Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 13
#1672544
Dave Phillips wrote:
Tim Dawson wrote:Dave, that really is nothing like what we have developed. It’s incredibly primitive.

Accuracy is important in my line of work.


Such arrogance.

Goodbye.


Dave, don’t flounce. We are all striving for a similar thing here. You and I know that the effective provision of traffic information is far more than shouting about every contact within a certain range of the subject aircraft. Tim and I, and I suspect hundreds of other customers, have talked for years about what a pseudo surveillance service would look and feel like if delivered via SD. Tim quickly understood the nuances required to make the information really useful and relevant rather than unnecessary and potentially overwhelming. I am certainly not claiming that other EFB/moving map GPS solutions don’t offer similar functionality but what I think you will see in SD’s offering is a level of background functionality and finess which takes pseudo traffic information and audio announciation to another level. Please deploy whatever you are most comfortable with and keeps you safe but allow Tim a degree of ‘arrogance’ because I do think he has, once again, delivered something significantly ‘smarter’ than other similar offerings, for the moment.
gaznav, Nick, kanga liked this
#1672545
Cub, initially it wasn’t presented as anything different to attributes that other apps already have. I tried to put across a balanced view and my ‘flounce’ was when a software developer called a competitors product “primitive”, with no supporting argument. For him to then ‘like’ my arrogance post is truly bewildering.

Yes, we all want the same thing.
gaznav, Flyin'Dutch', Nick liked this
#1672555
gaznav wrote:We just need everyone with the same Electronic Conspicuity now so that we can generate coverage like the picture on your FaceBook feed.
But until then (ie all move from Mode C/S to ADS-B), PAw offers the best solution (IMO).
[just offering some truthful light relief while we decompress and deflounce]
#1672566
gaznav wrote:^^^Probably, very little as they would be pushing out FLARM most likely and the algorithm is designed to warn when close and conflicting. When you are going ‘same way, same day’ then the system is designed not to alert you. That is my own personal experience of FLARM in a K21.

(My bold.) Yes, that is how Flarm works.

What I am asking is how SkyDemon, Foreflight & others would present the information. Imagine a PAW equipped aircraft receiving these contacts from an OGN station; imagine a future with mandatory ADSB out.

How will the navigation software of the future cope with localised dense concentrations of traffic? How will it cope with a gaggle in the Abingdon gap between Benson & Brize? Suppose you route round the future Farnborough class D, keeping 2nm clear like the CAA recommend? Your track takes you straight through Lasham's traffic, how will the software cope with 20 or so contacts within 2km?

The current powered aircraft navigation software seems to rely mostly on proximity for collision avoidance, glider software relies exclusively on Flarm. What we need is navigation software that can differentiate between proximity & collision likelihood, that way your navigation device becomes input agnostic.

What I am asking is what exactly would the new SkyDemon (or Foreflight) say if I was in, or near, these aircraft:

#1672581
low&slow wrote:How will the navigation software of the future cope with localised dense concentrations of traffic?


Image

low&slow wrote:What we need is navigation software that can differentiate between proximity & collision likelihood, that way your navigation device becomes input agnostic.

What I am asking is what exactly would the new SkyDemon (or Foreflight) say if I was in, or near, these aircraft:


That's what this whole thread is about isn't it, that they've implemented this sort of "flarm type" functionality on Sky Demon...?
#1672584
@Tim Dawson Fantastic news and a very nice development of the basic idea. You can now delete my pleading emails and messages on your forum.

I really look forward to one day actually getting SD instead of sitting and shouting from the sidelines :D
#1672589
patowalker wrote:Dave,

My 'like' on your post was unintentional. **** though posts with my thumb sometimes activates the 'like' button. I blame it on primitive software development.

If you hit the like button again it will delete the like.
Who can you blame now :D
#1672590
low&slow wrote:What I am asking is what exactly would the new SkyDemon (or Foreflight) say if I was in, or near, these aircraft:



That is a Dutch or previously Dutch registered glider innit?
#1672592
Waveflyer wrote:
patowalker wrote:Dave,

My 'like' on your post was unintentional. **** though posts with my thumb sometimes activates the 'like' button. I blame it on primitive software development.

If you hit the like button again it will delete the like.
Who can you blame now :D


Thanks. These software developers are bloody marvellous. I now blame whoever compiled the FAQ for not incuding that. :D
Waveflyer, Nick liked this
#1672605
low&slow wrote:What I am asking is what exactly would the new SkyDemon (or Foreflight) say if I was in, or near, these aircraft:

Joking aside - does it just call out specific traffic, or will it generate the 'multiple contacts in the xxxx area, possible gliders' that a LARS service would provide?
A lot of time with a real LARS service it's about avoiding an area of likely conflict before coming into a specific conflict that's important.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 13