AirNav RadarBox
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
 


Author Topic: Smooth moving network traffic  (Read 3471 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Terre

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
Smooth moving network traffic
« on: June 11, 2009, 02:31:27 PM »
Hi,

I do like the network feature of the Radarbox a lot.

Only thing that annoys me at times is the rather static hoping of the icons each time the network data gets updated. Wouldn't it be more pleasing if network traffic was smooth moving? The plotted icons would then move continously according to the last data given (acc. to speed & direction) and would get "corrected" when new data is read from the network. Same as the guys from the Zurich Live Radarwebsite (http://radar.zhaw.ch/) have done it - with extra- and interpolating the data to draw the flightpath.

I think this would make a nice feature for a future release. What do you guys think of it?

regards - Terre

AirNav Support

  • AirNav Systems
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4127
Re: Smooth moving network traffic
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2009, 02:55:54 PM »
Hi Terre,

This has been passed around but we would be concerned about two items.

1.) The 30 second download means an aircraft could easily be in totally the wrong place (approach, takeoff) if using the last data and then moving back with the next update wouldn't look good.

2.) This would be more proccessor intensive.

We may in the future decrease the download time to 15 seconds and have an option of allowing simulated network data.
Contact Customer/Technical support via:
http://www.airnavsystems.com/contact.html
[email protected]

tarbat

  • ShipTrax Beta Testers
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4219
    • Radarbox at Easter Ross
Re: Smooth moving network traffic
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2009, 03:11:20 PM »
This is something I've requested a couple of times.  I love the way Planeplotter simulates smooth movement of networked aircraft.  It takes the reported position, track, and speed and predicts where the aircraft would be NOW.  It can even cope with 5-minute delayed network aircraft, and does a pretty good job of predicting where that aircraft would be now.

Obviously you need to be able to turn off prediction once an aircraft gets below a certain altitude, to exclude aircraft on approach to airports, etc.   In Planeplotter, I find with a minimum altitude of 10,000ft, most predicted positions are very accurate.  Most aircraft above FL100 fly straight at a fixed speed.

Previous request at http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=466.msg3394#msg3394
« Last Edit: June 11, 2009, 03:16:15 PM by tarbat »

jgrloit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
Re: Smooth moving network traffic
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2009, 03:38:29 PM »
Hi Tarbet,
What about hold areas - oh yes Inverness doesn't have one does it!!!!
Those could cause problems.
Based in Hexham - Tyne Valley 
Best view for RB is North of a line between EGNT and EGNC  - includes OTA and Spade, to EGPH above 7500ft.   Can be TRUE mobile with Mobile Broadband feed to Network.

Terre

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
Re: Smooth moving network traffic
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2009, 03:39:46 PM »
Thanks AirNav for that fast reply and good to hear that you've noted it.
 
In my opinion a 15 seconds interval wouldn't really improve things much - it would not give the "flow" as I prefer it. However the Planeplotter approach as tarbat suggested seem feasible. A simple simulation of movement could to the trick - no need for any vast calculation that create proccessor load.

AirNav Development

  • AirNav Systems
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
    • AirNav Systems
Re: Smooth moving network traffic
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2009, 03:41:46 PM »
The problem is that any kind of simulation is against total accuracy of the system...

tarbat

  • ShipTrax Beta Testers
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4219
    • Radarbox at Easter Ross
Re: Smooth moving network traffic
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2009, 03:52:35 PM »
The problem is that any kind of simulation is against total accuracy of the system...

Which is why it would have to be a user option to turn prediction ON or OFF.