Important: These forums are for discussions between SkyDemon users. They are not routinely monitored by SkyDemon staff so any urgent issues should be sent directly to our Customer Support.

Differences from CAA charts (extra visual items)


Author
Message
cyberkryten
cyberkryten
Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.8K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9, Visits: 26

I was just wondering if there was something I've missed to get additional visual items displayed on the SD charts (both on my PC for planning and on the iPad for Navigation).

The best example I have is the various white horses around me as whilst Avebury is noted as a VRP, the white horses aren't marked in SD but they are on the CAA charts (my 1:500,000 chart has them clearly).

As a secondary observation, the appearance of roads and rivers can be quite different - comparing the river betwen Avebury and Marlborough, the CAA map has a lot of detail (despite not being zoomable in any way) whereas the SD one is a lot of straight lines (very obvious when zoomed in).

The same is evident on the A361 between Avebury and Wroughton, there is a marked bend in the road, clearly visible on the CAA map but completely absent on the SD plot.

I understand that it needs to be sampled as straight lines, but it seems that not enough sampling points have been used to give a true indication of the river shape, though maybe this is to reduce the data footprint.

I guess as SD is being used with GPS, it is not as important to have totally accurate mapping - but as there is an option to print the route, I was a little suprised they are not that accurate...
Replies
rg
rg
Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 109, Visits: 1.9K

Just picking this one up again as I'd just seen a post about it on facebook and read these comments “Our charts are much more accurate than the CAA chart” and “a zoomed-in CAA chart would not be helpful as it doesn't have that kind of resolution.”

I’m not sure the Skydemon chart zooms that well as thevector lines have pretty poor resolution and, to keep performance up, fewer ground features are depicted. The reasons are understandable and I like the Skydemon chart but I think there is a tendency to be a little dismissive of the use of the CAA charts. Runway HD seems to do alright offering the CAA 1:500kchart as a separate map subscription. If only it was available on Android!

The Skydemon chart may be “more accurate” but not necessarily as clear in every aspect. While it’s true that its generally less cluttered and has better contrast (well perhaps the SD styles) there are areas where things could be improved for the Skydemon chart in CAA style....

Airspace step-downs are not as clear.  The CAA chart visually highlights which sideof the intermediate line is within controlled airspace.

Airspace is not shown as clearly in some parts of the country.  It may be accurate but the chart appears cluttered. Particularly for class A between Birmingham and Brize.  OK you can hide features above but if you’re trying to get Skydemon CAA style chart to depict something like the CAA chart you end up with a mess or red lines. Only the external extents of the class A is relevant on a VFR chart.  The line separating M605 from Daventry CTA is not necessary.

http://forums.skydemon.aero/uploads/images/ae42c87b-1f46-4b9b-94e2-7fd4.png


http://forums.skydemon.aero/uploads/images/986f8c32-4590-4b4b-a93c-719e.png


Reducing the airspace removal level to say 6500 yields some surprising differences between CAA and Skydemon as to what is in or out of class A. One may be more accurate than the other but they're different and surely there shouldn't be.

Airfield name text size / placement could be improved at 1:500k. Its interesting zooming in and seeing which labels seem to stop other labels showing.  At 750k Fairford (military and not open to us civil VFR types) seems to block Kemble but at 500k Down Ampney (disused) blocks Fairford.  Whats the logic for which has priority?

Not all danger / restricted areas are named and the larger areas like D123 are not named as clearly in that the name follows an edge instead of being clearly within the area. This is made worse when smaller text is obliterated by the boundary hatching. This is less apparent in the Skydemon style because of color contrast.  Perhaps a bold font in the CAA style would help.

Masts / Lit Masts symbols not as clear.

VRP naming not as clear

Motorways not named and service stations junctions are not clearly shown.  This could be an optional layer under terrain features.

Fewer villages and hamlets shown. Have an option turn show /hide villages  and hamlets less that 1km2if necessary but currently which yellow circles are shown seems to be a bit random.

Fewer roads and water courses shown.   Again,could be an option to show minor roads or when zoomed in to equivalent of say the 1/4mil chart (personally not that fussed about this).

Some towns and large villages not named. Which ones are not named does not appear to be connected to size or level of zoom.

The visual contrast of wooded areas is not as clear.  The shade of green needs adjusting or perhaps edge in a slightly darker shade.
http://forums.skydemon.aero/uploads/images/604859dd-6d08-4077-ad53-a8db.png

How about a user customizable chart style??


Edited 3/28/2015 10:08:25 AM by rg
rg
rg
Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 109, Visits: 1.9K
rg (3/28/2015)

Airfield name text size / placement could be improved at 1:500k. Its interesting zooming in and seeing which labels seem to stop other labels showing.  At 750k Fairford (military and not open to us civil VFR types) seems to block Kemble but at 500k Down Ampney (disused) blocks Fairford.  Whats the logic for which has priority?


I've just noticed on this point that the behavior is different on phone, tablet and PC.  I would have expected (from users perspective) that the information on the chart at the same relative level of zoom would be the same.  font size and screen size are obvious difference but then the Oldbury on Severn and Bowldown text appears to be the same relative size on the chart on tablet and PC and the Bowldown on phone appears int he same place and size so it look like the same information COULD fit and be displayed in the same positions.






Edited 3/30/2015 7:22:22 AM by rg
GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Threaded View
Threaded View
cyberkryten - 3/5/2013 7:39:39 PM
Runways - 3/6/2013 5:40:16 AM
Biggles-EGKB - 3/6/2013 10:32:54 AM
Tim Dawson - 3/7/2013 5:33:04 PM
Smokey - 3/7/2013 8:52:59 PM
cyberkryten - 3/8/2013 3:33:53 PM
Biggles-EGKB - 3/8/2013 7:07:17 PM
ckurz7000 - 3/11/2013 3:11:31 PM
Tim Dawson - 3/11/2013 5:40:33 PM
FlightX - 4/28/2013 10:22:15 PM
cyberkryten - 3/15/2013 11:22:25 AM
Tim Dawson - 3/18/2013 5:54:58 PM
T67M - 3/18/2013 7:27:08 PM
AnglianAV8R - 4/6/2013 8:38:16 PM
daxwax - 4/9/2013 10:07:00 PM
AlanM - 4/10/2013 8:03:29 PM
cyberkryten - 4/11/2013 1:58:58 PM
Tim Dawson - 4/16/2013 3:36:50 PM
Tim Dawson - 5/8/2013 10:22:49 AM
flyingboy - 5/19/2013 1:10:14 AM
Tim Dawson - 5/20/2013 10:18:22 AM
flyingboy - 5/24/2013 8:08:24 PM
Tim Dawson - 5/28/2013 11:30:03 AM
Richard747 - 6/14/2013 3:13:52 PM
Tim Dawson - 6/14/2013 4:23:33 PM
Richard747 - 6/18/2013 9:48:55 PM
Joseph - 9/3/2014 4:27:52 PM
rg - 3/28/2015 9:26:27 AM
rg - 3/30/2015 6:49:56 AM
Tim Dawson - 3/30/2015 10:48:40 AM
rg - 3/30/2015 4:49:56 PM
Tim Dawson - 3/30/2015 7:48:50 PM
rg - 3/31/2015 6:39:25 AM
Tim Dawson - 3/31/2015 9:43:38 AM

Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search