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.

Obstacles Switzerland


Author
Message
Chris_LSZO
Chris_LSZO
Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 80, Visits: 149
Hi

In Switzerland we have a lot of cables and other dangerous stuff. Unfortunately Skydemon don't show some of them.
Here are the official source, in this example 2 cables are visible and they are missing in Skydemon.
Here you can download the *.kmz-file of all obstacles.



Could you fix this please? Thank you.

Chris

Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 5.7K, Visits: 4.2K
It is standard in enroute aeronautical charts to include obstructions whose height is at least 300ft AGL only. In Switzerland we do vary this and include obstructions whose height is at least 200ft AGL. It is therefore probably the case that the "missing" obstructions you alluded to are too small to be selected for inclusion in our charts.
Chris_LSZO
Chris_LSZO
Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 80, Visits: 149
Tim Dawson - 8/22/2018 10:57:45 AM
It is standard in enroute aeronautical charts to include obstructions whose height is at least 300ft AGL only. In Switzerland we do vary this and include obstructions whose height is at least 200ft AGL. It is therefore probably the case that the "missing" obstructions you alluded to are too small to be selected for inclusion in our charts.

Thats maybe the reason, yes. Does that mean the height of the masts or the maximum height of the cable above the ground? Last week I almost flew into one of the two cables, which was really close! I'm pretty sure the rope was higher than 200ft above the ground.

Chris

Edited 8/22/2018 11:13:45 AM by Chris_LSZO
Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 5.7K, Visits: 4.2K
We are given a "maximum height above ground level" datapoint, where the word "maximum" implies that includes the cable, in the event it crosses a valley. It's that value which we require to be at least 200ft.
Chris_LSZO
Chris_LSZO
Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 80, Visits: 149
Tim Dawson - 8/22/2018 11:24:07 AM
We are given a "maximum height above ground level" datapoint, where the word "maximum" implies that includes the cable, in the event it crosses a valley. It's that value which we require to be at least 200ft.


Okay Tim.
Could you reduce the limit to 100ft maybe? Or could you implement an option the user can choose this limit byself? Many helicopter pilots use this software...

Chris

Edited 8/22/2018 11:38:36 AM by Chris_LSZO
Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 5.7K, Visits: 4.2K
We would only do this if faced with significant demand to do so. The reason why obstacles over 300ft (typical value) are excluded from enroute charts is to reduce clutter, because there are a lot of them. Is it normal to fly a helicopter less than 500ft AGL when not taking off or landing where you operate?
Chris_LSZO
Chris_LSZO
Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 80, Visits: 149
Tim Dawson - 8/22/2018 4:18:36 PM
We would only do this if faced with significant demand to do so. The reason why obstacles over 300ft (typical value) are excluded from enroute charts is to reduce clutter, because there are a lot of them. Is it normal to fly a helicopter less than 500ft AGL when not taking off or landing where you operate?

I'm agree with you. The best way would be if you leave the choice to the user: Let him adjust the min. height from 0 to 300ft. Or just a "Helicopter-switch".

Chris

Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)SkyDemon Team (460K reputation)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 5.7K, Visits: 4.2K
But then we'd still be loading all those obstacles into memory (for the many obstacle related calculations we do) just electing not to display them. There isn't an option to selectively load only a subset into memory, based upon this theoretical helicopter switch. And we'd be introducing yet another option, which we dislike and confuses people.
Chris_LSZO
Chris_LSZO
Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)Too Much Forum (4.9K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 80, Visits: 149
Tim Dawson - 8/28/2018 1:35:40 PM
But then we'd still be loading all those obstacles into memory (for the many obstacle related calculations we do) just electing not to display them. There isn't an option to selectively load only a subset into memory, based upon this theoretical helicopter switch. And we'd be introducing yet another option, which we dislike and confuses people.


Sad(
Gerhard66
G
Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)Too Much Forum (2.8K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 57, Visits: 311
Hi Tim,

this switch already exists in the aircraft setup menu (airframe type)!

I guess, the additional memory needed for a larger obstacle database wouldn't be a serious problem on modern handheld devices....

Gerhard

GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search