AirNav Systems Forum
AirNav RadarBox and RadarBox24.com => AirNav RadarBox and RadarBox24.com Discussion => Topic started by: sandhl on September 11, 2010, 12:08:54 PM
-
Airnav Support Team
Would you be able to kindly let the forum members know what your current thinking on MLAT implementation is?
It was mentioned a while ago but we have not heard anything for a while.
Thanks
-
When we have the details to announce we will announce them on the forum. We know customers are eagerly awaiting this and our team is working hard as well.
For obvious reasons due to competitors we will not be releasing any information till near the release.
-
Could you say whether the announcement is likely to be in 2010 or 2011?
-
Sorry we can't disclose that yet. Even we don't know in support :) They are keeping tight lipped.
-
It would also be useful to know the ballpark cost of the new MLat-capable hardware, and whether there will be an upgrade path from the current RadarBox, but I guess that's also considered a sensitive topic at the moment for competitive reasons.
-
We are not confirming that nor whether you need a new box or not (which we know what your actual question was after)
All details will be announced near release. Till then we just have to wait :)
-
We are not confirming that nor whether you need a new box or not (which we know what your actual question was after).
I wasn't asking a question.
Nobody seriously believes you can do MLat with the current RadarBox hardware. Whether or not you wish to acknowlege that at this stage is of course up to you.
Feel free to tell me I'm wrong.
-
We have removed a post which was deemed advertising in this thread.
We have no problem with the mentioning of addons but please do not post just to advertise them and promote them. These posts will be removed for obvious reasons.
-
It's been a while any new information on the mlat feature?
-
Its been worked on, we have a few products/software to release in 2011 that we have been busy with it.
For obvious reasons due to competitors we will not be releasing any information till however till near the release.
-
Airnav, does this mean "It is actively being worked on at this time" ? or is ShipTrax still the only product being worked on?
On the topic, how can releasing little details about your mlat progress help competitors when Radarbox is now the only box without a Mlat feature, all your competitors have already implemented the feature.
Lets have a simple answer then to a simple question: Will Airnav's Mlat require a new box or will it be designed to work with my current box?
-
DaveG.
There a few products being worked at present and MLAT is one of those. Our competitors have not implemented anything, the actual data is being taken from there receivers and being worked on elsewhere. What we want to do is to provide MLAT so it can work in our network environment and be seamless in the RadarBox software.
This is not just a change of adding extra time commands to the port data. This includes updating the software, having servers ready to handle the MLAT processing, testing etc.. This is not something which is a simple or quick task therefore we are taking our time on this for the right reasons.
Many have spread rumours that we are doing nothing which is totally incorrect. There is a lot of work which is going on behind the scenes and in 2011 you will get to see the level of work that has been put in.
We won't be answering your question as it is something our competitors also want to know and is something that will be revealed when it is about to be released. We understand you have questions you want answered but like many products, very few details are released untill its ready.
-
Support, thanks for the reply and it is a little informative, so thanks for that. But hope you can understand the big question that everyone is looking for, including me is will it work with my current box or not.
If it does great and I look forward to the release, but if new hardware is needed then my current box would become defunct if I wish to run Mlat on the Airnav network and would need to splash out cash on a new box.
As for not releasing info until is about to be released due to competition, maybe in future it would be best not to publish or even hint that someone is being worked on if it can't be either delivered or explained until sometime in the distant undefined future, would save lots of questions I'm sure your tired of reading.
One final comment, and please this is just observation and no idea how valid. Would an Airnav Network only Mlat system have sufficient coverage to be able to provide mlat plots? The benefit with the third party option is greater coverage of all boxes and chances of valid plots.
Cheers
Dave
-
quote:
"This is not just a change of adding extra time commands to the port data. This includes updating the software, having servers ready to handle the MLAT processing, testing etc.. This is not something which is a simple or quick task therefore we are taking our time on this for the right reasons".
Thanks for the reply and all understood and i hope you have a good year in 2011.
from pat
-
Hi All,
I am verry sorry. I was offline for a while. What is "MLAT"?
Thank you in advance for your answer.
-
I am verry sorry. I was offline for a while. What is "MLAT"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilateration
-
John here is another book for bedtime.
http://www.multilateration.com/surveillance/intro.html
from pat
-
MLAT in Canada:
http://www.navcanada.ca/NavCanada.asp?Language=en&Content=ContentDefinitionFiles\Newsroom\Backgrounders\wide_area_multilateration.xml
Unfortunately MLAT is not of much use to us amateurs here in Canada due to the lack of receivers.
-
Airnav team,
Is there any update on Mlat? Been 6 months since this was last discussed.
