I believe this is a type option and in fact you will not see any Ejets or DHC fleet with ADS-B.
I will ask around and find out if there is any plans to add ADS-B to the fleet or whether there is any indication whether it would become mandatory in the future.
It seems there is a great debate going on regarding the future of PP: it is maintained by an individual and not a company and although these applications have their advantages (usually being cheaper) there is no guarantee they will continue to be supported and could simply disappear from one the to the other. That appears to be what is happening now.
At least with AirNav you have the guarantee of continuous development and a growing network. Innovation and work will stop at AirNav Systems.
You get a fix within 60 seconds, and then it plots with a moving map in real time
I believe its a one of charge of 12 Euros....
To me its not a choice of one over the other, as Planeplotter compliments Radarbox and works alongside it
It seems there is a great debate going on regarding the future of PP: it is maintained by an individual and not a company and although these applications have their advantages (usually being cheaper) there is no guarantee they will continue to be supported and could simply disappear from one the to the other. That appears to be what is happening now.
At least with AirNav you have the guarantee of continuous development and a growing network. Innovation and work will stop at AirNav Systems.
What is the accuracy of MLAT (NM) and how often is it updated?
What is the accuracy of MLAT (NM) and how often is it updated?
Tarbat, would it be true to say that the more contributors, the more accurate and more regular the plotting would be?
"As to what aircraft can you see before you buy it...well thats what the free trial will hopefully tell you. I get all sorts from light aircraft, to regional airlines (such as Flybe), many commercial jets which just aren't fitted with ADS-B (eg Embraer ) to military aircraft."
Hi Jon, But with the free trial you cannot subscribe to MLAT, because it asks you for your email and product code. i.e you have to first purchase PP for £25 Unless I am doing something wrong.
Despite 95% of the forum members being enthusiasts RadarBox is being used by many professional clients who can't afford to access data that "sometimes" can be unreliable and other times be correct. This explains why we haven't included MLAT on RadarBox now. Anyway RadarBox is well known for having everything inside its software: no need for external addons at all (the application is still 100% compatible with port 30003 output).
So it is obvious that MLAT will be included in the application too. Taking in account we have most of the time 5x to 10x more network users than PP it is easy to understand that the result of this implementation will be more accurate with our software.
DaveReid: sincerely we are totally tired // // you directly.
So there is no point in continuously playing the "database has problems" game with the objective of AirNav Systems paying you a fee to access the services you provide. As a company we are simply not interested in your paid solutions.
Hope this clarifies the information.
Airnav
Please can you add the ability to see what is missing in the database when the populate facility in MyLog is used?
I currently have 637 aircraft showing as requiring something to be updated but despite there being lots of server photo requests the number does not change on the next attempt, in fact it just gets bigger and bigger, it was well below 400 a couple of months ago.
I don't know how to improve this situation because I can't tell what is missing, a list of what the program considers in need of updating would be really useful.
Cheers!
AN is just interested to get something for free (for instance our data) and sell it then for a "reasonable" price....
What the computer feels needs updating is any blank field. Therefore if you list by all time and click on each column header, it will place those with blank values at the top. These are the ones you now need to manually updatein your database explorer.
Every ground station must be precisely located and validated on an individual basis.
Of course it could Chris ....so , who is going to ensure that each RB ground station within the RB Mlat network is using a GPS receiver plugged into their PC to ensure their location is correct.
And PP MLAT isn't always as great as is sometimes suggested. For me at least, around 90% of MLATs that I attempt in PP fail, despite having 3 Ground Stations around me.
But you know why that is.....simply because you are geographically out on a limb , PLUS , you are not supplying your own SBS1 raw data
But you know why that is.....simply because you are geographically out on a limb , PLUS , you are not supplying your own SBS1 raw data
2- Databases: what is the most used/common third-party aircraft registration information currently available (for spotters, etc)?
But you know why that is.....simply because you are geographically out on a limb , PLUS , you are not supplying your own SBS1 raw data
Geographically out on a limb? I was told that with 3 Ground Stations I would be able to use MLAT. As it is, I've managed to successfully MLAT less than 5 local aircraft since I paid for MLAT.
MLAT works for the select few in areas with a high number of SBS-1 enthusiasts (London, Manchester, etc.). For the rest of Radarbox users around the world, PP MLAT is useless in my opinion.
MLAT works for the select few in areas with a high number of SBS-1 enthusiasts (London, Manchester, etc.). For the rest of Radarbox users around the world, PP MLAT is useless in my opinion.
Well I suppose that if living in England means we are the select few , then fair enough ...all 50 million of us
Meanwhile for the "select few" ie the rest of the poplulation , Mlat is a huge success. if it wasn't , Air nav wouldnt be worrying about it , just to satisfy 5% of its users would it ?
Meanwhile for the "select few" ie the rest of the poplulation , Mlat is a huge success. if it wasn't , Air nav wouldnt be worrying about it , just to satisfy 5% of its users would it ?
What makes you think that AirNav are 'worrying' about MLAT?
If RB users could deliver raw data in the correct format , then they too could become PP MLat Ground Stations and Master users for free [ no annual 12 euro fee ]
Their own data would then be included in Mlat fixes providing increased accuracy and coverage.
Anyway let's move forward: we are not here for this kind of discussions, we are here to work and innovate like we've been doing for the last 2 years - and that's what will be doing with MLAT and other features - that will make our customers even more happy and stay with us.
MLAT is already on our to-do list.
we are here to work and innovate like we've been doing for the last 2 years - and that's what will be doing with MLAT and other features - that will make our customers even more happy and stay with us.
