I was just wondering if there was something I've missed to get additional visual items displayed on the SD charts (both on my PC for planning and on the iPad for Navigation).

The best example I have is the various white horses around me as whilst Avebury is noted as a VRP, the white horses aren't marked in SD but they are on the CAA charts (my 1:500,000 chart has them clearly).

As a secondary observation, the appearance of roads and rivers can be quite different - comparing the river betwen Avebury and Marlborough, the CAA map has a lot of detail (despite not being zoomable in any way) whereas the SD one is a lot of straight lines (very obvious when zoomed in).

The same is evident on the A361 between Avebury and Wroughton, there is a marked bend in the road, clearly visible on the CAA map but completely absent on the SD plot.

I understand that it needs to be sampled as straight lines, but it seems that not enough sampling points have been used to give a true indication of the river shape, though maybe this is to reduce the data footprint.

I guess as SD is being used with GPS, it is not as important to have totally accurate mapping - but as there is an option to print the route, I was a little suprised they are not that accurate...

I totally sympathise with the last comment about the need for accuracy in mapping, particularly that SD is marketed as a VFR flying aid.

Very Newbytheway

DurhamTeaseAirport

While I sympathise with the view that the SD maps may or may not have various bends missing and that they should be as accurate as possible, let's not lose the plot and remember that VFR flying is precisely that -- FLYING MAP TO GROUND --- and the only map that should be used for this purpose is the CAA approved and endorsed maps.

I have no issue with missing bends as I can see the ground (I assume that is how you know it was missing) and the only thing that I do ask of SD is that the vertical data and geofixed reference points (VRPs etc) and aeronautical data (airspace etc) are accurate so that when SD reports my current location I know that I haven't busted air space or missed my reporting point, requested by the radar service, that I should report at. Afterall, there are stop "STOP SIGNS" etc down there along the roads on terra-firma, but I've yet to see one at 4500 ft QNH at the class A airspace boundary saying "NO ENTRY" or "BUS LANE - BUSES ONLY". This is where SD comes into it's own, as long as the GPS is reporting the correct lat/long location to the SD software.

Furthermore, if I use SD in IMC (which of course I don't -- Do I?) I can't see the bend in the road anyhow due to big white fluffy things getting in the way, so it really doesn't matter whether it's there or not. But then I don't use it for IMC flying do I......

Just a thought

Biggles -- EGKB

We consciously decided not to include things like white horses, quarries etc on our maps. One of the main reasons people buy SkyDemon is because our maps are simple and uncluttered. If you want to use the CAA chart as a moving map there are several apps that let you do that, and they're cheap too.

We think the detail of roads and railways on our vector charts strikes a good balance between resolution and speed of loading and presentation.

Surely, there is also the added fact that a pilot should always carry a constantly refered to, up-to-date, route marked map so that in the event of a GPS failure he is not bimbling around in a three dimensional no-mans-land!!! All the additional data for further accurate VFR navigation is there-on.

I love SkyDemon but traditional VFR navigation techniques must never be forgotten or allowed to fall into dissuse. You never know when you might need them in earnest!!!

Fly safe

Smokey

Thanks for the reply Tim, I was just checking there wasn't another overlay I'd missed for the extra features either on the moving map or for pre-flight planning. They are quite useful as turn points.

As for the detail levels of roads/rivers, I understand for the moving map whilst airborne that speed is important and the GPS fix means the exact shape of features isn't really an issue.

Howecver, that was really more a question for the planning side. I have been printing out a map with route on it, but found that this really isn't accurate enough for falling back on if there is a GPS issue so was again wondering if there was an increased detail level I'd missed. Clearly for pre-planning (which I tend to do on the PC) having the most accurate printout is beneficial and load time isn't an issue.

I guess I'll just continue to draw my route on the CAA map as well (though a nicely cropped and printed single sheet would be easier to refer to that a folded CAA map)

I have to say that the CAA maps are great when it comes to "in cockpit" use. Those moments when you haven't folded it quite right in the pre-flight checks (I'm sure we have all been there) and have to refold "in flight".

It guarentees at least 5 minutes of IMC flying on an otherwise perfectly sunny day when you begin to undertake the CAA set Mensa task of working out what folds goes where in order to put a 4' x 4' object into an 8" x 8" space.

