NPWS landing sites task

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

NPWS landing sites task

Graeme Fitzpatrick
Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.

I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that says there is a landing site at "this" spot.

So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a landing site?

Node or area?

Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an open paddock.

& it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any way - does that matter?

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NPWS landing sites task

Andrew Harvey-3
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.

I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that says there is a landing site at "this" spot.

Yes that's right. 
 
So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a landing site?

This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site, either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just mapping any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only those which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
 

Node or area?

Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you can see I'd just go with a node.
 

Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an open paddock.

& it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any way - does that matter?

That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps and apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify getting it into maps and apps.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NPWS landing sites task

Sebastian Spiess
I use a node for most.
Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a marked helipad then I use an area.

On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.

I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that says there is a landing site at "this" spot.

Yes that's right. 
 
So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a landing site?

This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site, either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just mapping any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only those which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
 

Node or area?

Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you can see I'd just go with a node.
 

Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an open paddock.

& it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any way - does that matter?

That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps and apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify getting it into maps and apps.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NPWS landing sites task

Graeme Fitzpatrick

Thanks fellas!

Back to it, then :-)

Graeme


On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 22:08, Sebastian S. <[hidden email]> wrote:
I use a node for most.
Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a marked helipad then I use an area.

On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.

I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that says there is a landing site at "this" spot.

Yes that's right. 
 
So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a landing site?

This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site, either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just mapping any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only those which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
 

Node or area?

Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you can see I'd just go with a node.
 

Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an open paddock.

& it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any way - does that matter?

That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps and apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify getting it into maps and apps.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NPWS landing sites task

Graeme Fitzpatrick
& done!

Thanks

Graeme


On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 10:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks fellas!

Back to it, then :-)

Graeme


On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 22:08, Sebastian S. <[hidden email]> wrote:
I use a node for most.
Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a marked helipad then I use an area.

On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.

I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that says there is a landing site at "this" spot.

Yes that's right. 
 
So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a landing site?

This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site, either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just mapping any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only those which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
 

Node or area?

Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you can see I'd just go with a node.
 

Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an open paddock.

& it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any way - does that matter?

That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps and apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify getting it into maps and apps.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NPWS landing sites task

Australia mailing list
That was quick, good on ya!

On 12 January 2020 2:49:55 pm AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
& done!

Thanks

Graeme


On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 10:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks fellas!

Back to it, then :-)

Graeme


On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 22:08, Sebastian S. <[hidden email]> wrote:
I use a node for most.
Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a marked helipad then I use an area.

On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.

I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that says there is a landing site at "this" spot.

Yes that's right. 
 
So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a landing site?

This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site, either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just mapping any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only those which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
 

Node or area?

Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you can see I'd just go with a node.
 

Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an open paddock.

& it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any way - does that matter?

That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps and apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify getting it into maps and apps.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NPWS landing sites task

Graeme Fitzpatrick
Nice to think that it may actually make a difference one day :-)

Just thinking though - that was only a list of NSW NPWS pads, wasn't it? Would there be more listed by Fire & Rescue / SES / Police perhaps?

Would also be a good exercise to go through with the other States!

If we contacted them asking about "emergency landing sites" only & offering to map them, would we need to go through the full waiver procedure? 

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 09:14, Sebastian S. <[hidden email]> wrote:
That was quick, good on ya!

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au