Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Aussie Feeders

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

  • Originally posted by YSWG View Post
    Some MLAT coverage close to Wagga this morning. VH-SBT was flying QLK205 (Sydney to Albury) but was diverted to Wagga. Was on the ground for over an hour (work on the taxiway and tarmac added half an hour).
    It's interesting that you mention that aircraft in terms of MLAT. It was ADS-B equipped and was one of the aircraft used by Air Services Australia up in southern Queensland (around Bundaberg) when ADS-B was being tested in Australia. During the whole of 2009 it was visible on the map (or I should say, more accurately, on my receiver) until January 2010 when it was disconnected. There's some absolutely useless information!

    Regards,
    Gregg
    Last edited by fungus; 2014-05-24, 07:01.
    YSSY2/T-YSSY4 [SBS-1 Basestation w/- SSE-1090 SJ Mk2 Antenna (Thanks Delcomp) ] [Uniden UBCD996T w/- 16 element Wideband Discone VHF/UHF Antenna, and tuned 108MHz-137MHz Airband Antenna] [Trialing a home-brew 1090MHz collinear antenna]

    Comment


    • Originally posted by nomad77 View Post
      Well what a load of crap. Been tracking aircraft from 200+nm to the east of my location, before they even reach my site they are transferring over to other stations, even "T" feeders
      it seems to me that if any aircraft is being covered by another location then my feed gets dropped. This is so encouraging, seems my coverage is great until there is more than one
      feed then.......maybe FR thinks I am in Albury, who knows!
      If I recall rightly you're in Bairnsdale with an airport code of YMAY? I keep track of feeders around Oz and you're not alone in this experience although I must admit that I have not looked at yours since 24 April.

      There are several once dominant F feeders that are hardly seen any more. A good example is F-YPAD2 which is/was at Port Lincoln. It has been totally superceded by F-YPLC2 - the coverage is so similar I've even wondered if it is the same feeder with a different name but that seems unlikely given the reluctance of FR24 to change feeder names. At Broome, F-YPBR1 has been operating for a little while. A couple of weeks ago a second one, F-YPBR2, started up and now the original has all but vanished. At Ayres Rock there were two F feeders but F-YAYE1 has vanished. It could, of course, be coincidence with people simply returning their boxes to FR24 but who knows.

      Can't say that I've noticed too many examples of T feeders beating out F boxes but you may have read here recently that a guy at Tamworth is operating four Radarboxes (2 at Tamworth, 1 at Broken Hill and 1 at Gold Coast). These are all excellent feeders. Apparently the Radarbox is the same thing as a FR24 box but shows up as a T feeder. I wonder if more people are shelling out their hard-earned for these - could be your problem? Cheers.

      Comment


      • F-YSWG1 went offline just before midnight AEST, didn't notice until 8:00am. FR24 did send a email at 5am. Fault was the router, something caused it to switch off (likely a DDOS attack). Seems to be running fine now but will monitor it.

        Good ground coverage at the Duke of Kent Oval helipad (YXWG) [officially named "Wagga Hospital"] and at YSWG.

        Screenshot_2014-05-24-10-46-34.jpgScreenshot_2014-05-24-13-47-26.jpgScreenshot_2014-05-24-13-47-01.jpg
        Last edited by YSWG; 2014-05-24, 07:58.
        F-YSWG1 and T-YSWG2

        Comment


        • A late update, my FR24 receiver is on it's way to Germany.

          I agree totally with the comments re feed disappearing to other feeders, when F-YBNA1 was active I constantly saw feeders way north of me, feeding aircraft south of me. Annoying but at least Im contributing to M-LAT.

