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

Login with username, password and session length
 


Author Topic: Photo Data anomaly  (Read 2483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tommyg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
Photo Data anomaly
« on: September 26, 2011, 05:27:44 PM »
Picked up GLF5 01 USCG  (code AE10C1) all details correct in My Flights and log but the photo was of Hungarian Aerobatic display team and the aircraft type (on the photo) said C17 Globemaster!!! Never seen  anything like this before. I had downloaded the new database before switching my RB on.

tommyg
Tommyg

neroon79

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4657
Re: Photo Data anomaly
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2011, 05:35:44 PM »
Picked up GLF5 01 USCG  (code AE10C1) all details correct in My Flights and log but the photo was of Hungarian Aerobatic display team and the aircraft type (on the photo) said C17 Globemaster!!! Never seen  anything like this before. I had downloaded the new database before switching my RB on.

tommyg

This is a long time and well known bug (and was discussed here several times before), which will hopefully be wiped out with the next software release.
Greetings from northern Germany, Ingo
11.75nm ESE of EDDV

SW: ANRB v5.00.072/6.01.001 on WIN10 64Bit Pro&Home
HW:
Ant.: DPD Productions ADS-B Vertical Outdoor Base Antenna
AMP: Kuhne electr. KU LNA 1090 A TM
Cable: 25m of ECOFLEX 15+
NB: Asus P53E 24/7 op.
PC: 28"4K + 24" Monitor
AirSpy mini @RPi3

Runway 31

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34077
Re: Photo Data anomaly
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2011, 05:53:56 PM »
Tommy

As Ingo states this is a well known long time bug.  The photo is picked from the serial/registration and cannot differentiate between the correct 01 and any other aircraft with a serial of 01.  The correct photographs are detailed, have a look at the aircraft with Database Explorer.  Unfortunatly this is ignored and the server stored photograph, as you have seen is used instead.

Hopefully this will be fully resolved in the next software version.

Alan