Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion about Flightradar24 database

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Regarding Uzbeks and UK reg..

    From what I can gather, ICAO/ITU have always laid out a prefix shall be no more than 2 letters of the allocated 3 letter airline code.
    https://www.icao.int/secretariat/pos...tion_marks.htm

    And suffix of no more than 5 chars.

    That gives a 7 char limit.

    As 90% of the new registration numbers are now 5 chars, I believe this has lead to them dropping the - (or being told to) as they do not have a single allocated country range that could fill the slot C-/G-/B-/N

    They're also listed on wiki with no hyphen
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...ation_prefixes
    https://www.uzairways.com/en/service...-configuration
    Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

    Comment


    • #77
      The posting in the "aircraft to be added" forum are just getting out of hand.
      Despite constant reminders that its not for changed data, it continues to be
      posted. Either these people cannot read or simply chose to ignore what they
      are being told. Not wishing to add to Oblivian's workload but surely its time to
      bring the axe down on these posting and remove those which do not belong.

      Comment


      • #78
        And yet another Dilema.

        Colombia

        I suspect as they have had Microlite SUFFIX in the past, they are now branding small aircraft with -G as another classification?

        Someone is frantically changing Registration data based on what appears to be photos - just 1 example

        https://forum.flightradar24.com/thre...l=1#post116075
        https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/6959231

        But if you query the register, has them with no G (nor HK- for that matter but that may be a lookup limitation)
        HK.JPG

        And on the certificate you can see a G 'utilization' category

        HK2.JPG

        So the question is raised. Do you classify full database registrations on their presented registration on-wing (will cause more jetphotos issues). Or the actual apparent allocation in the register
        Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

        Comment


        • #79
          And yet more confusion.. If this ends up true

          There's no "registration" at all in France.
          F-GXYZ is called "immatriculation".
          00-XY is called "identification" and refers to the homebase of the aircraft. I did and do question its uniqueness regarding the mathematical maximum of 676 combinations...
          F-JXYZ is called "radio call identifier" only applying to aircraft equipped with radios.
          Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

          Comment


          • #80
            Its not confusion but that's not entirely correct

            All French civilian aircraft have a registration. Immatriculation in English is registration

            French ULM have an identification code and also a radio callsign, the radio call sign is in the F-Jxxx series. ULM do not need to display the "F-Jxxx" as a registration on the aircraft as it is only a callsign or for flight plans. For the purposes of FR24 a ULM with a transponder will use the F-Jxxx in the callsign box.

            French military aircraft have a serial and a civilian registration/callsign for when they need to be "civilian" or for flight planning purposes these are in the F-Zxxx or F-Uxxx ranges. Some aircraft do carry this "registration".

            I notice one of the DB experts has changed the Phenix (3B75DD) serial 041 to its radio callsign "F-UJCG" in the DB

            Comment


            • #81
              (knew about the registration thing after a post here and on Jetphotos.. however) That was what made me aware. The last 5 or so French entries people have posted

              Missing the '-' separator, or starting with F-J when it appears transponder should likely be in DB with F-G or similar. Especially when the photos look for 'reg' and they're having all sorts of issues agreeing if it should be the assigned Reg, or the one on-wing in the images (hello, Uzbekistan all over)
              Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

              Comment


              • #82
                For the purposes of FR24 ULM have to be treated like a normal aircraft F-Jxxx because that's what will show in the callsign box on the transponder.

                I don't know the official legal requirement for French ULM, but in reality some carry their code, some carry code and callsign and some neither!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Is there a register available for the F-J ones? I see a lot of them popping up now and google rarely yields results for them via a registration search. Are the registrations dynamic or once "assigned" to a plane do they remain with it?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by VOHY View Post
                    Is there a register available for the F-J ones? I see a lot of them popping up now and google rarely yields results for them via a registration search. Are the registrations dynamic or once "assigned" to a plane do they remain with it?
                    Theres an F- Register.. https://immat.aviation-civile.gouv.f...nef_liste.html
                    (https://forum.flightradar24.com/thre...r-Lookup-Pages)