          Ideally FR support have sent me another receiver box, but Ive not received notification of it yet.
          F-YBNA2

          Comment


          • Just because your code isn't listed, doesn't mean that your not contributing to the ADS-B data. I really can't blame FR24 wanting to remove the radar codes.
            F-YSWG1 and T-YSWG2

            Comment


            • Originally posted by nomad77 View Post
              Well what a load of crap. Been tracking aircraft from 200+nm to the east of my location, before they even reach my site they are transferring over to other stations, even "T" feeders
              it seems to me that if any aircraft is being covered by another location then my feed gets dropped. This is so encouraging, seems my coverage is great until there is more than one
              feed then.......maybe FR thinks I am in Albury, who knows!
              I have been feeding my data for a couple of years, provided by my own antenna and Radarbox receiver. I was the only feeder for the Bass Strait area - then came the "F" feeders and seemed my data was no longer used. Even data from aircraft overhead my location being provided by feeders over 200nm away - the first being FMAY. Lately there are more around Southern Vic and L'ton and Hobart. Even so my data is still used over all these "F" feeders as I can receive aircraft at lower levels than most in the Tas/SE Vic area. Also I am able to see aircraft further East towards NZ, especially the Christchurch track. So it may seem your data is not used, but it most certainly is. If you want to dominate again, maybe upgrade your antenna. I have just built a new Collinear - 1800mm long and wow what an improvement
              Mike in Burnie Tas

              Comment


              • This is an issues that has been discussed many many times in many many threads.

                * Data from ALL feeds is used.
                * Distance between the receiver and the aircraft is not relevant and not a parameter. ADS-B are digital signals and not analogue, so you either receive a signal or you don't receive it, nothing between. If the aircraft is 1km or 500km away makes no difference. The signal is not more accurate closer to the receiver. Once again either you receive the signal or not. The server doing the data merge does not know the location of the feeds.
                * The radar code shown on map is not correct. It's only there because users want it to be there. The data on FR24 is a mashup of data from all receivers and the code is often old/incorrect/cached.
                * There is nothing wrong with the radar code algorithm. The radar code is simply not correct as the data used is a mashup of data from different sources and receivers.
                * Premium is the place to check what data you are feeding (contributing with).
                * If you are doing radar-code spotting you are at wrong place. Flightradar24 is a place for plane spotting and not radar-code spotting.
                * We are installing receivers with a distance down to between 50 and 100km for several reasons. Redundancy and MLAT are the 2 major reasons. If there are not enough receiver users complains about lack of coverage. If there are many receivers feeders complain about radar code not showing up. No matter what we do someone is always dissatisfied.
                * If you are a software feeder and feel that you are not contributing to coverage you have the option to turn the software off.
                * If you are a FR24 box feeder and feel that you are not contributing to coverage please contact support@fr24.com to return the equipment.

                Comment


                • Does the server doing the mashup / merge use data from the multiple stations for validation (3 stations say the plane is at location 'a', one says it is at 'b' ... ignore 'b')?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by YWYY View Post
                    I have been feeding my data for a couple of years, provided by my own antenna and Radarbox receiver. I was the only feeder for the Bass Strait area - then came the "F" feeders and seemed my data was no longer used. Even data from aircraft overhead my location being provided by feeders over 200nm away - the first being FMAY. Lately there are more around Southern Vic and L'ton and Hobart. Even so my data is still used over all these "F" feeders as I can receive aircraft at lower levels than most in the Tas/SE Vic area. Also I am able to see aircraft further East towards NZ, especially the Christchurch track. So it may seem your data is not used, but it most certainly is. If you want to dominate again, maybe upgrade your antenna. I have just built a new Collinear - 1800mm long and wow what an improvement
                    Mike in Burnie Tas
                    This has nothing to do with wanting to "dominate". This is about the totally pointless data shown in the "radar".
                    FR state that people want this information and I don't doubt that but what they seem to fail to realise is that
                    people who want this information want it to be correct, otherwise there is no point in providing this information.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Mike View Post
                      This is an issues that has been discussed many many times in many many threads.

