Improved Routing Information

[tarbat]

OMG, AirNav have actually adopted one of my suggestions :-)

In fact the idea goes back to a suggestions email to Andre back in July 2008 ;)

Good to see it working at last, now if only we could find an effective solution for non-ADS/B aircraft routes (eg Loganair) - I guess that might need MLAT as a prerequisite.

[DaveReid]

In fact the idea goes back to a suggestions email to Andre back in July 2008 ;)

Just goes to show there's nothing new under the sun ...

Come to that, I've been using the same technique on my EGLL website for the last four and a half years to pick out inbounds and outbounds.

Good to see it working at last, now if only we could find an effective solution for non-ADS/B aircraft routes (eg Loganair) - I guess that might need MLAT as a prerequisite.

Must be due any time now :-)

[bratters]

Good to see it working at last, now if only we could find an effective solution for non-ADS/B aircraft routes (eg Loganair) - I guess that might need MLAT as a prerequisite.

Must be due any time now :-)

Well, I dunno about "any time now" but whenever it comes, if it works, it will be well worth the wait.

[orkney]

 effective solution for non-ADS/B aircraft routes (eg Loganair) - I guess that might need MLAT as a prerequisite.

hello

I wouldn't imagine MLAT would be of much use for Loganair Routes.  I would doubt if there will ever be  the required number of receivers in close proximity to Kirkwall, Sumburgh , etc for MLAT to work.

Andrew

[tarbat]

Still getting quite a lot of ADS/B aircraft with no route data.  For example, currently got EZY14PW (Aberdeen to Luton) with no route displayed.

To clarify, will the aircraft have to be detected ON THE GROUND at Aberdeen and Luton to create a route record, or just in the near vicinity at a low altitude?

[tarbat]

I wouldn't imagine MLAT would be of much use for Loganair Routes.  I would doubt if there will ever be  the required number of receivers in close proximity to Kirkwall, Sumburgh , etc for MLAT to work.

Going off-topic a bit, but you might be suprised.  PP users up here can now MLAT some Loganair aircraft quite well.  Still only a handfull, but with just 3-4 users in the far north, we would be able to MLAT quite well in Radarbox.

[Runway 31]

I would imagine that the updating will be after the event and will take a affect after the first flight received using a particular callsign.  Will therefore take at least a day until the next flight with that callsign before we notice a lot of difference

[DaveReid]

To clarify, will the aircraft have to be detected ON THE GROUND at Aberdeen and Luton to create a route record, or just in the near vicinity at a low altitude?

I would assume (yes, I know assumptions are dangerous) that the algorithm attempts to identify that an aircraft is on approach based on position, altitude, track and rate of descent, and similarly for one on climbout.

[bratters]

I would assume (yes, I know assumptions are dangerous) that the algorithm attempts to identify that an aircraft is on approach based on position, altitude, track and rate of descent, and similarly for one on climbout.

Accepting that assumptions are dangerous, I would suggest that anything based on less than "ground to ground" could lead to an erroneous routing.

This begs the question of how can these new routings can be checked. Presumably this will be by the community themselves spotting that the route to Linate turned out to be Malpensa.

[DaveReid]

Accepting that assumptions are dangerous, I would suggest that anything based on less than "ground to ground" could lead to an erroneous routing.

I disagree. 

If properly implemented, such a schema should be extremely reliable.  Feel free to visit www.civilaircraftregisters.org/Mode_S_Resources/LogReport/EGLLADSBsearch.asp and let me know if any of the 1.25 million Heathrow movements listed have been erroneously flagged as such.  I certainly can't see aircraft on the ground at LHR from here in Reading.

This begs the question of how can these new routings can be checked. Presumably this will be by the community themselves spotting that the route to Linate turned out to be Malpensa.

I would assume (that word again!) that in the same way that new routes can be identified, so the routing for flights already in the database can be validated each time the same callsign is subsequently picked up on approach or climbout.

Perhaps, now that the system is fully operational, AirNav could explain a bit more about how it works to reassure our readers.

[bratters]

I stand corrected.

A more detailed explanation would be most interesting and if the new system proves to be the definitive answer to the routing problem, then well done all concerned.

 

[EK01]

if you want to force a re-population simply delete flights from the client table and the software will get them again from the server

Forgive my ignorance - but am I correct in understanding that I use database explorer, select "routes" from the drop down menu and then individually delete each of the records in order to force a re-population ?

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Hi Eggplant - I tried the following early this morning:

Stop processing hardware flights/MyLog/Delete old data/Confirm/Empty mylog tables/Exit MyLog/restart processing hardware flights.

Subsequently going into File/Database Explorer/Routes/ I found the Routes re-populated with today's date and time but more importantly including many alph-numerics.

So it looks as if things are on the move.

On the other hand, I could have got things round my neck. Sometimes I fail to understand Airnav-speak.

Bratters,

Did all the above and just had UPS 1551 flying over the house here near Alicante. Route populating as Bogota to Miami. Going the long way round perhaps ?!

[bratters]

EK01 - to quote the Airnav oracle (above in the thread):

"Only airline flights should be updated"

Does that mean that UPS and the other freighters are excluded? In so far as they go up and come down, I can't understand why.

Going back 10-15 years to acars days, it was a pain in the neck to track down some of their routings.

Maybe he's just having a bad day navigationwise.

[EK01]

Bratters,

Non ADSB excluded.
Alpha-Numeric excluded (certainly seems to be the case with Ryanair/Easyjet and Air Berlin over here to name but three).
Freighters excluded?
Non airline flights excluded.

Not exactly comprehensive.

As to UPS 1551, maybe he just likes Spain !

[DaveReid]

If the system works as advertised, then there is no earthly reason why alphanumeric flights (and scheduled freight flights) shouldn't be treated exactly the same as any other.

After all, we're simply talking about tieing a callsign to an airport (or pair of airports) based on deducing that a flight is about to land there or has just taken off.

Incidentally, AirNav, how will you handle routes where network coverage only enables you to deduce the origin, but not the destination (or vice versa) ?