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.

Relative Altitude of Traffic Targets


Author
Message
TimT
T
Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 46, Visits: 49
The relative altitude of traffic targets displayed on the map and/or in Traffic Radar is arguably the most important information about a threat.

The relative altitude is currently included in the label belonging to the target (both with ADS-B target symbols, and with TPX-C related alert rings). For example "+0.8", or "-0.3", standing for 800 FT above, or 300 FT below respectively. The text size is:

- Controlled in the "Mapping" settings
- Linked together with the text size for all other waypoints, airport names, etc.
- And is limited to 140% of default text size

When a new traffic threat appears, I find it difficult to very quickly read the relative altitude:

- Even at 140% the writing is still small (after all the tablet 'vibrates' on a RAM Mount arms, and light conditions may be less than ideal)
- The most important + or - sign is really difficult to tell apart (after all, the difference between + and - is only a few vertical pixels on the screen, but it may be the difference between life and death up in the sky).

Therefore my suggestions are (not withstanding an entirely different, better way of doing it that the clever people at SD are capable of coming up with):

- Separate the settings for Traffic Label text size from the general text size settings
- Allow a wider wider range to set the text size (e.g, up to + 300%)
- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets (I have no suggestion here how to do it - you'd need to play around with it)



Sky Painter
Sky Painter
Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 488, Visits: 7.9K
TimT - 6/23/2019 1:49:43 PM
The relative altitude of traffic targets displayed on the map and/or in Traffic Radar is arguably the most important information about a threat.

The relative altitude is currently included in the label belonging to the target (both with ADS-B target symbols, and with TPX-C related alert rings). For example "+0.8", or "-0.3", standing for 800 FT above, or 300 FT below respectively. The text size is:

- Controlled in the "Mapping" settings
- Linked together with the text size for all other waypoints, airport names, etc.
- And is limited to 140% of default text size

When a new traffic threat appears, I find it difficult to very quickly read the relative altitude:

- Even at 140% the writing is still small (after all the tablet 'vibrates' on a RAM Mount arms, and light conditions may be less than ideal)
- The most important + or - sign is really difficult to tell apart (after all, the difference between + and - is only a few vertical pixels on the screen, but it may be the difference between life and death up in the sky).

Therefore my suggestions are (not withstanding an entirely different, better way of doing it that the clever people at SD are capable of coming up with):

- Separate the settings for Traffic Label text size from the general text size settings
- Allow a wider wider range to set the text size (e.g, up to + 300%)
- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets (I have no suggestion here how to do it - you'd need to play around with it)




- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets...

How about a dart symbol, pointing up or down as required. It might even be possible for the symbol to change colour depending on the threat level – yellow=low, orange=moderate, red=high.


Mike
_________________________________________
Nexus 7 (2013) – Android 6.0.1 & SD 3.12.7.22564
Huawei P30 – Android 9.1.0 & SD 3.12.7.22564
PC – Windows 10 (Home Ed) Version 1903, Build 18362.239 & SD 3.12.7.0

TimT
T
Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)Too Much Forum (725 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 46, Visits: 49
Sky Painter - 6/25/2019 7:52:24 AM
TimT - 6/23/2019 1:49:43 PM
The relative altitude of traffic targets displayed on the map and/or in Traffic Radar is arguably the most important information about a threat.

The relative altitude is currently included in the label belonging to the target (both with ADS-B target symbols, and with TPX-C related alert rings). For example "+0.8", or "-0.3", standing for 800 FT above, or 300 FT below respectively. The text size is:

- Controlled in the "Mapping" settings
- Linked together with the text size for all other waypoints, airport names, etc.
- And is limited to 140% of default text size

When a new traffic threat appears, I find it difficult to very quickly read the relative altitude:

- Even at 140% the writing is still small (after all the tablet 'vibrates' on a RAM Mount arms, and light conditions may be less than ideal)
- The most important + or - sign is really difficult to tell apart (after all, the difference between + and - is only a few vertical pixels on the screen, but it may be the difference between life and death up in the sky).