                      * Data from ALL feeds is used.
                      * Distance between the receiver and the aircraft is not relevant and not a parameter. ADS-B are digital signals and not analogue, so you either receive a signal or you don't receive it, nothing between. If the aircraft is 1km or 500km away makes no difference. The signal is not more accurate closer to the receiver. Once again either you receive the signal or not. The server doing the data merge does not know the location of the feeds.
                      * The radar code shown on map is not correct. It's only there because users want it to be there. The data on FR24 is a mashup of data from all receivers and the code is often old/incorrect/cached.
                      * There is nothing wrong with the radar code algorithm. The radar code is simply not correct as the data used is a mashup of data from different sources and receivers.
                      * Premium is the place to check what data you are feeding (contributing with).
                      * If you are doing radar-code spotting you are at wrong place. Flightradar24 is a place for plane spotting and not radar-code spotting.
                      * We are installing receivers with a distance down to between 50 and 100km for several reasons. Redundancy and MLAT are the 2 major reasons. If there are not enough receiver users complains about lack of coverage. If there are many receivers feeders complain about radar code not showing up. No matter what we do someone is always dissatisfied.
                      * If you are a software feeder and feel that you are not contributing to coverage you have the option to turn the software off.
                      * If you are a FR24 box feeder and feel that you are not contributing to coverage please contact support@fr24.com to return the equipment.
                      I'll make the point again.

                      Users who want the "radar" information displayed want it to be correct, if you can't do this then there is no reason to display this.
                      If you must display this sort of information then generic network descriptors would be more appropriate eg FAUS, TAUS or as is now
                      used F-MLAT3.

                      Comment


                      • So I quote myself again

                        * The data on FR24 is a mashup of data from all receivers
                        * If you are doing radar-code spotting you are at wrong place. Flightradar24 is a place for plane spotting and not radar-code spotting.
                        And to put another way: We have absolutely no plans in putting energy into radar code tracking. FR24 is a flight tracker and not a radar code tracker. One day the code will be removed, now it's there as people want it there.

                        Comment


                        • Mike,
                          Maybe the 'radar code thingy' should be turned off now from the website, and not at that later time whenever that 'One Day' you are talking about.
                          Brian

                          www.RadarSpotters.eu
                          [ Feeder Station List ][ Map ][ Latest Feeders Rank Stats ][ ImRadarFeeder.com Radar Feeders WorldWide Map ][ VRS Feeder List ] (NEW)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by peterhr View Post
                            Does the server doing the mashup / merge use data from the multiple stations for validation (3 stations say the plane is at location 'a', one says it is at 'b' ... ignore 'b')?
                            Yes, data from several receivers is already used for data validation and we are working on optimizing this to reduce number of data errors.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mike View Post
                              Yes, data from several receivers is already used for data validation and we are working on optimizing this to reduce number of data errors.
                              interesting..

                              I note that last night, my "radar code" was only one showing in my area where its usually killed by F-YBSU2, however, if your combining and validating data, something broke, why do you ask? well because one of those a/c to me never sends a decodable altitude to my device, however another (and YBSU2) does receive it, (I've got a bug report in on that software - seems one type of system fails to show it) so no, its not fr24's issue), but I note that YBSU2 was covering a/c well north, so was active and would also have been seeing this unknown alt a/c (I know because YBSU2 has good coverage where it was and shown this /ac before) yet the radar code thingy showing mine, reported 0 alt, which, if the combining and validating of data was occurring, should not have been "0" alt, should have been corrected by using the alt from another base (the alt was decoded and sent to fr24 correctly on the other 4 a/c around at the time).

                              just sayin...

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mike View Post
                                Yes, data from several receivers is already used for data validation and we are working on optimizing this to reduce number of data errors.
                                So the more receivers the more verification that can go on.

                                My main user of radar code is to differentiate; ADS-B, MLAT, T-EST, FAA. As they are different qualities of data.

                                The only reason I look at the codes is to see if any new T- radars come online. A with F-radars Mike nicely posts them in the forum.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X