-
Work is in progress. We will update everyone when we have news.
-
Work is in progress. We will update everyone when we have news.
Can you give some kind of time-scale, any indication at all please?
-
At this time we will not give any time scale. We are working hard on the background on several new systems and they will be announced when we have more news.
Next in line is ShipTrax and after that... :-)
-
Next in line is ShipTrax and after that... :-)
???.....a small patch to 4.03 that cures the bugs that corrupt the data, thus finally after a number of months giving users a stable and bug free 4.03, whilst they continue to wait for the long term developments of any other products you have been promising???? :-)
-
At this time we will not give any time scale. We are working hard on the background on several new systems and they will be announced when we have more news.
Next in line is ShipTrax and after that... :-)
Hi ANDev, this is the same old tale we've been told for months (years even), is MLat with the existing RB even possible? or will MLat only be available with a "MkII"? Come on, it's long gone time for some real truthful answers.
-
At this time we will not give any time scale. We are working hard on the background on several new systems and they will be announced when we have more news.
Next in line is ShipTrax and after that... :-)
Hi ANDev, this is the same old tale we've been told for months (years even), is MLat with the existing RB even possible? or will MLat only be available with a "MkII"? Come on, it's long gone time for some real truthful answers.
Yep, I have to agree with you Jon. Many of us have been with Airnav for years and we've waited patiently for the much heralded bug fixes and updates which never appear.
Meanwhile things have moved on in the field but it's only because of volunteer updaters and FDL that Airnav has made any progress at at all.
It's time we customers had some up front answers, not just the same empty promises?
-
All this criticism of AirNav saddens me as I know how extremely difficult it is to help set up and maintain a multilateration network , having done it for over three years on a voluntary basis.
We all know that there is only one way to get Multilateration and that facility is open to AirNav users as it is to any other virtual radar device owners.
The system operates in harmony , not in competition with , AirNav box owners.
-
We all know that there is only one way to get Multilateration and that facility is open to AirNav users as it is to any other virtual radar device owners.
Agreed. If Radarbox users want to make use of a multilateration network, then they can do so NOW, they don't have to wait for anything. And Radarbox 3D users can even display MLAT'ed aircraft in Radarbox itself, they don't need to look at a seperate Planeplotter display.
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=4578
-
All very well Satcom & Tarbat but I don't want to use Planeplotter particularly - nor for that matter FDL - nor for that matter do I think that the databases should be compiled by our members.
What we're talking about is a PROFESSIONAL outfit - Airnav - and a professional product - Radarbox. This should not have to be supported by amateur (with all due respects) and outside organisations, however good they are.
I like my radarbox - it is a good piece of kit and performs more or less as I expected it to. The question being asked of the manufacturers on their own forum is in 2 parts:
1. The long awaited bug fixes referred to above by ACW367 - how much longer will we have to wait?
2. The introduction of Mlat or Airnav alternative - is anything planned and if so how far away is it?
All that Coastguardjon, ACW and myself are asking for is an alternative answer to the "wait & see" that we've been given for a couple of years now. We're grown enough to take the truth, be it six weeks, six months or six years.
That seems reasonable enough to me.
-
All,
Our priority will be the bug fixes and requests that have been asked for. As soon as ShipTrax is released our developers time will be fully dedicated to rectifying these issues and working further on the software. We sincerely apologise for the delay in this however Live Flight Tracker and ShipTrax had suffered longer delays and had to be a priority first.
MLAT however has been worked on since last year. This is not an easy project as we have mentioned before and will take time. We cannot say when it will be released and anymore details for commercial reasons.
-
I guess I take the view that I never rely on "vapourware" announcements from any manufacturer. Until a feature is actually announced, don't rely on it. I've been dissapointed too often over the years from various software and hardware companies over features that take longer to appear than expected, or never appear at all.
If you're desperate to use multilateration now, then there are solutions that work with Radarbox - until you see the words "MLAT" on a Radabox screenshot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tarbat/5395517974/sizes/o/in/photostream/) ;) (joke!!)
Although I find that I don't bother with MLAT now - after the initial excitement of the feature in Planeplotter, I've gone back to using just basic ADS/B reception in Radarbox.
-
I think what it boils down to is how much of our money is going into shiptrax that should be spend on airnav.
-
I guess I take the view that I never rely on "vapourware" announcements from any manufacturer. Until a feature is actually announced, don't rely on it. I've been dissapointed too often over the years from various software and hardware companies over features that take longer to appear than expected, or never appear at all.
