

Descent path is now forced to lowest altitude restriction on FAF and FACF.
Added display of GS indicator for altitude restrictions. #298
@antoonh

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 8, 2018

When creating a flightplan in LNM 2.2.1-beta from EHAM, RWY27, SID GORL1P with 2.2.1-beta, the first waypoint is described by AIS-NL as follows: "Climb on course 267° MAG, at or above 500 ft AMSL turn right".

With the first SID waypoint being fixed in space near the far threshold of RWY27, LNM will generate a "cannot comply with altitude restrictions". It would be great to be able to suppress altitude compliance for waypoints like these.
image

@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Nov 8, 2018

This is an error. Have to check. Other similar altitude restriction have no problems.

@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Nov 8, 2018

Plenty thanks for the report. Fixed now.
Alex

@antoonh

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 18, 2018

on the presumption that you pushed this fix to the beta channel: my current LNM (2..2.1-beta) doesn't report a new update available :-)

@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Nov 18, 2018

Right. Because I'm preparing 2.2.2.rc1. :-)
Alex

@antoonh

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 28, 2018

Testing now with arriving at EGHI, STAR EAS1B arriving RWY 20. (I tested from EHGG, without a SID activated yet) It suggests it cannot comply with altitude restrictions.

@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Nov 28, 2018

You have to set cruise altitude at or above 16.000 ft because there is an "at" restriction in EAS1B.
Alex

@antoonh

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 28, 2018

Understood. Not sure where that came from. Meant for FL200. It would be helpful if the warning reported the actual waypoint in the plan that has the altitude restriction that can't be met. In this case OCK

@albar965

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

commented Nov 28, 2018

Yup. Makes sense. I noted this for future versions. Probably 2.2.X
Alex

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.