Discussion about Flightradar24 database

[Vroom]

There's no registration

http://hexlookup.epizy.com/hex.php?h...&submit=Search

Correct. It is used on a paramotor which does not require a registration (same as wheeled single seat craft below 70kg empty weight). The CAA allocate us a hex code to our personal selves instead. I can forward a copy of the hex allocation to me from NISC if required. We assign ourselves a callsign as a means of identification and the CAA have been happy with this for years. When I say happy… I asked them directly and they said it isn’t causing an issue and they’d rather not have to go through legislation for such a small group due to unwanted costs at this time. They were happy enough that the current info in CAP509 was enough as that is what I use on the radio.

[Oblivian]

Is it possible to have an update on progress with this please? Many thanks.

There's no registration

http://hexlookup.epizy.com/hex.php?hex=4521AB&prefix=&submit=Search

[Vincenzo Caccamo]

So form is different by forum?

[Oblivian]

Said the Public FORM

Not FORUM

The FORM (I believe is still there) is for website submission that '+' appears on things flying but not in dbase.

[Vincenzo Caccamo]

Replying to Vicenzo Caccamo :

"Very easy to blame others for your mistakes instead of admitting them. even if I had guessed it (although I have photographs with proof of the correct registration) the registration in the first post is correct. it's you who can't even copy and paste the recordings. I have been registering aircraft with callsign PROVA for years and no one has ever complained. By the way they are all correct. why all these problems now? Congratulations on your consistency."

The incorrect frame had been submitted by someone via the public form. The timing seems strangely coincidental, but if it was not you, I apologise. There have been no mistakes done my myself so there is nothing to admit.

In response to your question "why all these problems now?" - the problems have always been there but rarely addressed as the submissions have been added to the database unchecked, resulting in the database getting into a bit of a mess with many errors, duplicates and other issues. There has recently been a push to improve the quality and attempt to check and verifiy submissions before adding them to the database. You will find that any submissions that are not supported with evidence and unable to be independently verified will often not get processed. The editors (as volunteers) do not have infinite time to spend researching them.

As you wish to make sarcastic remarks about consistency, it's usually best to ensure your own house is in order first. It wasn't that long ago when you guessed the new GdF heli registrations incorrectly which later had to be corrected and even your post from just a few days ago contains errors :

30089E
I-TEAS
AS50
Airbus Helicopters H125
9123
Terna Group
00-00-2021

30089D
I-TEAF
AS50
Airbus Helicopters H125
9122
Terna Group
00-00-2021

The operator is E+S Air S.R.L. as found in the latest official ENAC update: https://www.enac.gov.it/sites/defaul...braio_2022.pdf

That aside, all submissions are welcome but priority is generally given to those which are quick to verify and process. As there is no official public register for Italy then if you can add your photo (or link to it on your own website, flickr etc) to prove the reg > hex tie-up from a visual sighting then that would be fantastic and cut down on processing time.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Asr...w?usp=drivesdk

We start from this image in which you can see that I look in the topic for the post in which someone has suggested the wrong registration I-MVRR. Only my fix appears and no other posts. this means that no one has instructed you to enter I-MVRR. Since the first post in question I have always published the reg. correct. The error is absolutely not up to me.

To conclude with this speech you will find the photo of I-MMRV with its flights with callsign. certainly the news that now you try to verify the information of the forum to improve the quality of the information is a big step forward.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AzVCXX_ssvoC9sQg9HANYJfTveN4Z4b6/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1B0B...w?usp=drivesdk

I would really like to know how do you know if a user guesses the brands or is based on truthful information that leads him to add aircraft with a large degree of certainty. Now I ask you. how are you sure that i guess the brands? Please list me the mistakes I made adding new helis of the GdiF. to me there are no errors. If he doesn't, I'll take it as a lie just to avoid taking the blame.

as far as the h125 of the backhoe loader in the following photo is concerned, the information I have taken is present. you can see that both companies are present, I decided to publish Terna because they will be operative for it and not for E + S. I don't know if E + S will be indicated as operator for bureaucratic papers. But in fact the heli will be for Terna.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1B56...w?usp=drivesdk
https://www.dgualdo.it/italy-new-current.htm

[alfa10530]

Hello.
I added the details of my aircraft on the 6th of March but it still cannot be found in the platform’s database.
Usually how long does it take for someone from the admins to add an aircraft to the database? Or maybe I have done something wrong? The aircraft registration is HA-WAJ.
Thank you in advance.
Stephen

473A21
HA-WAJ
C152
Cessna C152
15283188
Private owner
1979-00-00

[user12345]

Replying to Vicenzo Caccamo :

"Very easy to blame others for your mistakes instead of admitting them. even if I had guessed it (although I have photographs with proof of the correct registration) the registration in the first post is correct. it's you who can't even copy and paste the recordings. I have been registering aircraft with callsign PROVA for years and no one has ever complained. By the way they are all correct. why all these problems now? Congratulations on your consistency."

