AirNav Systems Forum
AirNav RadarBox and RadarBox24.com => AirNav RadarBox and RadarBox24.com Discussion => Topic started by: Southwest on April 13, 2010, 07:56:59 PM
-
Have just had a chat with Dave Reid (thanks for your time it was much appreciated) and one of the things that came about as a result was the alarming difference in the number of network flights we were both receiving.
At 20.47hrs I was showing 1033 and he was showing 1316. Now, as I undertsand it, it wouldn't matter if I was in Bedfordshire or Timbuktoo, surely everyone should get roughly the same amount of network flights? I can appreciate that it wouldn't be to the exact amount but the differences between myself and Dave is substantial.
Would someone from AirNav Support please advise?
-
No thats not worrying. As there could be a couple of reasons why:
1.) One of you has delayed flights and the other has real time network
2.) Depends on how many aircraft you are getting locally
3.) Depends exactly when you both downloaded from the network
4.) Your network timeout settings would affect whats being display or not being
-
Were your timeout times the same??
J.
-
Were your timeout times the same??
Yes, we ensured that that was the case. We are both on the delayed network, too.
-
1. I certainly have delayed but in all my time with the Radarbox have never acheived that high a number in network flights ....ever!
2. We were both getting around the 30 plus mark, certainly not a difference of 300.
3. I'm being thick, don't understand the question.
4. Dave adjusted his times to meet mine and the discrepancy was still as large.
-
Currently showing 24 My Flights and 978 nework.
If it's a question of settings would someone like to offer a best settings guide? I'm prepared to try anything once.
-
1.) Not sure what you mean by that, you just mentioned you have 1000 network flights. That is a high number.
2.) Was this both ADS-B and Mode-S?
3) The network flights change every second that passes as certain flights timeout on the server as they leave range or someone stop running there software. Hence you can easily see 100+ change in flights from one second to another. We can view the network stat live here and they change rapidly at times within a few seconds.
4) Understood
-
1.) Not sure what you mean by that, you just mentioned you have 1000 network flights. That is a high number.
The amount dropped. It's not as high as 1316 though and I'm really shocked you offer that up as an acceptable answer. Look at it like this, you pay for a Jaguar and end up with a Ford, it's still a nice car though....nah, didn't think so.
I'd like to know whether it's technically possible to achieve higher numbers
-
I went from 800 to 941 network flights in just over a minute. Now at 896, had over 1300 at one stage today. So it is possible to achieve a high number, whatever number is high as it is all relative.
-
I went from 800 to 941 network flights in just over a minute. Now at 896, had over 1300 at one stage today. So it is possible to achieve a high number, whatever number is high as it is all relative.
When I called Dave he hadn't even switched his box on, mine had been on for nearly an hour. Straight away he got to the 1300 number whilst I was languishing down in the low 1000's and into the 900's
-
I have been seeing around the 8/900 mark since around 1900, at 864 just now. Havnt seen 1300 since around late afternoon but hen again I dont get any more than 30 in my flights.
-
Disconnect your aerial and just monitor network. I bet it goes up!
J.
-
What's in a number?
If I can watch a flight all the way across Europe, then I'm pretty sure that I've got good Network Coverage :-)
-
Southwest,
If two RadarBoxes download the network data the same time they will exactly the same network flights downloaded. Then it goes through processing:
1.) Flights your picking up locally through ADS-B or Mode-S (which are ADS-B on the network) are taken away.
2.) Your local network timeout settings are also applied
In your experiment the download times are not synced so a difference of 200 can easily be reached. Add the flights your picking up and he isn't you can make up that number.
Its not actually about the number. Someone with a very good system in Germany for instance could be picking up 200 ADS-B flights and another 200 Mode-S flights. He would have less on the network than someone who is based in the Artic but if you checked all the flights from network and local they would be the same (if timeout etc all matched and times when they downloaded)
You don't have anything to be concerned about :)
-
3) The network flights change every second that passes as certain flights timeout on the server as they leave range or someone stop running there software. Hence you can easily see 100+ change in flights from one second to another. We can view the network stat live here and they change rapidly at times within a few seconds.
As I understand it, all other things being equal (timeouts, live or delayed network, etc) then every network user should see their network flights total fluctuating around roughly the same average value, particularly when compared over a longish period to eliminate short-term time phase differences. Only if user A is picking up significantly more (or fewer) local flights than user B should their network totals diverge by a corresponding amount over a period.
Incidentally, I may not be able to participate in this (or indeed any other) thread for much longer as I've had a helpful PM from AirNav Development in the last half hour telling me I'll be banned if I post any more database update information ...
Still, I'll have made somebody's day for them :-)
-
I have run two radarboxes side by side connected to separate PC's but the same cable network and the number of networks flights has not been that different. There is a small difference but I think that would be down to download sychronisation.
-
Incidentally, I may not be able to participate in this (or indeed any other) thread for much longer as I've had a helpful PM from AirNav Development in the last half hour telling me I'll be banned if I post any more database update information ...
