Aussie Feeders

[Petenz]

Does anyone here have outline files (.0ut)for Australia? I have NZ Outlines but sometimes want to follow things in Aussie.

[FR24support]

Does anyone here have outline files

If these are for RadarView, maybe this post should be moved?

What files do you want - coastline, airports, routes?

[Oblivian]

http://jetvision.de/sbs.shtml

Has some

[nomad77]

Hi folks some of you may have noticed a new FR24 feed from F-YMAY1 Albury and the odd coverage it is providing.
This is because the feeder is in fact no where near Albury not even in the same state, but in fact located 200 kms
away in Bairnsdale Victoria. Despite my request to have the radar alias reflect my location it seem that FR is unable
(unwilling) to change this for reasons unexplained.

[fungus]

Hi folks some of you may have noticed a new FR24 feed from F-YMAY1 Albury and the odd coverage it is providing.
This is because the feeder is in fact no where near Albury not even in the same state, but in fact located 200 kms
away in Bairnsdale Victoria. Despite my request to have the radar alias reflect my location it seem that FR is unable
(unwilling) to change this for reasons unexplained.

G'day Nomad.
Have you contacted support@fr24.com and asked them to change the alias? If so, it may take some time as a change such as that may be a fair way down their priority list. Please let me know how things go- I'm considering a change to mine.

Regards,
Gregg (T-YSSY4)

[Mike]

The process of changing a feeder ID may seems very simple but as it's replicated to other servers and services, changing a feeder id is quite complex. There is only one person in FR24 team who can do it, and he is quite loaded with other tasks. I have full respect for that this maybe an issue for some feeders, but he would really like to focus on core development instead of spending his days with updating feeder id's for 500 feeders.
"I like this airport more"
"I live closer to this airport"
"There are more aircraft landing on this airport"
"If you change to this airport I will get a #1 instead of #4"
"There is no ADS-B traffic on this airport"
"The code of the airport has changed"
"There are no aircraft landing on this airport"
"This airport is closer on map, but it's faster to drive to another airport"
"This airport closed 3 months ago"
"This airport is only used by military"

The idea with the identifier was just to give every receiver a unique ID, and not keep up updated on daily basis with every airport/traffic change.
There are already several request queue since several months. If you want to change the ID, please make a request to support@fr24.com and it will be added to the list for future change. Please be prepared for waiting times.

[fungus]

The process of changing a feeder ID may seems very simple but as it's replicated to other servers and services, changing a feeder id is quite complex. There is only one person in FR24 team who can do it, and he is quite loaded with other tasks. I have full respect for that this maybe an issue for some feeders, but he would really like to focus on core development instead of spending his days with updating feeder id's for 500 feeders.
"I like this airport more"
"I live closer to this airport"
"There are more aircraft landing on this airport"
"If you change to this airport I will get a #1 instead of #4"
"There is no ADS-B traffic on this airport"
"The code of the airport has changed"
"There are no aircraft landing on this airport"
"This airport is closer on map, but it's faster to drive to another airport"
"This airport closed 3 months ago"
"This airport is only used by military"

The idea with the identifier was just to give every receiver a unique ID, and not keep up updated on daily basis with every airport/traffic change.

Mike.
since you're relying on the goodwill of the feeders for your site's very existence, it might be worth a bit of leeway towards the feeders 'issues' or 'concerns.' Without them, you dont have a website.


I'm pretty sure the number of changes would likely be minimal (and simply corrections of wrong information/location etc) that would likely 'please' the feeders. It also helps to make sure that the information being displayed on the map is accurate. We stump up a lot of money and invest a lot of time to upload to FR24 and in my own personal case, have to overcome some very severe health issues in order to continue doing so. I dont think it's too much to ask.

... hope those 1500 boxes have the correct ID's. And I guess we tell Nomad to go suck an egg.

Regards,
Gregg

[Mike]

Mike.
since you're relying on the goodwill of the feeders for your site's very existence, it might be worth a bit of leeway towards the feeders 'issues' or 'concerns.' Without them, you dont have a website.

Regards,
Gregg

I have full understanding for you say Fungus, but the problem is the number of feeders. We will soon have 1500 boxes out there, and just as I wrote
"The idea with the identifier was just to give every receiver a unique ID, and not keep up updated on daily basis with every airport/traffic change."
The risk is that in some months we will spending our days updating feeder ID's instead if developing FR24, and I guess that web page development is also a feeder concern or?

[Mike]

I'm pretty sure the number of changes would likely be minimal (and simply corrections of wrong information/location etc) that would likely 'please' the feeders. It also helps to make sure that the information being displayed on the map is accurate.