The most enjoyable part has to be that it's the only IMC flying I have done where I cannot see outside the cockpit while, at the same time, not being able to see any of the instruments inside the cockpit.

Adds a new meaning to "flying by the seat of your pants". Best total instrument failure I've ever experienced and still trying to work out how to determine which way is up!

Just a thought!

Biggles -- EGKB

I do a lot of open cockpit flying where it isn't an option to take out a printed map, unfold it and re-fold it in a way that shows your route and fits on my kneeboard. Doing that would just tear it out of my hands.

For exactly that reason I was looking toward SD as my chance to a paperless cockpit. Therefore I put in my vote in favor of a more accurate map representation.

I would like to have the option to select the level of accuracy in the setup. Every video game lets me choose my balance between fidelity and speed. Why not SD?

-- Chris.

Because we have decided that, in our product, highly detailed roads are not important. There are other products where that decision might not have been made, but it fits our needs well and is a good balance between detail and speed and memory consumption.

To say our charts are not accurate implies they are not accurate from an aeronautical standpoint, which would be wrong.

Hi,

I agree totally with the accomplished balance between detail, speed and memory, from my point of view, there is no need for futher detailed roads.

However, I've another concern regarding the accuracy of roads, for example. I think, it is important to recognize the shape or the course of a road as a visual reference if the GPS functionality is unserviceable. Comparing the shape of the same piece of highway in Switzerland in SD and google maps or the Swiss ICAO Map, the difference of the shape, especially within the red rectangle, is quite obvious:



This is an example where I say that I would need to recognize the curved course of the highway (right image) which is not straight on like in SD's part of the map (left image).

This is not an issue about the level of details but about accuracy within the same level of details.

If there would be an option to improve the accuracy regarding shapes and courses of roads, rails etc., I would appreciate it very much.

Thanks for the reply Tim,

As a moving map for real-time navigation it is perfect and the fast update and less cluttered view is definitely a bonus.

I was just hoping to be able to increase the detail levels for printouts (even if this was an optoin on the PC only it would be useful) as having a single sheet printout with my planned route drawn on it exactly (ie matching the PLOG I have printed from SD) would be really useful as a backup should the iPad fail in some way.

I did this as a 'test' which is how I discovered this and I found it much easier to use a sheet of A4 than the unwieldy folded CAA map, which I found throughout my training that I always seem to pick up upside down or looking at the wrong side for several seconds. A single sided print of A4 is so much easier to use for a quick glance (even if the CAA map is carried in case it is needed).

However, what I found was that with the current levels of detail (and and lack of visual references, like the white horses) then I'll have to carry on drawing up the route on the CAA map. Maybe you could consider this in the future?

(Oh, along with being able to get SD to draw in plot 5deg/10deg 'off track' lines to aid estimation of closing angle)

We would consider increasing the detail level for roads etc if a lot of people made it clear that the level of detail at the moment is insufficient. I don't see that happening any time soon as I think we've got the balance right for the normal usage pattern of the software. I can't see us adding things like white horses though; it's a GPS navigation system after all.

Suggestion...... If you're planning to fly over unfamiliar territory, you could choose to create additional waypoints such as chalk figures. Then give them a particular type of symbol, such as a blue spot.

I tend to confirm such features via google earth and then create the waypoints.

Having been used to CAA 250k MM charts prior to my conversion to the faith, I was a little apprehensive when I did my first long distance flight with SD. However, I found the basic mapping to be quite adequate.

Having bolstered the detail with assorted recognisable features as waypoints, I'm happy with the compromise.

SD and a cheap Chinese satnav = Jobzagoodun.

I would suggest that the extra level of detail (e.g. the CAA 250:000) would be great to have for the printed back up but is unnecessary when everything is working as advertised on the ipad. This would avoid the need for huge data downloads on the ipad itself.

The SD Charts are just right for the job they are designed for, better than the Garmin on hardware twice the price. Those of you that have a problem with map size and or folding should get the CAA MemoryMap for your area. France is also available. Then plan your flight on SD repeat on to paper version ( to stay legal) then copy to MM and print out A4 sheets of flight, Use for the one flight, scribble clearances squawks and whatever on them. And then throw away and get a new clean set for the next flight. By combining these 2 sets of planning software you will have to work very hard to get unsure of position!! And you will not break the bank.