Still, I'll have made somebody's day for them :-)
Sincerely hope it doesn't come to this Dave
I've found your info most helpful over the past months,and whilst not always agreeing with your opinion on some issues (but then what's a debate without different mind sets?), have enjoyed your humour and insight to many of the topics raised on here
I think we all need to chill a little, or we're in danger of loosing a lot of moderation and indeed variation on here
Regards
Rich
-
3) The network flights change every second that passes as certain flights timeout on the server as they leave range or someone stop running there software. Hence you can easily see 100+ change in flights from one second to another. We can view the network stat live here and they change rapidly at times within a few seconds.
As I understand it, all other things being equal (timeouts, live or delayed network, etc) then every network user should see their network flights total fluctuating around roughly the same average value, particularly when compared over a longish period to eliminate short-term time phase differences. Only if user A is picking up significantly more (or fewer) local flights than user B should their network totals diverge by a corresponding amount over a period.
Incidentally, I may not be able to participate in this (or indeed any other) thread for much longer as I've had a helpful PM from AirNav Development in the last half hour telling me I'll be banned if I post any more database update information ...
Still, I'll have made somebody's day for them :-)
No one will ban you from our forum if you strictly follow its rules (you are interested in a contract with AirNav Systems to supply us with aircraft data and we don't want you - or anyone - to use our forum with commercial intentions).
We've already sent you several PMs regarding this and from time to time you seem to ignore them.
If you follow these rules you will never be banned.
-
Sincerely hope it doesn't come to this Dave
I've found your info most helpful over the past months,and whilst not always agreeing with your opinion on some issues (but then what's a debate without different mind sets?), have enjoyed your humour and insight to many of the topics raised on here
I think we all need to chill a little, or we're in danger of loosing a lot of moderation and indeed variation on here
Regards
Rich
I agree with Rich - Dave has been giving us some good information with his database updates. I may have had my differences with Dave, over the couple of years being a SBS and now Radarbox user, but he has been giving the forum a good service and help people where the database has let us down.
to use our forum with commercial intentions).
AirNav-You could be right, but he has been helping all of us with the information he has been giving
Andy
-
If it's a question of settings would someone like to offer a best settings guide? I'm prepared to try anything once.
As Dave has eluded to in reply 14, the difference between my network numbers and his shouldn't be as big as it is. We both had roughly the same My Flights on our screens.
If anyone in the UK, who regularly achieves 1300 plus in the Network flights, would like to let me know their Radarbox settings I would be grateful. Like I say, I'll try anything once.
-
No one will ban you from our forum if you strictly follow its rules (you are interested in a contract with AirNav Systems to supply us with aircraft data and we don't want you - or anyone - to use our forum with commercial intentions).
We've already sent you several PMs regarding this and from time to time you seem to ignore them.
If you follow these rules you will never be banned.
Now you're being economical with the truth.
Sure, I don't deny I have access to a resource that could fix all your database problems overnight, but that's a different issue.
Your PM threatening to ban me refers specifically to this thread: www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=4285.105 [Database update info] which consists of purely informational posts in which I (and a number of other users) provide data that sharers can apply to their own NavData databases to help ensure that the aircraft being shown on the screen are the ones they are actually picking up.
Not a commercial or banner in sight, just plain data - I'll leave readers to draw their own conclusion about why you are so anxious to suppress this kind of information.
Anyway, returning to the topic of this thread, I'm happy (while I'm still here!) to assist anyone who wants to do a bit more diagnosis on the network counts issue. Following last night's experiment, I've developed the following methodology whereby two or more network users can compare results:
i) turn OFF both local and network flights
ii) all users set the same timeouts for network flights
iii) wait 15 minutes to ensure that locally-buffered data is purged
iv) turn ON network flights (but NOT MyFlights)
v) wait 15 minutes to allow the number of Network Flights to stabilise
vi) leave RadarBox running for a further 10 minutes, noting the Network Flights total every 15 seconds
vii) calculate the average number of Network Flights from (vi)
Obviously the above steps should be caried out simultaneously by all participating users, and ought to iron out any local, short-term discrepancies in the totals. Needless to say, it's only valid if everyone is on either the live or the delayed network - if there's a mix, then the comparison won't be valid.
-
Hi Dave
Started a bit of a can of worms here, didn't I?
I'd like to try out your method, just let me know if you are free tonight and I'll give you a call and see what happens. If you are up for this, please remind me what your timeouts are?
All the best
Tony
-
Actually, this has all been discussed before about a year ago. There is a layer where a/c disappear between being seen on the network and direct. That 'layer' is different for each individual depending on the height and visibility of their aerial. There is bound to be clash of data at some point as one system takes over from the other.
J.
-
Actually, this has all been discussed before about a year ago. There is a layer where a/c disappear between being seen on the network and direct. That 'layer' is different for each individual depending on the height and visibility of their aerial. There is bound to be clash of data at some point as one system takes over from the other.
J.
I would have thought the network flights came via software and not the aerial which is why I can't understand the huge differences.
