|
David N.
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 100
|
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
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 52,
Visits: 28
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
emporer
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 100
|
+xjust 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
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 72,
Visits: 757
|
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
;
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Dawson
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 9K
|
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.
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 100
|
+xFeel 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
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 9K
|
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.
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 100
|
+xBecause 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
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 9K
|
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.
|
|
|
|