|
Kurt37
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 16,
Visits: 1
|
Hi there,
apologies if this has been raised before - tried searching without success.
I am using Pilotaware with Skydemon and I really enjoy the audio warnings since that maximizes my out of the Cockpit looking time.
However most traffic is bearingless mode S and I find it difficult to pick up bearing less targets in SD. AFAIK they is no info in the traffic screen that there is a bearing less target. I only see it on the moving map.
I know bearingless target info has its limitations. However it would help me a lot to get an audio warning: "bearingless target same altitude (or according altitude)". Then I know without looking at my iPad that there is Mode S traffic nearby.
What do Tim/others think? Possibly a user selectable feature (as already the option to display bearingless targets on/off).
Kind Regards, Patrick
|
|
|
|
|
PaulSS
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 89,
Visits: 3.2K
|
What do Tim/others think? Possibly a user selectable feature (as already the option to display bearingless targets on/off).
Some others, like you, would like audio for bearingless targets and have asked for it on the past
Tim doesn't like bearingless targets at all but allows us to see the circles despite this. He definitely doesn't like audio for bearingless and has said, in the past, that it ain't gonna happen.
I really like the SkyDemon intelligent audio but have to combine my Pilot Aware audio and SkyDemon audio in order to get the best of both worlds. As far as I'm concerned, an option for bearingless audio would be great, as then SD would be a one-stop-shop for audio (airspace warnings and all traffic warnings).
I think we're going to need a LOT of 'pretty pleases' though 
|
|
|
|
|
pilot-byom
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 323,
Visits: 388
|
I am all with the Skydemon opinion on that. Bearingless targets are often poorly detected and neither distance nor altitude can be trusted enough to do any further processing.
|
|
|
|
|
Kurt37
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 16,
Visits: 1
|
+xI am all with the Skydemon opinion on that. Bearingless targets are often poorly detected and neither distance nor altitude can be trusted enough to do any further processing. I agree with you about the distance, since that is purely based on a signal strength algorithm and not GPS data. But the signal contains an accurate altitude information, which is also what ATC uses.
Im my flying experience it has been way better to know that there is traffic in your vicinity at e.g. 200ft below (and most of the times I was able to spot him) than not getting any info at all. It just sharpens your senses. Who else thinks this way?
Kind regards Patrick
P.S.: and yes I do fully agree it needs to be user selectable, because of the limitations bearing less targets have.
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Dawson
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 9K
|
The best we could do here is a warning saying "there is traffic at around your altitude, that may or may not be close to you, and we don't know what direction it is". That isn't good enough for us, and that's why we haven't added such warnings. It's very important to us that the warnings we do give are as relevant as possible, so that people don't start tuning them out.
|
|
|
|
|
PaulSS
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 89,
Visits: 3.2K
|
I don't think it needs to be that facetious, Tim. The whole idea, in this case, is just to draw your attention to the screen, so a simple "Traffic" or "Bearingless Traffic" would suffice. Even better would be "Traffic, 200 ft above".
The fact that no other information is given means I don't really even need to look at my screen because I already know it's bearingless. Being given the relative height means I REALLY don't need to look at my screen.
I do understand the scepticism and reasons for the scepticism regarding bearingless traffic but I definitely pay much more attention to looking outside if I get an orange to red circle around me, so think there is merit in the warning. An audio prompt allows that to happen sooner, as I look at the screen relatively infrequently.
I welcome the day that we all have position information in our electronic outputs but, until the CAA mandates it, we still have to live with those who plough the skies without it. Just look around the Bournemouth extended area on a busy day and see the numbers of Katanas and Diamonds, from the local training school, flying around without ADSB and you'll see it is not an imagined scenario to sometimes only have bearingless traffic.
|
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 72,
Visits: 757
|
+xI don't think it needs to be that facetious, Tim. The whole idea, in this case, is just to draw your attention to the screen, so a simple "Traffic" or "Bearingless Traffic" would suffice. Even better would be "Traffic, 200 ft above".
The fact that no other information is given means I don't really even need to look at my screen because I already know it's bearingless. Being given the relative height means I REALLY don't need to look at my screen.
I do understand the scepticism and reasons for the scepticism regarding bearingless traffic but I definitely pay much more attention to looking outside if I get an orange to red circle around me, so think there is merit in the warning. An audio prompt allows that to happen sooner, as I look at the screen relatively infrequently.
I welcome the day that we all have position information in our electronic outputs but, until the CAA mandates it, we still have to live with those who plough the skies without it. Just look around the Bournemouth extended area on a busy day and see the numbers of Katanas and Diamonds, from the local training school, flying around without ADSB and you'll see it is not an imagined scenario to sometimes only have bearingless traffic. +1
|
|
|
|
|
Maverix
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 53,
Visits: 14
|
Tim,
please add a audio warning for bearingless targets.
Kai
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Robertson
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 48,
Visits: 140
|
At the risk of going over old ground yet again, the ONLY potentially inaccurate bit of data about a Bearingless target is the HORIZONTAL SEPARATION (due to differences in transponder transmission strength between sircraft). Vertical separation is calculated from the barometric altitude transmitted by the aircraft’s transponder, and is therefore accurate to the limits of the transponder transmissions (so no difference whatsoever in this respect from Mode-S/ES ADS-B).
An audio warning reporting ‘Traffic, 500 feet above - horizontal position unknown’ cannot therefore be described in any way as ‘inaccurate’ to any greater degree than equivalent warnings for known position traffic. You can also readily determine accurately from the data whether the broadcasting aircraft is climbing or descending - a factor which can be critical when you have no accurate horizontal position data for it.
Despite the reported significant recent increase in sales (and hopefully installations) of known-position EC devices, there will still be a very significant percentage of GA traffic out there with raw Mode-S transponders not transmitting their position (I don’t have the most recent figures, but I’d be extremely surprised if it is below 50% of GA yet - and probably still higher).
Adding an appropriate audio warning ‘Traffic, Same Level / xxx feet above/below / climbing/descending / Horizontal Position Unknown’ would immediately draw the users’ attention to looking outside the aircraft - rather than hunting for a contact on a screen. It would also allow SkyDemon (with audio) to be the ‘Go-To’ on GDL90 for both known position AND Bearingless Traffic.
Best Regards as Always
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
Tony N
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 335,
Visits: 2.4K
|
Surely, a bearingless target is still "position unknown"? All you know is that the bearingless target is at the same level as you somewhere but: 1. Range will be anywhere between 0 - 20+ NM of your current position 2. Its location will be anywhere relative to your aircraft.
Personally, I would still prefer to rely on my Mk1 eyeball for these targets rather than be alerted that an aircraft is "somewhere"..
|
|
|
|