Improved Routing Information

[flybhx]

since we can't get official data all of the look ups are subject to error in submission by the people doing it. For example  people close to airports are able to tie routes up from sightings to online arrival departure sources but sometimes a couple of flights from the airline being present at the same time can cause the routes to get transposed.

I would hope that airnav should be able to amend the software to display whatever is in the database field to resolve the 2 letter code issue. Does it only apply to French/French dependency airlines?

[Southwest]

Air Nav - my apologies.

However with over 26 pages of threads all related in some way to Improved Routing Information it is apparent that this topic is a 'hot' issue with Radar Box users and we look forward to you coming up with a solution to it.  Please though, sooner than later!

[DaveReid]

For info, these are the Flight IDs where route lookup failed in FD7.    I realise that some of these you would not expect to find a route for (eg all the G-FRA* flights).

You will be pleased to hear that, excluding the military, bizjets and reg-as-callsign flights in your list, a number of the flights and carriers featured (BCY, BDI, EZY, LOG, RAE, RYR, WZZ, etc) are starting to appear in the Flight Route Update database.

While we don't necessarily (yet) have both ends of every route, without which they can't go into FRL, we've had considerable success with enthusiastic users monitoring Mode S and their local airport's website simultaneously.

[tarbat]

You will be pleased to hear that, excluding the military, bizjets and reg-as-callsign flights in your list, a number of the flights and carriers featured (BCY, BDI, EZY, LOG, RAE, RYR, WZZ, etc) are starting to appear in the Flight Route Update database.

That's a good point Dave.  Do you have plans to include the results of this exercise into your FRL service?  In that way the efforts of the Radarbox community to resolve these difficult routes will become available to users of FD7 across the whole VR community, regardless of which hardware they're using.  Even better, maybe you could encourage owners of other VR hardware to also contribute.  Or even operators of other flight sharing networks.

I've tried my best with Loganair flights into Inverness (EGPE), but unfortunately getting the other end of these flights seems difficult.  I've even tried MLAT'ing them, but they never get near another airport before dissapearing from MLAT.

[DaveReid]

If we were to correct every issue that is caused by ADS-B we would need to correct the drift on some aircraft, the callsign 747 changing issue etc.. We do have the draw the line.  

That's a ridiculous analogy.  Even professional ATC systems have problems with rotating B744 callsigns, so nobody is expecting you to come up with a solution for that.  Likewise ADS-B drift - you can't possibly make corrections for that, so why raise it ?

Can you explain what you mean by your network log? Would you like to go into detail about this?

I'm not going to be drawn into a clumsy attempt to change the subject and divert attention from the issue under discussion, which is Flight IDs and routes.

[DaveReid]

Do you have plans to include the results of this exercise into your FRL service?  In that way the efforts of the Radarbox community to resolve these difficult routes will become available to users of FD7 across the whole VR community, regardless of which hardware they're using.

Most certainly I do.  Complete routes from FRU will start to be loaded into FRL over the next few days.

I haven't decided yet how to handle partial routes.  For them to go into FRL would need some reprogramming, since obviously we can't do sanity checks on an ADS-B position if we have no idea where an aircraft is coming from or going to, as the case may be.

Even better, maybe you could encourage owners of other VR hardware to also contribute.  Or even operators of other flight sharing networks.

Yes, in fact I have permission from the PlanePlotter folks to use sharers' traffic to deduce takeoffs and landings at airports covered by the PP network, although that process isn't operating at the moment.

I've tried my best with Loganair flights into Inverness (EGPE), but unfortunately getting the other end of these flights seems difficult.  I've even tried MLAT'ing them, but they never get near another airport before dissapearing from MLAT.

Your efforts are much appreciated.

[Runway 31]

Needing some help here importing the sql.text file downloaded from the flight route update site.

I have Tarbets import route batch file, sqlite3 exe, anrb.exe and the text file in the one folder.  I close down Airnav, run import route bat and when I start Airnav again and check in database explorer under routes, I cannot see any of the routes detailed on the sql.text document.

Where am I going wrong please?

Alan

[DaveReid]

I've just received an amazing PM from AirNav Support threatening (not for the first time) to ban me from the forum, on this occasion I'm told that I'm suspected of having "hacked" [sic] the RadarBox network, whatever that means. 

I suspect that it's more to do with the recent debate on decoding Flight IDs where our views, to say the least, differ widely.

