Page 39 of 43

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Wed Jun 02, 2021 10:39 pm
by Cub
PaulSS wrote:@Flyin'Dutch'
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Did they not have their TXPDR on for you to see them on your PAW with multilateralisation?


As I said, I didn’t get THAT close. I couldn’t see whether he had his transponder on or not and if he did I have no idea if he had C Mode S or just just Mode C.


Yet you are confident that he was using a SkyEcho that wasn’t performing?

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 7:10 am
by PaulSS
Yes, I am. Reg + GINFO + Vector = CAP 1391 device. Unless you know of another such device that is being used in G reg aircraft in the UK.

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 8:04 am
by Cessna571
Lucky he had an SE2 on board, otherwise you’d not have seen him at all on EC.

All you’ve done here is show that people MUST still use the Mk1 eyeball, and that the PAW ground station network didn’t work in this instance.

It’s funny that whilst trying to pick a hole in SE2, you’ve actually picked an even bigger hole in PAW!

I think it just reiterates what both SE2 and PAW have been saying for a while.

Transmit ADSB. Either via an SE2 or a transponder, then any of the EC units can see you.

I personally don’t trust MLAT, as apparently I keep overflying Cambridge airport! (which I don’t).

Mk1 eyeball is still king, the bickering is still stopping joined up thinking.
Mr Shapps should be ashamed of what he’s done.

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 8:35 am
by PaulSS
Lucky he had an SE2 on board, otherwise you’d not have seen him at all on EC.


Yep, I am genuinely glad they had some sort of EC installed; it's just a shame the performance of that device (be it the device or, more probably, the mounting) wasn't very impressive.

All you’ve done here is show that people MUST still use the Mk1 eyeball


I do wish people would stop using such a trite phrase. We all know the EC devices are complementary to lookout and not a substitute.

and that the PAW ground station network didn’t work in this instance.

It’s funny that whilst trying to pick a hole in SE2, you’ve actually picked an even bigger hole in PAW!


What is your logic behind the PAW ground station network not working? As I said before, if the aircraft only had Mode C then no multilateration is going to take place. If he didn't have Flarm then no Flarm re-broadcast is going to take place. If he didn't have PAW then my PAW is not going to see him and neither is a ground station. None of that has anything whatsoever to do with the ATOM station network not working. There will be many aircraft flying around with Mode C and SE2. The ATOM network is not going to make a silk purse etc etc.

I think it just reiterates what both SE2 and PAW have been saying for a while.

Transmit ADSB. Either via an SE2 or a transponder, then any of the EC units can see you.


That was the point :roll: He did have ADSB Out via SE2 and my EC unit (PAW for reception) did not see him until very late, despite my aircraft having very well mounted external antennas.

I personally don’t trust MLAT, as apparently I keep overflying Cambridge airport! (which I don’t).


Are you King Of The Red Herrings? What on earth has MLAT got to do with me seeing SE2 ADSB so late?

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 9:25 am
by Cessna571
Did your PAW bearingless targets not warn you if he was mode C?

Should have been going nuts in the situation you describe.

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 9:48 am
by exfirepro
Cessna571 wrote:Did your PAW bearingless targets not warn you if he was mode C?

Should have been going nuts in the situation you describe.


It certainly would have - which clearly suggests the aircraft in question was CAP1391 ONLY! (At least at the time in question).

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:51 am
by exfirepro
Miscellaneous wrote:@leemoore1966, is an ATOM station not part of the OGN?


Hi Misc,

Under the initial agreement with the OGN for PAW to rebroadcast locally captured OGN data via OGN-R (now known as ATOM-GRID), ‘Flarm-Type’ data is reported to the OGN servers to increase OGN coverage (for local display and SAR).

Historically, OGN data has also been used by other glider-oriented organisations such as Glidernet, GliderRadar, Glidertracker and others for similar purposes.