Therefore my suggestions are (not withstanding an entirely different, better way of doing it that the clever people at SD are capable of coming up with):

- Separate the settings for Traffic Label text size from the general text size settings
- Allow a wider wider range to set the text size (e.g, up to + 300%)
- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets (I have no suggestion here how to do it - you'd need to play around with it)




- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets...

How about a dart symbol, pointing up or down as required. It might even be possible for the symbol to change colour depending on the threat level – yellow=low, orange=moderate, red=high.

I thought about that, but the dart is conventionally reserved for "climbing" and "descending" trend. Can't mess with those conventions.

A workable idea would be to omit the "+" sign, and to only use the sign in case of "below". So 300FT above would be "0.3", and 500 FT below would be "-0.5". (But see below regarding the 'useless' leading zeros...). So instead of having to figure out whether the sign is a "+" or a "-", one then can just say: If there is a sign, it is below; no sign, above. That is safer than the current denotation.

--

On a different note, in principal I prefer to see relative altitude stated in "hundreds of feet", like normal TCAS systems would do. And like it is equally the conventional way to denote flight levels. So for example:

"80" for 8,000 FT
"3" for 300 FT

Doing it is "thousands of feet" just creates leading zeros and commata without meaning. Why say (for 300Ft) "+0.3", if you can just say "+3", etc. That helps decluttering the display. 

Sky Painter
Sky Painter
Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)Too Much Forum (40K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 488, Visits: 7.9K
TimT - 6/25/2019 8:11:41 AM
Sky Painter - 6/25/2019 7:52:24 AM
TimT - 6/23/2019 1:49:43 PM
The relative altitude of traffic targets displayed on the map and/or in Traffic Radar is arguably the most important information about a threat.

The relative altitude is currently included in the label belonging to the target (both with ADS-B target symbols, and with TPX-C related alert rings). For example "+0.8", or "-0.3", standing for 800 FT above, or 300 FT below respectively. The text size is:

- Controlled in the "Mapping" settings
- Linked together with the text size for all other waypoints, airport names, etc.
- And is limited to 140% of default text size

When a new traffic threat appears, I find it difficult to very quickly read the relative altitude:

- Even at 140% the writing is still small (after all the tablet 'vibrates' on a RAM Mount arms, and light conditions may be less than ideal)
- The most important + or - sign is really difficult to tell apart (after all, the difference between + and - is only a few vertical pixels on the screen, but it may be the difference between life and death up in the sky).

Therefore my suggestions are (not withstanding an entirely different, better way of doing it that the clever people at SD are capable of coming up with):

- Separate the settings for Traffic Label text size from the general text size settings
- Allow a wider wider range to set the text size (e.g, up to + 300%)
- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets (I have no suggestion here how to do it - you'd need to play around with it)




- Find a better way of differentiating between "above" and below" targets...

How about a dart symbol, pointing up or down as required. It might even be possible for the symbol to change colour depending on the threat level – yellow=low, orange=moderate, red=high.

I thought about that, but the dart is conventionally reserved for "climbing" and "descending" trend. Can't mess with those conventions.

A workable idea would be to omit the "+" sign, and to only use the sign in case of "below". So 300FT above would be "0.3", and 500 FT below would be "-0.5". (But see below regarding the 'useless' leading zeros...). So instead of having to figure out whether the sign is a "+" or a "-", one then can just say: If there is a sign, it is below; no sign, above. That is safer than the current denotation.

--

On a different note, in principal I prefer to see relative altitude stated in "hundreds of feet", like normal TCAS systems would do. And like it is equally the conventional way to denote flight levels. So for example:

"80" for 8,000 FT
"3" for 300 FT

Doing it is "thousands of feet" just creates leading zeros and commata without meaning. Why say (for 300Ft) "+0.3", if you can just say "+3", etc. That helps decluttering the display. 

That makes a lot of sense Smile


Mike
_________________________________________
Nexus 7 (2013) – Android 6.0.1 & SD 3.12.7.22564
Huawei P30 – Android 9.1.0 & SD 3.12.7.22564
PC – Windows 10 (Home Ed) Version 1903, Build 18362.239 & SD 3.12.7.0

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