Proposal talk:Highway strip

"when the strip has been dedicated as an emergency landing strip" - what about military-only ones? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:11, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Good question, IMO they fall under this if they otherwise fit. As far as I know they're (often? usually?) shown in aviation maps as emergency landing strips, but in practice the military is the main user, so that's quite possibly the main scenario. --ZeiP (talk) 22:10, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I attempted to reword proposal to exclude possible suitable as emergency landing sites and include military-only ones not designated as emergency landing sites. Feel free to revert if that change was undesirable Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:15, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Yep, I changed it a bit, I think it's much clearer now – thanks! --ZeiP (talk) 10:09, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Criteria

Maybe mention how such object may be recognized? Some may be signed, there are probably also official registries of such objects Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:23, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Good point, I added some description to the tagging section. --ZeiP (talk) 10:09, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Good point, but valid for other aeroway=*, for instance airstrips/aerodromes: some are published by AIP (the registries Mateusz is speaking about), some are not. The last ones because they didn't pay some fees or for due to the quality of the equipment (surface...), because they're private and they don't care, etc... The last ones are important because small places have more accidents. And in case Search And Rescue (SAR) units are involved, they may want to see/use those strips. Currently we have no way to distinguish them. What about AIP_published=yes/no (yes = published by the official Aeronautical Information Services). Better naming?

Note: in Kenya 400 are published, 600 are operational and usually mapped in OSM... with no way to discriminate the 400 and the others --Nospam2005 (talk) 04:07, 17 July 2018 (UTC)