What has changed is that with the significant expansion of interest in EC, the latest OGN software now also receives and decodes PilotAware and (presumably) reports this data to the OGN servers along with their ‘Flarm-Type’ data.

It appears that some of the commercial aircraft tracking websites have cottoned on to this opportunity and have found a way of tapping into this information (though I should stress, NOT from the ATOM-GRID network - which is securely encrypted).

Hope this helps clarify things.

Regards
Peter

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:21 pm
by VinceGod
Thanks The ATOM/GRID does not upload to any 3rd party site


Is this actually true, isn’t 360Radar a 3rd party?

Aircrew.co.uk isn’t that 3rd party too?

Confused from EC Land

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 9:36 pm
by gaznav
@VinceGod

Here I am being tracked by 2x ATOM-GRIDs and my information being displayed on a 3rd Party Website :thumright:

Image

But to be clear, I don’t really mind as pretty much anyone can build a decent receiver to see me (even at 32nm distance!).

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:12 pm
by Flyin'Dutch'
gaznav wrote:But to be clear, I don’t really mind as pretty much anyone can build a decent receiver to see me (even at 32nm distance!).


You sure with those antics!

:wink:

If this was OH I can testify it is entirely possible to fly her straight and level without any trouble.

:D

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:14 pm
by gaznav
Cheeky - it was the Supermunk with a 1,800fpm climb rate :lol:

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Fri Jun 04, 2021 12:40 am
by VinceGod
gaznav wrote:
Here I am being tracked by 2x ATOM-GRIDs and my information being displayed on a 3rd Party Website :thumright:

But to be clear, I don’t really mind as pretty much anyone can build a decent receiver to see me (even at 32nm distance!).


I’m also confused why for an hour when you where flying the ATOM-Grid tracked 1,944 ADS-B targets and recorded 1,099,248 individual messages but only 775 targets where DF17 (552,565 messages) and 142 targets where DF18 (40,780 messages).

So what happened to the other 1027 targets and 505,903 messages, and what download link format are they? Is ADS-B data getting corrupt or lost by skynet?

Image

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Fri Jun 04, 2021 8:56 pm
by russp
VinceGod wrote:
I’m also confused why for an hour when you where flying the ATOM-Grid tracked 1,944 ADS-B targets and recorded 1,099,248 individual messages but only 775 targets where DF17 (552,565 messages) and 142 targets where DF18 (40,780 messages).

So what happened to the other 1027 targets and 505,903 messages, and what download link format are they? Is ADS-B data getting corrupt or lost by skynet?


Sadly the Aircrew search is seriously clunky.. I can see my aircraft when I do an all aircraft search but search for my hex code and nothing! It does however show how often, even with an external aerial pilotaware install that I'm losing contact contact with a ground station. worryingly so.. now I realise why all those contacts suddenly disappear and become bearingless targets...

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:19 am
by leemoore1966
russp wrote:Sadly the Aircrew search is seriously clunky.. I can see my aircraft when I do an all aircraft search but search for my hex code and nothing! It does however show how often, even with an external aerial pilotaware install that I'm losing contact contact with a ground station. worryingly so.. now I realise why all those contacts suddenly disappear and become bearingless targets...


Hi Russ
Please try aircrew again - we did find an issue and fixed, this may fix your issue, if not please PM me and tell me how to reproduce.

Regarding uplink contacts, what distance were they from you, could they have been less than 10km ?
The reason I ask is as follows, if they are within 10km of you, then you will trigger an uplink
If they are not you are receiving them as a peripheral uplink, ie triggered by someone else.

In either case if the triggering aircraft goes beyond 10km, then the uplink will cease.
If you don't think this is the case, again, I would be interested in further information, you can PM me to send the track file of a flight where you observed this behavior

Thx
Lee

Re: EC so far......

PostPosted:Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:44 am
by James Rose
russp wrote:Sadly the Aircrew search is seriously clunky..


I programmed the tool and even I regularly have trouble using it. Improving the search is on my todo list.