-
Actually, this has all been discussed before about a year ago. There is a layer where a/c disappear between being seen on the network and direct. That 'layer' is different for each individual depending on the height and visibility of their aerial. There is bound to be clash of data at some point as one system takes over from the other.
You are perfectly correct - that's why the experiment only makes sense if you have local/hardware flights switched off, so that everything on your screen is coming from the network.
-
I'd like to try out your method, just let me know if you are free tonight and I'll give you a call and see what happens. If you are up for this, please remind me what your timeouts are?
Sorry, I'm not around the next few evenings, but I was planning a trial this afternoon (purely totals) and anyone else who wants to participate is more than welcome.
The plan is:
1545BST/1445UTC turn off hardware flights, turn on network flights
1600BST/1500UTC note the number of network flights, and again at 15-second intervals for the next 5 minutes (i.e. 21 readings in total)
I'll happily collate and publish the results from my own box and (anonymously) from anyone else who cares to participate (PM me the counts).
Please specify if you're on the live or delayed network, and set your network timeouts to 30/30 seconds to ensure an apples-for-apples comparison.
-
You are perfectly correct - that's why the experiment only makes sense if you have local/hardware flights switched off, so that everything on your screen is coming from the network.
Unticking "Process Hardware Flights" doesn't necessarily stop Radarbox processing hardware flights, it just stops them being displayed in the MyFlights tab. They may still interact with aircraft received on the network.
When testing the network aircraft process, it's much better to unplug the antenna to prevent reception of any hardware aircraft.
-
I'd like to try out your method, just let me know if you are free tonight and I'll give you a call and see what happens. If you are up for this, please remind me what your timeouts are?
Sorry, I'm not around the next few evenings, but I was planning a trial this afternoon (purely totals) and anyone else who wants to participate is more than welcome.
The plan is:
1545BST/1445UTC turn off hardware flights, turn on network flights
1600BST/1500UTC note the number of network flights, and again at 15-second intervals for the next 5 minutes (i.e. 21 readings in total)
I'll happily collate and publish the results from my own box and (anonymously) from anyone else who cares to participate (PM me the counts).
Please specify if you're on the live or delayed network, and set your network timeouts to 30/30 seconds to ensure an apples-for-apples comparison.
Never mind, I hope a few 'boxers' take up the challenge. I await the results with great interest.
-
Unticking "Process Hardware Flights" doesn't necessarily stop Radarbox processing hardware flights, it just stops them being displayed in the MyFlights tab. They may still interact with aircraft received on the network.
When testing the network aircraft process, it's much better to unplug the antenna to prevent reception of any hardware aircraft.
Point taken - thanks for the tip.
-
Sorry, I'm not around the next few evenings, but I was planning a trial this afternoon (purely totals) and anyone else who wants to participate is more than welcome.
The plan is:
1545BST/1445UTC turn off hardware flights, turn on network flights
1600BST/1500UTC note the number of network flights, and again at 15-second intervals for the next 5 minutes (i.e. 21 readings in total)
I'll happily collate and publish the results from my own box and (anonymously) from anyone else who cares to participate (PM me the counts).
Please specify if you're on the live or delayed network, and set your network timeouts to 30/30 seconds to ensure an apples-for-apples comparison.
Well as many will have observed, the network was down at the time I'd earmarked for the experiment, so it didn't happen. Depending on my movements tomorrow and/or Friday, I'll try to schedule a substitute session.
Interestingly, my network count has just plummeted from 1010 to 503 in the space of a second !
-
Sorry, I'm not around the next few evenings, but I was planning a trial this afternoon (purely totals) and anyone else who wants to participate is more than welcome.
Well as many will have observed, the network was down at the time I'd earmarked for the experiment, so it didn't happen. Depending on my movements tomorrow and/or Friday, I'll try to schedule a substitute session.
Good job I'm not a consipatory theorist otherwise I might have suspected that the downtime of the network was planned to coincide with the experiment ha ha ha
-
Good job I'm not a consipatory theorist otherwise I might have suspected that the downtime of the network was planned to coincide with the experiment ha ha ha
Now, now !
Anyway, in view of today's disruption to UK flights I think a raincheck until next week is called for.
-
I couldn't resist but you are probably right about leaving it until next week..
Have a good weekend.
-
Network flights currently running at around the 900 mark (timeouts 30/30), compared to around 1300 at this time yesterday which I guess is consistent with a sizeable proportion of network coverage being UK airspace where nothing IFR is flying at the moment.
Lots of missing registrations, types and silhouettes, presumably connected with the server problems reported in another thread.
The latest news would suggest that the airspace closure is likely to last at least 24 hours, i.e. until midday UTC tomorrow, if not later.
-
You are lucky Dave, at the moment I am getting 667 flights on the network as the same 30/30 settings.
Glad I am not scheduled to be flying over the weekend!!
-
You are lucky Dave, at the moment I am getting 667 flights on the network as the same 30/30 settings.
I guess I get favoured treatment from AirNav :-)