Upcoming AIRAC Digest - 1701

[Harry Sugden]

Hi all,

I'd like to start opening up discussion to determine the necessary changes for each AIRAC release. Why?

1. To ensure we pick through every page of the (sometimes mammoth) amendment documents that are released
2. To enable discussion surrounding how particular 'issues' / changes should be approached, particularly for those who might not be completely confident with their 'solution' yet
3. To make it clearer as to why an updated sector file might not be necessary for a particular AIRAC cycle

So, kicking things off with 1701...

• Amendment Document - access from here - it's the 'AIRAC+28' document
• List of 1701 'issues' identified so far

Can you see anything that's contained in our sector file which is being changed? I've noticed 'EG R156', 'EG P106' and 'EG P047' are all set to be removed - is this something someone might wish to issue?

---

Note: This post might, unfortunately, end up looking a little silly and not get many replies, partly because this AIRAC cycle brings us very relevant few changes (for once!). However, it's important I facilitate this discussion to generate a new 'breed' of sector file contributors, so as to remove as much of the burden on the 'Operations Manager' role as possible. This will, in turn, allow me to focus on the 'development of the development' (i.e. making sure that we never get in a position where we rely on a single person / few people to create our controller resources).

[Luke Peters]

Part of the issue with point 1 is that it takes in depth knowledge of what is in the sector file currently in order to make sure that the relevant changes are issued and then implemented.

I think that we should be making all of the changes that actually affect the sector file as and when AIRAC amendments are made available. That is not to say that we need to release an updated sector file each time.

In this case we will have a bundle of changes to release (1613 as well as 1701) so it would be more beneficial to release this version than if we were to only remove 3 danger areas.

While we have a small number of changes to make for 1701, there are 48 issues outstanding which are for various enhancements/fixes/airac changes that still need to be implemented.

 

Obvious changes that we have to try to make on release of an AIRAC include STARs, SIDs, navaids and airway changes because we do have pilots out there running on the latest nav data (for those pilots, there is no point in routing them direct OLKER for example as it no longer exists for them as of 1613).

[Harry Sugden]

On 21/12/2016 at 00:12, Luke Peters said:

Part of the issue with point 1 is that it takes in depth knowledge of what is in the sector file currently in order to make sure that the relevant changes are issued and then implemented.

I think this is an important point, so...

• Action Point - I will begin to organise the production of a Wiki that details exactly what the sector file contains, and explains the formatting of every single file type.

On 21/12/2016 at 00:12, Luke Peters said:

I think that we should be making all of the changes that actually affect the sector file as and when AIRAC amendments are made available.

Agreed, that has always been the plan. Unfortunately, by relying on myself to issue up the AIRAC changes before, it wasn't working. As a result, my aim is for these posts to be used to organise the combing through of each amendment document.

• Action Point - I will catch-up with the past AIRAC cycles ASAP over the next week of holiday, so as to put us in a good position for a 1701 release!

[Luke Peters]

2 hours ago, Harry Sugden said:

• Action Point - I will begin to organise the production of a Wiki that details exactly what the sector file contains, and explains the formatting of every single file type.

I think this may be a step too far. The majority of the documentation from Euroscope itself covers what we need to here. It may be helpful to say file X contains Y, see <link Z> for details of how to write it though.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Luke Peters

[Harry Sugden]

5 hours ago, Luke Peters said:

I think this may be a step too far. The majority of the documentation from Euroscope itself covers what we need to here. It may be helpful to say file X contains Y, see <link Z> for details of how to write it though.

Of course, using what has been written is useful and time-saving, but there are a number of things not explained in detail on the Wiki, and we have a number of features (such as adjacent airports, mentoring ownership, SMR file formatting etc.) that just aren't documented on there.

[Luke Peters]

Yes, I agree some extra documentation will be helpful, but just suggesting we don't need to repeat what is already publically available.

[Anthony Lawrence]

17 hours ago, Harry Sugden said:

Of course, using what has been written is useful and time-saving, but there are a number of things not explained in detail on the Wiki, and we have a number of features (such as adjacent airports, mentoring ownership, SMR file formatting etc.) that just aren't documented on there.

Can I also suggest that anything we write is sent to Gergly to add to his wiki?

[Harry Sugden]

21 hours ago, Anthony Lawrence said:

Can I also suggest that anything we write is sent to Gergly to add to his wiki?

Definitely!

---

I've gone through AIRAC 1701 now, and there didn't seem to be too many changes. Any issues with the label 'airac' on this milestone were identified from the Amendment document: https://gitlab.com/vatsim-uk/UK-Sector-File/milestones/29