The incorrect frame had been submitted by someone via the public form. The timing seems strangely coincidental, but if it was not you, I apologise. There have been no mistakes done my myself so there is nothing to admit.

In response to your question "why all these problems now?" - the problems have always been there but rarely addressed as the submissions have been added to the database unchecked, resulting in the database getting into a bit of a mess with many errors, duplicates and other issues. There has recently been a push to improve the quality and attempt to check and verifiy submissions before adding them to the database. You will find that any submissions that are not supported with evidence and unable to be independently verified will often not get processed. The editors (as volunteers) do not have infinite time to spend researching them.

As you wish to make sarcastic remarks about consistency, it's usually best to ensure your own house is in order first. It wasn't that long ago when you guessed the new GdF heli registrations incorrectly which later had to be corrected and even your post from just a few days ago contains errors :

30089E
I-TEAS
AS50
Airbus Helicopters H125
9123
Terna Group
00-00-2021

30089D
I-TEAF
AS50
Airbus Helicopters H125
9122
Terna Group
00-00-2021

The operator is E+S Air S.R.L. as found in the latest official ENAC update: https://www.enac.gov.it/sites/defaul...braio_2022.pdf

That aside, all submissions are welcome but priority is generally given to those which are quick to verify and process. As there is no official public register for Italy then if you can add your photo (or link to it on your own website, flickr etc) to prove the reg > hex tie-up from a visual sighting then that would be fantastic and cut down on processing time.

[joekoehn]

I added my plane
Hex 3FFA0F
D-MEEC
But i still can't find it in the database. Did I post anything wrong in 'Aircraft to be added'?
The plan was formerly known as OM-S538.

[user12345]

Response to bahamabarbarian, ref: https://forum.flightradar24.com/foru...386#post212386

I think perhaps you have misunderstood my previous post. The airframe details are not in question, it's the fact that none of the hex codes for the submissions you've posted are in use, ergo regardless of who is listing them they are nothing more than guesses at this point in time. Guesses don't go in the database. I understand that some countries have fixed hex > reg algorithms where tie-ups can be predicted, but that's all it is : a prediction. Predictions are not fact until they actually happen and there have been numerous examples over the years where new frames have delivered with miscoded transponders.

Please only post submissions when there is evidence of the hex pinging so it can be checked by the editors. Thanks.

[Dogmatix]

Sorry about posting the error here. Until you mentioned it about the errors data thread, I had no idea that there was a thread for errors in the database. I automatically assumed that this would be the place for such a post. Where can I report the errors to in the database to, so they can be corrected.

Regards
Dogmatix

[Dogmatix]

Is there somewhere else errors can be posted or, would it be better to do a fresh up date for for that hexcode?.
I know I am new to this forum Just trying to help the forum.

regards

Dogmatix

[Oblivian]

I know you are posting here because the errors database thread was removed

But I don't believe thats what this thread was made for.

[Dogmatix]

Mode-s/Hexcode -4CAD1D
Registration EJ-GABJ
IACO type code HS25
Type Bae 125-800B
MSN- 258153
Airliner/Owner -Gainjet Ireland

There seems to be some confusion on the Hexcode. FR24
has the Hexcode of 4CA91D which equates to a scrapped A320 EI-DDL. Irish civil aircraft register has the Hexcode code of 4CAD1D. AIrNav radar also report EJ-GABJ Hexcode as 4CAD1D.

Regards

Dogmatix

[Dogmatix]

Afternoon can someone update EJ-GAJB

Hexcode 4CA91D

C/N 268153 is incorrect should be 258153

Regards
Dogmatix

[Dogmatix]

Should’ve put EC-NTA for my previous post, everything stands the same in my previous message.

Regards

Sentinel