Just to add, here are the major issues we are aware of:
- Database must be able to handle updates of data so data is not stale.
- Allow users data not to be overwritten by data on our server
- Pictures, use most recent addition rather than most popular
- Corruption bug causing details to incorrectly have "..."
Our comments:
>I would change third ones to read, - photos only to be derived from NAVDATA link fields as provided by updaters or return photo not available field. No independent search of ANet for 'most' anything by individual user. (I will PM you seperately with how this should be working within the updater DB.)
Ok. Right now the server returns the two newest airliners.net photos for each aircraft. It saves the links on the main server database which is then passed to the client application. What's wrong with this?
Our comments:
>I would change the fourth one to 'When hex not in NAVDATA, Corruption bug that does not pull ICAO data from database and instead guesses ICAO code, sometimes right, mostly wrong, sometimes blank or ...'
Corrected. ICAO aircraft code returned directly from server and no more "guesses".
Our comments:
>-Corruption bug messes display of all diacritical marks à & ū ö etc
Send two examples so we can investigate further.
Our comments:
-No 3D models or skins for hundreds of ADS-B aircraft. 3D models also set up against corrupted ICAO codes like A380 instead of A388.
We need a full list with these errors. It's a matter of changing the sub-folder names inside the GE_Models folder.
- No Silhouettes for over 600 aircraft types
Where is the Silhouette team? We can add extra silhouettes for V4.04.
-
Time for bed - Can someone post a screenshot of a TACTICAL or VARIOUS to illustrate the Airnav quote
- Corruption to Info displayed next to photo. Reaches into Navdata for Regn rather than Hex
Explain in detail.
-No 3D models or skins for hundreds of ADS-B aircraft. 3D models also set up against corrupted ICAO codes like A380 instead of A388.
We need a full list with these errors. It's a matter of changing the sub-folder names inside the GE_Models folder.
SELECT DISTINCT
Aircraft.AircraftTypeSmall,
COUNT(Aircraft.ModeS) AS Counter
FROM
Aircraft
LEFT OUTER JOIN GE_Models ON (Aircraft.AircraftTypeSmall=GE_Models."AT")
WHERE
(GE_Models."AT" IS NULL) AND
(Aircraft.ADSB = "Y")
GROUP BY
Aircraft.AircraftTypeSmall
ORDER BY
Counter DESC
Just a heads-up for the next version, but 42 aircraft in this new database still have invalid ICAO Type codes (field AT), and there are around 611 aircraft types without silhouettes available.
Any volunteers to develop the missing silhouettes? ACW367/Tarbat: are you able to help us with this task?
Regarding missing models: documentation is available for such development so, just like FS users do, why not developing such models too? It would bring a lot more value to the community.
Any volunteers to develop the missing silhouettes? ACW367/Tarbat: are you able to help us with this task?
Regarding missing models: documentation is available for such development so, just like FS users do, why not developing such models too? It would bring a lot more value to the community.
One of the reasons I chose RadarBox was the fact that the user could simply load the cd and not have to go trawling off to find other add ons - this being a highly attractive marketing point at the time.
OT: SQL Error: near "(": syntax error
Created using this SQL:SELECT DISTINCT
Aircraft.AircraftTypeSmall,
COUNT(Aircraft.ModeS) AS Counter
FROM
Aircraft
LEFT OUTER JOIN GE_Models ON (Aircraft.AircraftTypeSmall=GE_Models."AT")
WHERE
(GE_Models."AT" IS NULL) AND
(Aircraft.ADSB = "Y")
GROUP BY
Aircraft.AircraftTypeSmall
ORDER BY
Counter DESC
Any volunteers to develop the missing silhouettes? ACW367/Tarbat: are you able to help us with this task?
When you mention 1270 silhouettes on Ian K's site, I take it this figure included the 100's of ones not yet available?
I dont see anything wrong with users themselves going to the site as has been done for years and getting them ourselves and re-sizing., do we really need a nanny state to do everything for us?
Point people in the right direction and let them have a go themselves.
When you mention 1270 silhouettes on Ian K's site, I take it this figure included the 100's of ones not yet available?
No. In the download that IanK provides (http://www.gamefront.com/files/17918616/SBS_1_85x20_size_Aircraft_Silhouettes_zip), there are 1339 silhouettes. 70 of these are copies with "Airbus", "Boeing", "Antonov" on them, leaving 1269 actual unique silhouettes. Alright, some of these are for ground vehicles, etc.I dont see anything wrong with users themselves going to the site as has been done for years and getting them ourselves and re-sizing., do we really need a nanny state to do everything for us?
Unfortunately I think we do, since end-users complain about missing silhouettes when all they have to do is download IanK's silhouettes, resize them to 68x16, and save them all in the data/silhouettes folder.
After all, it was IanK that provided the Radabox silhouettes in the first place.
To advocate resizing them breaks his IPR and leaves any found doing so, up for legal action from Ian K - if he should so chose.
ACW367,
Regarding the advertising, if you felt that way you could have easily contacted us via other means and made this known and this would have been changed. The work of the updaters has been mentioned many times on the forum by us and praised highly.