Some may, of course, agree that banning me would be a good thing :-)

Anyway, and just for the record, I have not "hacked" RadarBox or its network, I have no intention of doing so, and indeed would have no idea how to, were I so inclined.  In fact , I'd always been under the impression that network traffic was encrypted, and my codebreaking skills are non-existent.

My usage of RB and the network does not involve any functionality other than that provided by the software to any user of the system.

AirNav are still, of course, at liberty to ban me, but any further allegation or imputation on their part that I have been involved in "hacking", or any other illegal activity, will be passed to my legal advisers.

[AirNav Support]

As you have decided to publicly post on the forum like this we have no choice but to ban you untill you tell us what you meant by your network log and other posts. You ignored our earlier PM and post on the forum about it and only untill you were sent that PM did you actually think about replying.

You have stated more than once on this forum and others you have found other ways to analyse the network data and log the data ("I've just had a quick look at my network log for yesterday")You have been asked to explain your self and in your last post above you haven't done so at all.

For the sake of the security of RadarBox Network we have asked you to explain what you have meant but you haven't.

Its your choice, you will remain banned untill you explain your comments which identify you as accessing the network data. You know the various ways to get in contact with us if you choose too.

[Chris11]

AirNav - I think you guys have made a mistake here. I have already said that I would have banned Dave because of the constant sniping which detracts from the from the actual item under debate. I find those comments irritating.

The problem I have is that we are now onto a project/idea that will be for the benefit of all your customers. Routes are an issue and anything that assists in improving that is positive. for you to ban Dave because of some suspicion that he has secret access is ludicrous. If Dave has a mechanism to record all the flights he sees on Radarbox  or any other Mode S receiver then that is his prerogative. When he refers to his network log - surely he is referring to his log of flights.

I really think you guys have acted hastily and propose that you unban Dave with immediate effect.

[AirNav Support]

Before we get some negative comments from customers regarding this banning let us explain the decision:

While DaveReid provides great assistance on key issues we cannot have network or RadarBox software integrity and security undermined and anyone who is seen to be damaging that will be questioned.

DaveReid last post which alerted us contained the following line.

"I've just had a quick look at my network log "
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=5333.msg56216#msg56216

This is not either the first time he has commented on gaining access to the network data. He has made suggestions to this before and even further on other sites. As you will know the network data cannot be extracted from the RadarBox 2010 software, so we are concerned and hence have questioned him.

We have simply asked Dave to clarify this twice today which has been ignored before we sent him a further PM to gain this information.

If he has done no wrong doing he can easily explain his comments by emailing us otherwise he will remained banned.

[AirNav Support]

Chris11,

If that is correct, he can easily be unbanned if he emails us. These PMs was going on behind the scenes and he has brought it to the public himself which has meant we had no choice but to ban him.

[Chris11]

He has already said that - as I see it the ball is in your court
 

Anyway, and just for the record, I have not "hacked" RadarBox or its network, I have no intention of doing so, and indeed would have no idea how to, were I so inclined.  In fact , I'd always been under the impression that network traffic was encrypted, and my codebreaking skills are non-existent.

My usage of RB and the network does not involve any functionality other than that provided by the software to any user of the system.

[AirNav Support]

Chris,

His response does not explain much. How has got he got a log of the network data if it’s not possible via RadarBox?

This was asked to him via PM and post and both were ignored before we PMed him again. If it was nothing to be concerned about why didn't he email back saying so then and why hasn't he explained to us how he managed to log the network data.

If he has done nothing wrong he can explain to us how he has managed to get a network log if it’s not possible through RadarBox.

Otherwise we have a right to remain concerned if things don't add up for the integrity and security of the network.

[AirNav Development]

To all concerned: we have been mentioned several times before that our forum is the largest mode-s related community on the internet - the forum is totally free but has rules: we constantly send PMs to users who don't follow those rules and advise them to correct their actions. Some users prefer to continue their actions and simply don't respect the other 4000 forum members who come here to enjoy this hobby and change ideas/know-how between themselves.

We cannot accept that a user constantly posts negative / false comments on our forum, doesn't answer PMs from our moderators and permanently halts any discussion going on.

Unfortunately and because of the huge success RadarBox is having we have users that connected or not with our competitors use our forum to damage RadarBox reputation and image. This is something our company will not accept.