If you're desperate to use multilateration now, then there are solutions that work with Radarbox - until you see the words "MLAT" on a Radabox screenshot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tarbat/5395517974/sizes/o/in/photostream/) ;) (joke!!)
Although I find that I don't bother with MLAT now - after the initial excitement of the feature in Planeplotter, I've gone back to using just basic ADS/B reception in Radarbox.
Mlat, like 3D. might make a nice addition, but it is not top of my "must have" list.
Far more important IMO is the "daily bread" of the system. We need the bug fixes together with a reliable supply of regular and accurate updates to ALL databases, including routes, such updates being delivered in a way that does not require the user to get involved in advanced computing.
If we can get that sorted we will then have a stable and reliable long serving Radarbox, to which we can consider adding additional software/hardware goodies.
-
Far more important IMO is the "daily bread" of the system. We need the bug fixes together with a reliable supply of regular and accurate updates to ALL databases, including routes, such updates being delivered in a way that does not require the user to get involved in advanced computing.
Totally agree.
-
Hi
I totally agree as well.
Brian
-
We will repeat one more time that once ShipTrax is release we will focus all our attention back to RadarBox and correct every single pending item.
-
Oh no - ShipTrax before even a small release to fix some minor easy to fix bugs....... Imagine if MS said - we will not fix all those Windows bugs until we release MS Office 2011
-
ShipTrax has no interest to me whatsoever.............possibly about the third or fourth time in the last twelve months that I've typed those words on this forum.
We are talking about a totally different product - one that is already in the public domain - that is available to be purchased - has a fairly extensive/captive market - should already generate revenue from its initial purchase and "add-ons", compared to a totally new product, aimed (with the exception of a small % of users) at a totally different market, with no as yet justifiable captive market!!
I really don't get it at all?
Based on the unrest these sort of topics drum up, it seems there is a very strong level-headed group of current users/customers awaiting some serious resolution to some/all the problems we have put up with for who knows how long.
How much longer are you guys going to use ShipTrax as an excuse?
Please don't continue to dangle carrots in front of us, giving us the slightest belief that something like MLAT is around the corner.
It should by now , have been a critical business decision to firstly fix these bugs or alternatively go public with the reason why it is not possible to fix them.
The comment above to "correct every single pending item" is undoubtedly what we the users would like to happen - but it is a very very bold statement to make.
It's interesting that we seem to now be getting a fair few "senior" forum members throwing their views onto the table also - surely this is indicative of how fed up we all are of this continuing saga relating to a product/hobby we care not a jot for!!
May I throw some weight behind Bratters comment, that the bread and butter fixes should be prioritised, together with anything that the updaters need to continue to carry on with their unwavering support (having been part of the updater team in its fist several months, I know exactly what these guys are giving in terms of effort and time, not to mention nervous breakdowns). How these guys continue to "dig " the product out of a hole is quite simply unmeasurable in my view, so please please concentrate on their needs before we start going off on any product development routes.
At the end of the day we are, believe it or not, fully behind RadarBox - all we want, is a reliable, informed path forward, giving the users some realistic hope , rather than continuing into the same black hole
-
Marpleman,
As we have said, after ShipTrax is released which should be very soon we will looking at these details.
Yes its very easy post what you have written but there are considerations which have to be made by us which are not always clear to the average customer. We are doing our best to make the correct decisions and we hope you will be pleased with the outcome.
-
Blimey..........
What do you class as the "average customer"?
I think it's a safe assumption that ANY customer would expect a niche product such as RadarBox to do what it says on the tin, and if it doesn't, by whatever small measures , get it fixed?
It's surely about basic support of a CURRENT product that at the moment is simply underperforming due to continued under resourced support for THAT product.
Anyhow, I've voiced my opinion enough on this , so I'll leave it alone now.
At the end of the day, you guys make the decisions.
Thanks
-
It's interesting that we seem to now be getting a fair few "senior" forum members throwing their views onto the table also - surely this is indicative of how fed up we all are of this continuing saga relating to a product/hobby we care not a jot for!!
The senior forum members have always expressed these views. Airnav are fully aware that whilst I volunteer to help them I have long verhmently pushed for data adminstration to be taken in house. A professional database solution (in-house) for a professional product should always be considered first, prior to expansion of the product range in my opinion.
Here is my February 2010 push, 17 months ago. http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=4285.msg43216#msg43216
Many of the "senior" forum members who agreed with me at that time can no longer post here.
Regards
ACW367
-
Hello
I can see everyone's points of view but the general opinion in our household is we are actually getting the service we paid for when we purchased our boxes. It is better actually as the database of aircraft is much improved but I do agree the routes need looking at. Obviously anything else that is released, for example MLAT, is really just an added bonus.
