Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By leemoore1966
#1860837
I was sent a number of messages asking for an update on the ATOM/GRID network.
We are now up at over 220 active stations in the network, with more being added almost every week. Most recently a blitz on the South West has seen a number of installations come online this week, including the most Westerly point of England, Lands End airport.

When it was turned on, we were astounded to discover it was able to see a PilotAware equipped aircraft, whilst on the ground at St Marys on the Isles of Scilly !
A distance of almost 50km at just above sea level

Image

The same aircraft was in contact with our network all the way back to his home base, and more importantly by the new set of installations in the South West
A great job by Keith and all the team :D
Image

A great addition to the network now providing valuable uplinks of ModeS traffic and Metar data, such as
Lands End
Image
Bolthed
Image
Rob P, rohmer, 2Donkeys and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By gaznav
#1860999
That Aircrew site sadly doesn’t show which are working or which aren’t. When I looked at this six months ago for the “local” 15 ground stations to me then this is what I found:

11 out of 15 (73%) appeared to be working.
4 out of 15 (27%) appeared to not be working at all.
Of the 11 that were working, then 3 appeared to have pretty poor reception performance compared to the other 8. Which is kind of proven as an issue with @rohmer’s post of “ which now has improved range”.

So it would be really useful to have a “down detector” on these 220 sites as in reality it may be significantly fewer that actually work. Otherwise it lured you into a false sense of security that everything is fine because you’re not seeing anything. That down detector could then be part of your planning process to understand where you might not be able to rely on the ground signal broadcasts.
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1861002
gaznav wrote:That Aircrew site sadly doesn’t show which are working or which aren’t. When I looked at this six months ago for the “local” 15 ground stations to me then this is what I found:

11 out of 15 (73%) appeared to be working.
4 out of 15 (27%) appeared to not be working at all.
Of the 11 that were working, then 3 appeared to have pretty poor reception performance compared to the other 8. Which is kind of proven as an issue with @rohmer’s post of “ which now has improved range”.

So it would be really useful to have a “down detector” on these 220 sites as in reality it may be significantly fewer that actually work. Otherwise it lured you into a false sense of security that everything is fine because you’re not seeing anything. That down detector could then be part of your planning process to understand where you might not be able to rely on the ground signal broadcasts.


Just like how I could be lured into a false sense of security when I'm flying with my SE2 and seeing nothing on my tablet, but I'm actually surrounded by aircraft which are either not broadcasting ADSB or suffering from airframe obscuration (mine included), you mean? :lol:
Last edited by GrahamB on Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
johnm, ivor.phillips liked this
User avatar
By ls8pilot
#1861004
gaznav wrote:That Aircrew site sadly doesn’t show which are working or which aren’t. When I looked at this six months ago for the “local” 15 ground stations to me then this is what I found:

11 out of 15 (73%) appeared to be working.
4 out of 15 (27%) appeared to not be working at all.
Of the 11 that were working, then 3 appeared to have pretty poor reception performance compared to the other 8. Which is kind of proven as an issue with @rohmer’s post of “ which now has improved range”.

So it would be really useful to have a “down detector” on these 220 sites as in reality it may be significantly fewer that actually work. Otherwise it lured you into a false sense of security that everything is fine because you’re not seeing anything. That down detector could then be part of your planning process to understand where you might not be able to rely on the ground signal broadcasts.


As I understand it this link gets you a view of which sites are up (blue and green). The red ones have been down for a while & the purple ones more recent

[url]https://ognrange.glidernet.org/#,max,lastweek,51.32263_-0.92156,8,#80000040:#008000ff,[/url]

One thing we've noticed in the last week or so is very poor reliability of our 4G internet connection - I think the high pressure systems may affect the reception (we are in a marginal area for 4G (Gloucestershire - so miles away from London and presumably don't matter to the mobile network providers :lol: ). For a lot of airfields I suspect the poor provision of rural internet will be a factor.
gaznav liked this
User avatar
By ls8pilot
#1861005
GrahamB wrote:
gaznav wrote:That Aircrew site sadly doesn’t show which are working or which aren’t. When I looked at this six months ago for the “local” 15 ground stations to me then this is what I found:

11 out of 15 (73%) appeared to be working.
4 out of 15 (27%) appeared to not be working at all.
Of the 11 that were working, then 3 appeared to have pretty poor reception performance compared to the other 8. Which is kind of proven as an issue with @rohmer’s post of “ which now has improved range”.

So it would be really useful to have a “down detector” on these 220 sites as in reality it may be significantly fewer that actually work. Otherwise it lured you into a false sense of security that everything is fine because you’re not seeing anything. That down detector could then be part of your planning process to understand where you might not be able to rely on the ground signal broadcasts.


Just like how I could be lured into a false sense of security when I'm flying with my SE2 and seeing nothing on my tablet, but I'm actually surrounded by aircraft which are either not broadcasting ADSB or suffering from airframe obscuration (mine included), you mean? :lol:


Please don't start this again guys ..... I think we've all had enough :thumleft:
T67M, gaznav, Shoestring Flyer and 2 others liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1861012
I think the best response to @gaznav on this topic is :roll: frankly
User avatar
By gaznav
#1861015
That’s the one @ls8pilot. I think this kind of depiction is really useful for planning purposes:

Image

The mauve/red spots are the OGN ground stations that are down, and the blue/green ones are the ones that are working. What would also be useful would be an indication of those that appear to have limited performance. Obviously OGN don’t really rebroadcast anything, so for this website they aren’t that interested apart from whether the receiver is working or not. But for any systems that are broadcasting information (be that UAT, PAW or others) then an indication of the serviceability of the uplink should be considered (a bit like a Nav beacon is NOTAM’d for poor performance or unserviceability). That could be achieved by either NOTAM for UAT or a website like this for non-certified systems :thumright:
ls8pilot liked this
User avatar
By Rob P
#1861024
ls8pilot wrote:
Please don't start this again guys ..... I think we've all had enough :thumleft:


@gaznav How can you possibly 'like' this post ^^^^ and then come back posting more, mind-numbing repetition of the same, tired old stuff?

You do know he was talking to you too, don't you?

Rob P
townleyc liked this
User avatar
By ls8pilot
#1861033
Rob P wrote:
ls8pilot wrote:
Please don't start this again guys ..... I think we've all had enough :thumleft:


@gaznav How can you possibly 'like' this post ^^^^ and then come back posting more, mind-numbing repetition of the same, tired old stuff?

You do know he was talking to you too, don't you?

Rob P


My criticism is for the endless "tit for tat" of "my EC is better than yours". Factual debate along the lines of "this system works like this" is useful so we understand the limitations of each EC system, and to keep people looking out the window - which IMHO remains the primary barrier to MAC.

My own view is there is absolutely no need to denigrate any of the EC systems, if you think "yours" is better that's fine, but everyone is entitled to their own view & make their own choices .
Shoestring Flyer, townleyc, gaznav and 2 others liked this