Alan M

But isn't Skydemon available as a non-navigation version too?

I accept that for live flight, the detail levels are OK but surely for anyone that bought it for pre-planning, the argument that you don't need accurate detail when SD is telling you where you are doesn't work? (Of course, I don't know what % of SD subscribers take the Nav option).

Just a shame to have to add another step (whether that be drawing it onto a chart myself or doing so through another application) when SD could let me do it with a click of the Print button.

We believe that regardless of whether you are planning or flying, SkyDemon's vectorised dynamic charts do a better of job giving you the detail that you actually need than any printed chart. Of course if you are actually interested in chalk figures, quarries etc for sightseeing, then clearly a map which has those on is more suited to you.

This is the same issue with a different name; it's still the level of detail of roads. Where you compromise on level of detail, details such as small bends will always be removed. That is the way it is, I'm afraid. I am unclear why you would be looking to use a small bend in a road observed on your GPS screen to identify where you are, when that is the purpose of your GPS?

As a flex wing microlight pilot, I agree with the original poster and the view that more, much more (if possible) detail/data/roads/places/landmarks/country houses/castles etc....... would be very welcome.

It sounds like you would be better off using a product that can display your position on (for example) an Ordnance Survey map. SkyDemon is not seeking to be such a product, nor are we seeking to be all things to all people (because that would be impossible).

Hi Tim,

Let me clarify. If enough people want more detailed roads, railways, rivers etc, we will increase that detail.

What we will not add is landmarks/country houses/castles. Those things, in our opinion, belong on an ordnance survey map and there are many simple apps out there whose job it is to allow such maps to be displayed onscreen with your position overlaid.

When selecting UK CAA/NATS Chart Style I would prefer an exact replication of the 1:500000 chart to be displayed. Thanks.

If you want an exact replica of the NATS 1:500k chart, I would suggest you use an app that is designed to display the NATS 1:500k chart.

Okay, but as customer feedback my preference is for a complete NATS chart option...in SkyDemon.

People who think VFR flight is not a 'follow the needle' activity, would like to have a detailed digital map or paper printout or JPG made by few clicks after route set up. That could be done in PC version only and keep tablet/mobile versions as we like them - responsive, reliable. The maps in PC version could be an option to be paid for.

Just picking this one up again as I'd just seen a post about it on facebook and read these comments “Our charts are much more accurate than the CAA chart” and “a zoomed-in CAA chart would not be helpful as it doesn't have that kind of resolution.”

I’m not sure the Skydemon chart zooms that well as thevector lines have pretty poor resolution and, to keep performance up, fewer ground features are depicted. The reasons are understandable and I like the Skydemon chart but I think there is a tendency to be a little dismissive of the use of the CAA charts. Runway HD seems to do alright offering the CAA 1:500kchart as a separate map subscription. If only it was available on Android!

The Skydemon chart may be “more accurate” but not necessarily as clear in every aspect. While it’s true that its generally less cluttered and has better contrast (well perhaps the SD styles) there are areas where things could be improved for the Skydemon chart in CAA style....

Airspace step-downs are not as clear.  The CAA chart visually highlights which sideof the intermediate line is within controlled airspace.

Airspace is not shown as clearly in some parts of the country.  It may be accurate but the chart appears cluttered. Particularly for class A between Birmingham and Brize.  OK you can hide features above but if you’re trying to get Skydemon CAA style chart to depict something like the CAA chart you end up with a mess or red lines. Only the external extents of the class A is relevant on a VFR chart.  The line separating M605 from Daventry CTA is not necessary.

Reducing the airspace removal level to say 6500 yields some surprising differences between CAA and Skydemon as to what is in or out of class A. One may be more accurate than the other but they're different and surely there shouldn't be.

Airfield name text size / placement could be improved at 1:500k. Its interesting zooming in and seeing which labels seem to stop other labels showing.  At 750k Fairford (military and not open to us civil VFR types) seems to block Kemble but at 500k Down Ampney (disused) blocks Fairford.  Whats the logic for which has priority?