If RB users could deliver raw data in the correct format , then they too could become PP MLat Ground Stations and Master users for free [ no annual 12 euro fee ]
Their own data would then be included in Mlat fixes providing increased accuracy and coverage.
Think this is not going to happen, as far as i can tell airnav don't want to see a big piece of there income (sub for network)get lost.
Don't understand why there is so much quarrel between the 2 user groups (RB + SBS).
i alway tought that forums are intentional to help eachother, but i only see struggle and allegations.
For people like me who are not so technical and only join boards like these to learn more about the products and what we can expect from it, we got completely lost
in this war.
if i read on other forums how bad the RB is, i wonder why they all so eager to get the network option for free.
(must be something they missing with the other software).
If there is a topic started with a simple question it allways ended up with the same old story and always started by the same people
The CAA G-INFO database is going to be fairly accurate and I'm sure that the FAA has a similar database, but what about all the other licensing authorities around the world!
2- Databases: what is the most used/common third-party aircraft registration information currently available (for spotters, etc)?
"AirNav have already dismissed my suggestion of using the ICAO International Register, which covers official data from most of the world's registration authorities."
Please copy-paste our statement where we dismiss it.
Regarding MLAT: one more time expect the technical best solutions from us - we have always release what we promised.
Regarding MLAT: one more time expect the technical best solutions from us - we have always release what we promised.
It's got to be better than the PP-MLAT solution. This is all I ever seem to get from that solution:(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4010/4321199083_41840fa394_o.jpg)
4 stations receiving raw data from the aircraft, 168 raw data packets received and processed, and still it can't give a fix on the aircraft. Useless.
as i see it now with the pp-mlat, at this moment its just a cluster of enthusiastic hobbyists who have succeeded to get this to work and they desperate to get more users to provide data for this.
Not saying that pp-mlat wont work at all but not on this manner
Regarding MLAT: one more time expect the technical best solutions from us - we have always release what we promised.
It's got to be better than the PP-MLAT solution. This is all I ever seem to get from that solution:(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4010/4321199083_41840fa394_o.jpg)
4 stations receiving raw data from the aircraft, 168 raw data packets received and processed, and still it can't give a fix on the aircraft. Useless.
4 stations receiving raw data from the aircraft, 168 raw data packets received and processed, and still it can't give a fix on the aircraft. Useless.Location Location Location
But how many ground stations, and how many raw reports does PP-MLAT need to get a fix? I just don't understand why 168 raw reports aren't enough for PP-MLAT to even draw ONE hyper curve!!
Are you seriously expecting AirNav to provide you with a network of worldwide, 24/7, professional MLat ground stations ? If so, common sense will tell you to expect also a few more zeros to be added to the cost of your network subscription to finance that.
Do you think we will do MLAT the way PP does it? The answer is no. Expect no amateur solutions for professional problems from us.
Dave: SBS/Kinetic could never release Mapmode-s because of technical difficulties. AirNav did so and our network is a huge success. Do you think we will do MLAT the way PP does it? The answer is no. Expect no amateur solutions for professional problems from us.
Hi all.
I am enjoying my airnav receiver and the new software is great, i have no problems or complaints, so why do people persist in taking down airnav, i am getting spam email from the vultures site now about Mlat, but we all know about their the hidden agenda.
from pat
Hi satcomHi all.
I am enjoying my airnav receiver and the new software is great, i have no problems or complaints, so why do people persist in taking down airnav, i am getting spam email from the vultures site now about Mlat, but we all know about their the hidden agenda.
from pat
Hi Pat
I would dearly like to see a copy of that "spam" mail.....COAA will investigate immediately and inform the necessary authorities....so can I have a copy please to examine?
Many thanks
John
Just the opposite Pat...it exposed you for what you are :O)Hi satcom.
Thank you.
At the end of the day guys... it's nice to have a choice :)Hi. Tallyho
We now have a choice on what boxes to use (at least 3 now), what networks (various dependant on location) to use and what software to use (more popping up by the day).
We are a clever species and we usually find out what is best for us (which is not necessarily always best for the next person).
Personally I find space in my life for both RB (local) and PP (network and MLAT) and I am perfectly happy with that at this moment in time, will it change going forward, probably, who knows what the future brings unless someone brings out a peice of software called Crystal Ball v1.0 for seeing into the future, now that would be something to purchase !!!!
Keith
I agree with Runway 31 and Tallyho. All this thread seems to do is get people all revved up.
It would be nice to return to normality
I like coming on to the forum to learn how others do things and to learn how I can make greater use of the system. The constant bickering however is putting me off and like someone stated yesterday I can easily see why some can be put off posting due to the antagonism shown by some.
Airnav for me is a fantastic tool enabeling me to identify all those aircraft that once flew over the top of me unidentified. I had a choice to make before I purchased it and I think I made the right one for me, others made the choice that suited them and it may be for a rival product. If the developers can come up with something else to increase its use, making it more responsive to users needs, I for one would welcome it whether or not it suits my personal needs.
2- Let's focus on what matters: RadarBox, MLAT, external updates of our databases and other great features we want to implement on RadarBox;
3- Not allow the same users (DaveReid, etc) to constantly focus on the same old facts for their own interest;
4- Concentrate on what's coming at AirNav in the next weeks/months: starting with the release of RadarBox 3D which is about to be released;
3- Not allow the same users (DaveReid, etc) to constantly focus on the same old facts for their own interest;