                    Which still indicates forced "F-" without spaces. But doesn't seem to list either of the shortcode or F-J references
                    Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      They seem to have another identifier as well. Check : https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9239883 and also http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage2.php?img=56000. No external registration F-JWCC visible in the jetphotos pic but 72-OB visible under the wing in the other pic. Some other frames have the F-J identifier painted on the sie so it is quite a confusing situation. The hex for the above Alpi Pioneer is 38847D from my research so should this be entered as F-JWCC or 72-OB ? It most photos of these planes types you cannot see what the other identifier is underneath the wing so you can only use the F-J registration from the mode-s callsign if it doesn't have it painted on the side.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        That's why I said there needs to be some sort of official stand.

                        If we dont want to be overloaded with people reporting images that don't match, both here and jetphoto have to be using the same common reference standards for the reg.

                        One poster said the xx-xx is a region/club of origin code and a reference like an initial of owner or similar.

                        I suspect the same goes for the Brazillian hkxxxxx sets. People (possibly) reporting the reg based on jetphoto as 'proof', putting a -G at the end takes them past standard 7 char format. And the .br register doesn't show -G or HK-. Just HK

                        Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
                        Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          There isn't an online resource for the radio callsigns and the radio callsigns can move between different aircraft. I don't know enough about French ULM to say if they are allocated to the owner?

                          The code under the wing two digits - two or three letters is the registration, I don't know the legal requirement to display the callsign, but many don't have it displayed even when they have one allocated.

                          For the purposes of FR24 I think using the callsign as that's what is displayed in the transponder is the correct thing to do, there are many in the DB already.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Oblivian View Post
                            That's why I said there needs to be some sort of official stand.

                            If we dont want to be overloaded with people reporting images that don't match, both here and jetphoto have to be using the same common reference standards for the reg.

                            One poster said the xx-xx is a region/club of origin code and a reference like an initial of owner or similar.

                            I suspect the same goes for the Brazillian hkxxxxx sets. People (possibly) reporting the reg based on jetphoto as 'proof', putting a -G at the end takes them past standard 7 char format. And the .br register doesn't show -G or HK-. Just HK

                            Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
                            I think the proper identifier (that is: not the r/t callsign) should be the primary. Uploading photos to jetphotos putting the identifier as F-Jxxx is silly when the plane does not wear it and just leads to confusion as you have said. My argument for saying this is because for those that are wearing a F-J identifier will/should also have their proper identifier displayed somewhere on the plane in addition. So in the example I posted up thread, F-JWCC is listed in FR database with that as the registration when really - in my opinion - it should be 72 OB. APphotos makes a good point in that it is not known if the r/t callsign is even fixed to the plane - it could be transferrable. But the 72 OB identifier will be fixed to the plane, hence my suggestion to use those as the primary. What are your thoughts?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              I'm not sure if this is the right place but I have the following question: After a airline's new route appear, the corresponding flight number is missing (cause it's not got from feeding, it shall be added manually by staff).

                              So I want to report the following connections of callsigns and flight numbers and wonder how they can be added to the DB:
                              BTI6A1 = BT661 (Air Baltic | RIX - DUB)
                              BTI6A2 = BT662 (Air Baltic | DUB -RIX)
                              BTI7HT = BT639 (Air Baltic | RIX - CTA)
                              BTI8TK = BT640 (Air Baltic | CTA -RIX)
                              The 4 connections above can be found on YL-CSK history: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/yl-csk

                              BTI3BJ = BT261 (Air Baltic | RIX - STR)
                              BTI2DF = BT262 (Air Baltic | STR = RIX)
                              These 2 connections can be found on YL-CSD history: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/yl-csd

                              BTI4NB = BT673 (Air Baltic | RIX - BOD)
                              BTI2TU = BT674 (Air Baltic | BOD = RIX)
                              Not a new route but possible a new callsign after the winter break. These 2 connections can be found on YL-CSD history: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/yl-csf

                              Thanks for your support!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Commerical flight routes are supplied by 3rd parties. Not added by users. The callsigns come from the aircraft if the pilots enter it. But the from/to may not be known until the source updates.

                                Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
                                Posts not to be taken as official support representation - Just a helpful uploader who tinkers

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X