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

Login with username, password and session length
 


Author Topic: G-OZBO A321  (Read 5118 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jasper37

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 93
G-OZBO A321
« on: November 08, 2009, 10:49:46 PM »
Anybody any ideas why this never appears on the Radar box
all the other Monarch A321 seem to appear regular

many thx for comments

rgds

jasper

Fenris

  • Guest
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2009, 11:05:23 PM »
Anybody any ideas why this never appears on the Radar box
all the other Monarch A321 seem to appear regular

Do you mean that its position is never plotted?

I frequently see G-BUSI in My Flights, but it never provides a position either. I think (from memory) that it's a BA A320, I thought they all have ADS-B fitted.

Marpleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 738
  • Proper aeroplanes!
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2009, 11:19:56 PM »
None of the earlier BA320's are ADS-B equiped. The G-BUS* machines have been in service donkey's years.

Don't know about the Monarch machine though

Rich

John Hargreaves

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2009, 12:01:21 AM »
Last had G-OZBO in 'My Log' on Nov 3rd out of MAN. This may sound a silly question but have you got G-OZBO as hexcode 400832 in your database? This frame was previously G-MIDM with the same hexcode, and if you haven't altered it manually then this could be the reason.

John H.

Fenris

  • Guest
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2009, 12:21:29 AM »
None of the earlier BA320's are ADS-B equiped. The G-BUS* machines have been in service donkey's years.

Interesting. I saw an Air France 320 this evening, it had a very early construction number but it was sending ADS-B just fine. I wonder if BA simply ordered them without the requisite kit or perhaps AF decided to update theirs at some point.

DaveReid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
    • Heathrow last 100 ADS-B arrivals
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2009, 08:00:49 AM »
Anybody any ideas why this never appears on the Radar box
all the other Monarch A321 seem to appear regular

If it helps, it was on my box 20 minutes ago, departing Gatwick for Faro as MON214..

As previously advised, hex code is 400832, which wouldn't have changed on re-registration from G-MIDM, since the UK sticks to ICAO rules on 24-bit addresses.
This post has been scanned for any traces of negativity, bias, sarcasm and general anti-social behaviour

jasper37

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2009, 08:55:09 AM »
Ok......many thx for all the comments
next question how do i change this and how can i check for any other poss errors
ie..hex code is 400832  was showing G-MIDM

thx again
jasper

NickJackson

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2009, 11:05:06 AM »
Maybe I'm not understanding something here, but doesn't AirNav have the link to the GAS database?  Therefore, as GAS quotes G-OZBO for code 400832, shouldn't this populate correctly into Radarbox?

I have a long list of codes that never seem to convert into registrations at all. (e.g. Iberis 34260F, SAS 4A91D8, Aerosvit 5081C7 etc.) Most of these are quite old and show up in GAS. It's almost as if AirNav has a "mental block" over a small selection of codes!

Any theories?

Nick

DaveReid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
    • Heathrow last 100 ADS-B arrivals
Re: G-OZBO A321
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2009, 11:49:38 AM »
Maybe I'm not understanding something here, but doesn't AirNav have the link to the GAS database?  Therefore, as GAS quotes G-OZBO for code 400832, shouldn't this populate correctly into Radarbox?

I have a long list of codes that never seem to convert into registrations at all. (e.g. Iberis 34260F, SAS 4A91D8, Aerosvit 5081C7 etc.) Most of these are quite old and show up in GAS. It's almost as if AirNav has a "mental block" over a small selection of codes!

It's a known issue, and it's in hand - watch this space ...
This post has been scanned for any traces of negativity, bias, sarcasm and general anti-social behaviour