I wanted to check my work to make sure my assumptions are correct. The math was correct, but the reason was not, because after all that, I failed to consider one other possibility that wasn’t evident in the picture: and I just confirmed it - the TDZE is 1253 in the sim, which is 72’ higher than the published TDZE of 1181.
However, at .6 DME, the terrain is at 1173’. The reason for this is that approach end of runway 25 is on a plateau in the sim that doesn’t exist in the real world, it should be a much more gentle rise of only about 19’ over that distance (versus 72’)- starting at 1162’ MSL, ending at 1181’ MSL. In fact, the entire runway itself is only sloped .05° in the sim, but it slopes up to the west at .5° in real life, so almost an order of magnitude off. The picture you posted hides the sloped approach end from that angle, but you can clearly see it here:
The result is that the RA on short final is all messed up - much higher than it should be for the given barometric altitude. You were actually only at a height of 178 above TDZ, which would put you in the 1-white/3-red zone.
However, that still doesn’t account for the GS/PAPI disagreement. You should have been close to glidepath, unless the GS transmitter height in the sim is located at or underground, which is very possible given the artificial plateau.
Either way, BIG oops for whoever did the scenery. Definitely a discrepancy, but in this case, not the specific discrepancy that the thread is about. I’d almost report this as a scenery bug if I were you.