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.

Finding waypoints


Author
Message
David N.
D
Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9, Visits: 98
At a recent flight in Polen, I was diverted to waypoint 'LUXAL' during flight. Due to turbulent weather, difficult communication and very limited airspace/time to navigate within it would have been nice if options that would fit the search criteria would be a bit more intelligent. LUXAL does not appear as a waypoint until you have typed the the full name dispite it should be evident (based on distance) when either LU or LUX has been entered.
During flight, I pushed the SD icon (top left), pressed 'Direct to' & 'Find':
Typing L - gives 25-28 options, none is LUXAL
Typing LU - gives 1-2 options, none is LUXAL
Typing LUX - gives 1-4 options, none is LUXAL
Typing LUXA - gives 0 options, none is LUXAL (obviously) 
Typing LUXAL - gives 1 (correct) option

This contributes to unnecessary high mental workload.
Please make it more logical/intelligent.




Frans
Frans
Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)Too Much Forum (975 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 47, Visits: 25
I had this issue as well, the search engine should be a little bit more "intellegent". ATC in countries like Poland or Slovakia likes to give VFR traffic directs to ATS-waypoints in CAS (just like IFR traffic), so it would be very usefull if this could be optimized.

Edited 8/5/2019 1:10:36 PM by Frans
emporer
e
Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)Too Much Forum (1.2K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 69, Visits: 5
just turn the waypoints ON in the layer menu:waypoints/airway reporting points
than you will see them
David N.
D
Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9, Visits: 98
emporer - 8/6/2019 1:32:55 PM
just turn the waypoints ON in the layer menu:waypoints/airway reporting pointsthan you will see them


True, I got that ... but in turbulent air with a Polish operator hard to read and diversion instructions to be implemented immediately ... I prefer typing instead trying to visually find it on the map.
177
1
Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)Too Much Forum (137 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44, Visits: 162
Is it possible to search with 'Find tool' (Ctrl+F) nearby ground facilities (VORs, DMEs, NDBs, marker beacons etc.) and other stuff like fixes (VRP's, IFR wpts) without entering their names? Or even better, just add some dedicated filter buttons in search window to find them more quickly. Even my old JeppView from 2000s can do it. Also, as the OP mentioned above, you still need to enter full name in order to find something (e.g., if I look for NIMUL wpt, it doesn't show anything even if I type the first 4 characters - NIMU). It really needs to be improved


;




Edited 4/21/2021 12:21:30 PM by 177
Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.1K, Visits: 6.7K
Feel free to suggest an alternative algorithm that will address the issues raised but will not detract from any existing used search behaviour.
David N.
D
Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9, Visits: 98
Tim Dawson - 4/22/2021 9:25:58 AM
Feel free to suggest an alternative algorithm that will address the issues raised but will not detract from any existing used search behaviour.

Tim,
I have no idea what lies behind the existing algorithm as my earlier/originating issue still persist.
If I am looking for LUXAL, the outcome is still identical as previously. 

What would help me, would be an algorithm with the following approach:
Note that this will primaly/only be relevant during flight.
During flight (Go fly) , 'Direct to' ... : (Maybe discard any match fx > 100nm away.)
Entering L, I would expect any matches complying to L*, including LUXAL, sorted by distance 
Entering LU, I would expect any matches complying to LU*, including LUXAL, sorted by distance 
... and so on.
Currently LUXAL is *NOT* shown until you make the full spelling, which doesn't make any sence to me ... why isn't LUXAL shown until fully spelled?


Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.1K, Visits: 6.7K
Because a search for lu* would produce hundreds of results. Also, why would we assume you're typing the beginning of a waypoint? Many people would search by the second word, or a piece of the work that will quickly filter down the number of results.
David N.
D
Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)Too Much Forum (61 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9, Visits: 98
Tim Dawson - 4/22/2021 3:00:33 PM
Because a search for lu* would produce hundreds of results. Also, why would we assume you're typing the beginning of a waypoint? Many people would search by the second word, or a piece of the work that will quickly filter down the number of results.

Tim,

I am aware that 100's will fit a criteria of LU*, which is why I suggested that distance limitation could work to reduce the share amount of hits/matches. Note that I consider this relevant during flight which also could support a distance limitation as anything very far away most likely will not be relevant. Alternatively could be a sorting by distance. I dont think that there will many LU* matches within 100NM (pls note that I am not talking about *LU* but only LU*). 
Nobody is assuming that I am looking for waypoint (dispite this would be highly probable during flight) but I am still puzzled why I am not getting a match/hit during the typing of LUXAL. It seems that waypoints are discarded in the current algorithm.
This is not a theoretical issue but a practical problem (diversion by ATC) that I (and others) have encounted and I am trying to find a good solution for that should be workable within SD. The above mentioned solution does in my perspective handle this issue.

Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)SkyDemon Team (573K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.1K, Visits: 6.7K
We've tweaked the search behaviour in the forthcoming version to allow partial matches for 5-letter designated points, during flight, for those points within 60nm. We will see (in this thread) whether this is a positive change.
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