Duplicate Aircraft between T-MLAT2 & T-F5M

[Asuka]

I've been seeing duplicate aircraft very close together that seem to be the same aircraft reported by 2 different feeds. Attachments are just an example of one, but I've seen it multiple times.

Is this normal?

F5M.jpgMLAT.jpg

Edit:
Add T-KFUL4 & T-F5M on a Southwest flight

[Oblivian]

F5m is a network of receivers bundling data. And looks to be lacking a lot of info required.

And MLAT is of course server side production of Mode-S. If users are piping out already calculated GPS data flagged with positional as if it was ADSB, Yeap. You'll get some

[airnrail]

F5m is a network of receivers bundling data. And looks to be lacking a lot of info required.

And MLAT is of course server side production of Mode-S. If users are piping out already calculated GPS data flagged with positional as if it was ADSB, Yeap. You'll get some

Is not T-F5M one of designators used for FAA data together with FAAx? When they used to show up as orange planes, those two codes appeared on orange planes all over the north Pacific and North America.

[Asuka]

Is not T-F5M one of designators used for FAA data together with FAAx? When they used to show up as orange planes, those two codes appeared on orange planes all over the north Pacific and North America.

That was my impression as well. The last 72 hours, I can find the duplicates all over the USA without even trying to find them, like something is out of wack somewhere between what MLAT and T-F5M are reporting. Doesn't matter if it's West Coast, Middle or East Coast, they are everywhere.

Now if you could combine what both are reporting, you would end up with a better dataset, one reports things the other doesn't

Hopefully things will settle down over the next few days.

[Sam26K]

I see the same problem all the time and keep that feature turned off. Under visibility if you switch off "US/Canda Radar Live" it masks the FAA sourced aircraft.
Attached images show the typical problem. The radar returns from the FAA sources over land within range of receivers have always been messed up.

[Sam26K]

Here's another couple of screen grabs clarifying the error. The T-F5M source is the phantom of the T-MLAT radar source. Between the time it took to get the screen grabs, both had climbed to 18K but were tracking the same altitude and the same airspace most of the time.

[Asuka]

Turned it off and will see what happens, but in LA Traffic

Good to see that I'm not the only person going mad

End of the day, this is pretty F U.....

No Help from FR24

[MikeyMoMo]

Thanks. Turned it off. F5M data is just wrong.

I see the same problem all the time and keep that feature turned off. Under visibility if you switch off "US/Canda Radar Live" it masks the FAA sourced aircraft.
Attached images show the typical problem. The radar returns from the FAA sources over land within range of receivers have always been messed up.

Thanks for the clue on what to turn off. I have not wanted F5M data for a while. Nice to get rid of it (I hope!).

I have noticed several problems with F5M data. For one, they present AC which don't exist where they are supposed to be. I had one "fly" right over the house per FR24 but I was not receiving it. So, it was not there. My range is not up there with the best but if something is flying right overhead, I will surely see that!

Another problem is the duplication between the two feeds. I have seen multiple occurrences of duplicate AC on the map. The AC are close to each other but there are certainly two of the same ID on screen.

The third problem I have seen with their feed is where planes flip between positions immediately and/or disappear mid "flight". This is from erroneous data. Since I don't know anything about that network, I can't even speculate on how the error data comes to be but there is frequently bad positions reported and impossible aerobatics going on!

My opinion is that FR24 needs to figure out who they will believe and put up the one that is thought to be correct. My vote is to ignore F5M input. It seems to be consistently wrong.

Mike
Vallejo, CA

[Sam26K]

My take away on the FAA data is that is not reliable at all but since it's from the FAA it should not be blocked from FR24. It's the officially released public data. The user has the option to switch it off (which I do) but I don't think it should be blocked from FR24.

If anything to me it's a curiosity and justifies further investigation by those who are curious .

[MikeyMoMo]

Good point

My take away on the FAA data is that is not reliable at all but since it's from the FAA it should not be blocked from FR24. It's the officially released public data. The user has the option to switch it off (which I do) but I don't think it should be blocked from FR24.

If anything to me it's a curiosity and justifies further investigation by those who are curious .

Good point. As long as any user can turn it off, that's good enough. But I wish there was some kind of consistency check. Maybe that's impossible to do. Who do you believe? Maybe F5M will get better in the future.

I tried FlightAware and the software kept crashing and when it didn't, the maps they present are quite inferior to FR24 so I am staying here and enjoying the view.

Mike