Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 23
#1685150
@matthew_w100
Every time PAW tells me the relative position of another plane it's wrong. Well - not *every* time. But quite noticeable in strong wind when heading isn't the same as track.


PAW, SD et al only know your GPS track. How do you expect them to give you a bearing relative to your heading?

You'll just have to either (a)fly in lighter winds or (b)fly faster :D
#1685162
I didn't. Being told "same level port" is annoying when the target is actually same level right. It results in fruitless searching in the wrong bit of the sky while something bad could be happening in the right bit of sky.

But of course SD knows the (predicted ) winds and ought to be able to correct. Hence being cleverer :D .
#1685170
matthew_w100 wrote:But of course SD knows the (predicted ) winds and ought to be able to correct. Hence being cleverer :D .

But of course you know the actual angle of drift, so now being even cleverer than SD it isn't hard for you to know whether you you need to look slightly left or right of the reported position, just like you would with traffic reported to you by a radar service.
#1685172
Cub wrote:Hopefully, lots of people will come to appreciate just how much cleverness has gone into SkyDemon Traffic


Count me in

Rob P
Dave W, johnm liked this
#1685177
You're right Matthew, and that is something we are doing in the next version. Estimating the heading and adjusting our "o'clock" annunciation accordingly.

Unless you're flying in strong crosswinds it doesn't make much difference, mind.
Dave W, matthew_w100, derekf liked this
#1685178
GrahamB wrote:
matthew_w100 wrote:But of course SD knows the (predicted ) winds and ought to be able to correct. Hence being cleverer :D .

But of course you know the actual angle of drift, so now being even cleverer than SD it isn't hard for you to know whether you you need to look slightly left or right of the reported position, just like you would with traffic reported to you by a radar service.

I just follow the magenta line; I haven't thought about drift for years.
#1685180
matthew_w100 wrote:I just follow the magenta line


You are damned and headed for eternal purgatory :twisted:

Rob P

But at least you won't infringe on the way.
XX, kanga, idlelayabout liked this
#1685207
Tim Dawson wrote:You're right Matthew, and that is something we are doing in the next version. Estimating the heading and adjusting our "o'clock" annunciation accordingly.

Unless you're flying in strong crosswinds it doesn't make much difference, mind.

Now that is impressive, how do you get that, without a magnetic reference, or without knowing the wind direction ?
Thx
Lee
#1685214
SkyDemon generally does know the forecast winds aloft in the vicinity of where you’ve planned to fly.
PaulB, leemoore1966 liked this
#1685339
@Tim Dawson Well, this could get interesting. Bearingless targets are "utter guesswork" and you rejected the MLAT data due to a 'field uncertainty' of 2 nm but you're going to use forecast winds to produce relative bearing call-outs :shock:

In addition to mandatory ADSB I propose we have mandatory magnetometers fitted (especially in flexwings and Condors) :D :D
#1685347
PaulSS wrote:@Tim Dawson Well, this could get interesting. Bearingless targets are "utter guesswork" and you rejected the MLAT data due to a 'field uncertainty' of 2 nm but you're going to use forecast winds to produce relative bearing call-outs :shock:


Hi Paul
It was actually the ADSB with SIL=0 via SkyEcho producing 2nm of uncertainty, not the MLAT data

Thx
Lee
Last edited by leemoore1966 on Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 23