Not all danger / restricted areas are named and the larger areas like D123 are not named as clearly in that the name follows an edge instead of being clearly within the area. This is made worse when smaller text is obliterated by the boundary hatching. This is less apparent in the Skydemon style because of color contrast.  Perhaps a bold font in the CAA style would help.

Masts / Lit Masts symbols not as clear.

VRP naming not as clear

Motorways not named and service stations junctions are not clearly shown.  This could be an optional layer under terrain features.

Fewer villages and hamlets shown. Have an option turn show /hide villages  and hamlets less that 1km2if necessary but currently which yellow circles are shown seems to be a bit random.

Fewer roads and water courses shown.   Again,could be an option to show minor roads or when zoomed in to equivalent of say the 1/4mil chart (personally not that fussed about this).

Some towns and large villages not named. Which ones are not named does not appear to be connected to size or level of zoom.

The visual contrast of wooded areas is not as clear.  The shade of green needs adjusting or perhaps edge in a slightly darker shade.


How about a user customizable chart style??

I've just noticed on this point that the behavior is different on phone, tablet and PC.  I would have expected (from users perspective) that the information on the chart at the same relative level of zoom would be the same.  font size and screen size are obvious difference but then the Oldbury on Severn and Bowldown text appears to be the same relative size on the chart on tablet and PC and the Bowldown on phone appears int he same place and size so it look like the same information COULD fit and be displayed in the same positions.

Sorry, this is never going to happen.

No chart is perfect and different chart styles suit different people. Pointing out there are differences between two charts is interesting but not really productive, as we do not seek to emulate any particular printed chart. The fact that SkyDemon charts tend to lack lots of "scenery" detail compared to many printed charts is very much deliberate. It's the aeronautical features we emphasize in SkyDemon and on many occasions our charts have been proved to show correct information whereas printed charts (which are out of date by the time you can even purchase them) are sadly lacking in this respect. It is the nature of vector charts that labels are not cartographically and individually placed.

Well actually I didn't think I wasn’t just pointing out differences and I’m certainly not trying to cause offense.

What I wrote was ONLY in the context of the CAA style that renders your vector graphics. I can only assume, from its name, that the intention was to get us somewhere close to the general appearance look of the paper chart. I think it does that very well but I highlighted some areas where I feel the visual clarity could be improved.....but perhaps it can't.

I am not, unlike many microlight pilots I've seen posting in various threads, asking for more ground features to be depicted.  Though I can’t see the objection if users can choose to display it or not through a filter.  I do think if you’re going to show ground features of a particular category then you should and not pick what 'appears' to be a random sub-set. If you not going to show all villages and hamlets below 1km2 then personally I’d rather have the ability to turn them all off and just leave urban areas visible. More ability to filter what features you show surely wouldn’t harm anyone or make you product less desirable?

Of course I’m not suggesting you carefully place the locations of the labels cartographically and I can see that you'll potentially have bigger issue if text was placed at the centroid of an area. Even you must agree that this colour text on the same colour hatch without any kind of masking is not legible, and zooming in doesn't always help as the text flies off and appears against a different line.


Some of the symbology within the CAA chart style could be to adjusted. Clearly you've no intention of doing that which is what I expected and why I thought the idea giving users the ability to create and edit chart styles didn't seem so ridiculous.

I actually think the answer is for us to get rid of that chart style (and in time, many of the others). At the time it was created it was designed to help people move away from the CAA chart by having similar colours and line styles. Clearly, it has also raised unintended expectations regarding symbology and presence of certain details. I wouldn't expect it to survive much longer, as the main chart style contains a large amount of functionality that people don't even know they're missing when they switch to one of the ones, like the CAA style, that were only designed to ease people away from printed charts.

Well that would be a great shame.....as you say....no one style is perfect.

We've been investing heavily in our charting for the last three years or so, and virtually NONE of that effort has made it into the old chart styles that were designed (as I mentioned above) to kind of loosely mimic national printed charts. That would require us to duplicate the effort for each style, and in doing so we'd void the purpose of those styles as they would no longer fulfil their original function.

The UK CAA chart style has been removed in the forthcoming version of SkyDemon.