No, they are not minimal, and they take valuable development time. Once again, the idea of the code is to give a receiver a unique ID and not reflect traffic status. As long as the ID is unique it's accurate.

[fungus]

Hi folks some of you may have noticed a new FR24 feed from F-YMAY1 Albury and the odd coverage it is providing.
This is because the feeder is in fact no where near Albury not even in the same state, but in fact located 200 kms
away in Bairnsdale Victoria. Despite my request to have the radar alias reflect my location it seem that FR is unable
(unwilling) to change this for reasons unexplained.

There's your reasons mate, no one gives a rats. I thought you'd put up quite a reasonable argument. Looks like 'help us increase coverage' is a one-way street. Sorry but I tried to help.

[Mike]

There's your reasons mate, no one gives a rats. Sorry but I tried to help.

I'm sorry Fungus, but as many times before you and me don't speak the same language.
Feeder feedback is very valuable for us and that changes we currently make to show more feeder statistics is just because of such requests. Of course if we had unlimited time, unlimited resources and unlimited money we would implement every request we have received. But the reality is different so we have to make some priorities.

[airnrail]

No, they are not minimal, and they take valuable development time. Once again, the idea of the code is to give a receiver a unique ID and not reflect traffic status. As long as the ID is unique it's accurate.

Mike, I'm not (yet) a feeder so I don't have personal experience with the process. Purely a suggestion but would it be feasible for those putting up new feeders to nominate the airport code they want to use and FR24 allocate the prefix and the sequential number? Checking for conflicts need only be a clerical process using something as simple as a spreadsheet. As long as the ICAO code was correct and FR24 supplied the other two components, there should be no conflicts created.

While I can appreciate both sides of this issue, a 200km positional difference, were it in Europe, could easily put a feeder in one of several different countries which likely would bring a ferocious cross-border protest. Having a Victorian feeder labelled as being in NSW is our equivalent - and I can say that fearlessly because I'm a Queenslander!

John

[fungus]

Mike, I'm not (yet) a feeder so I don't have personal experience with the process. Purely a suggestion but would it be feasible for those putting up new feeders to nominate the airport code they want to use and FR24 allocate the prefix and the sequential number? Checking for conflicts need only be a clerical process using something as simple as a spreadsheet. As long as the ICAO code was correct and FR24 supplied the other two components, there should be no conflicts created.

While I can appreciate both sides of this issue, a 200km positional difference, were it in Europe, could easily put a feeder in one of several different countries which likely would bring a ferocious cross-border protest. Having a Victorian feeder labelled as being in NSW is our equivalent - and I can say that fearlessly because I'm a Queenslander!

John

Well said and that's usually how it operates- the feeder supplies his co-ordinates and nearest airport and FR24 do the rest- if there's been a cock-up, it should be fixed. If it takes a bit of time that's fine- priorities are priorities but at least help the bloke. And i'm sorry you're a Queenslander, watch out next year for the state of origin series. We'll nail you guys this time around. We have to- there's not much pride left down here at the moment

[Mike]

The system is already today picking nearest airport in FR24 database, so it's not possible to get a London code in Amsterdam or Munich code in Frankfurt, but you can get a US code if you live in Canada and closest airport is 2 km away on other side of the border. The problem is that feeders have different opinions about what the closest airport is, like the examples I gave above "too small", "only cargo", "more traffic on X" and so on.
No matter what changes needs to be done, there is no room for that in the coming 6-9 months. We are still working on releasing things that was supposed to be released 3 moths ago.

[airnrail]

Hi folks some of you may have noticed a new FR24 feed from F-YMAY1 Albury and the odd coverage it is providing.
This is because the feeder is in fact no where near Albury not even in the same state, but in fact located 200 kms
away in Bairnsdale Victoria. Despite my request to have the radar alias reflect my location it seem that FR is unable
(unwilling) to change this for reasons unexplained.

I thought it had extraordinary coverage from Albury when I followed a plane from Melbourne almost to Launceston on F-YMAY1. It's a very good feeder all the same and thanks for putting it up. It also seems to have cured a small gap in the coverage south of Bairnsdale of planes from Melbourne heading to NZ.

I replied to Mike earlier today and I guess we call that argument a stalemate but it begs the question: Is T-YBNS1 Bairnsdale an active feeder if you are at Bairnsdale but you are F-YMAY1 Albury? Both feeders were on the FR24 list yesterday and I've not been able to locate any activity from T-YBNS1 at all. Just curious.