This is only my opinion but then we are all entitled to that and that is what a forum is for-rational discussion :-)
Andrew
-
- Posts have been removed which are promoting other software/products on the forum. It is against the rules.
-
Having just seen Tarbat's screenshot above, it reminded me why I first bought a Radarbox. It was actually to see Flybe flights from my local Exeter airport. How disappointed was I, when I found after plugging it all in, to only find out that you simply can't see any Flybe flight positions on the 2D display.
2 years later...and ... still no MLAT - but hey...you do have 3D display so you can wizz round with a mouse, and see all that empty space with the occassional white bean stalks showing - oh ...thats another bug...).
I wonder how many Radarbox uses have now lost that novelty new 'excitement' feeling that they all first had, or maybe the excitement we all had just after the 3D upgrade.
I feel like Ive got an ipad, without any new apps to play with, and no bugs getting fixed. (like my 3D 'selection' bug which I reported over a year ago, and still no fix)
Am I alone with that 'empty' feeling...... ?
Is there anyone else who has some dust starting to build up on their Airnav box ?
(Come on Airnav.... )
-
cool_1,
We think that is unfair. The product was always sold with details that is a ADS-B decoder and Mode-S showed up on the list. You have got what you have paid for. The MLAT we are looking at and other feature are bonuses.
The bugs we understand that they should be fixed and we apologise and have stated about what we will do in the last few posts.
-
I have had my box for three years now.
When I purchased it i'm sure it said it was an ADSB and mode S receiver.
No mention of MLAT anywhere.
If it is in the pipe line then great?
Steve
-
Airnav,
Well thats debateable.
Can you really say that I'm getting what Ive paid for ? (After paying extra for 3D interface).
See attached photo.
As you can see, I have only (approx) 10% of the 3D models expected, and and I cannot select any aircraft without going back to 2D network. (so I cannot see the 3D descent paths !)
Add to that the lack of MLAT (OK its a feature in progress) and its a bit like booking a holiday in a posh hotel, and when you turn up to use the HUGE pool, the swimming pool is actually only 1/10th full. So no diving !
Its VERY frustrating...
-
As said issues with bugs will be looked at and we have already said that a few times now and we understand the grievances behind this and will be rectifying this. We apologise for the issues caused and will be doing our best to change this.
However MLAT is a feature we are working on for the future. It is not something that was a stated feature when anyone bought RadarBox.
We feel we have said enough on this topic now, the thread has brought out the resident trouble makers and people promoting other products. Anymore silly discussion and this topic will be locked.
-
Some users write message that are totally the opposite of what's going on: RadarBox is now and by far the leader in Virtual Radar Systems, is being used by hundreds of professional customers all over the world and by thousands of enthusiasts. It continues to set the standards on this area with a superior software and hardware, simple, easy to use and sales continue string after almost 3 years since release.
It has problems? Yes. Any software nowadays has problems and there is always room for improvement. We are aware of that. Microsoft Windows is in its seventh version, Apple will release iphone 5. RadarBox will continue to be improved. We have never and will never make false promises at AirNav Systems to try to keep customers with us.
Now its time for ShipTrax which is as addictive as RadarBox and the hardware represents an important improvement over other existing receivers with almost always better results in all conditions and for the first time ever with a simultaneous ethernet, USB and serial output.
Please be patient as we have dozens of new ideas for RadarBox which will be implementd after ShipTrax is released. You are part of the biggest Virtual Radar Community and be sure we are here to work hard and continue to improve all our products.
-
Please be patient as we have dozens of new ideas for RadarBox which will be implementd after ShipTrax is released. You are part of the biggest Virtual Radar Community and be sure we are here to work hard and continue to improve all our products.
Can you kindly advise when you expect Shiptrax to be released then if only to give us a clue when to expect these ideas for RB to surface.
P.S I saw a ship last week leaving Southampton, it was moving so slowly I was able to get my binoculars out read the name and port, have a pint then fire up the netbook, eat a sandwich and read up all about the ship. I looked up and the ship was still in sight. Exciting stuff......
-
B****y hell Tramline. All that detail from 2 miles south of Heathrow. Where did you get binoculars like that from? Exciting stuff indeed!!
Regards
Syd :-)
-
B****y hell Tramline. All that detail from 2 miles south of Heathrow. Where did you get binoculars like that from? Exciting stuff indeed!!
Regards
Syd :-)
I was at Southampton Docks! I saw this ship and Zzzzzzzzzzzz......
-
Now its time for ShipTrax which is as addictive as RadarBox
No, it isn't time for ShipTrax. At least, it shouldn't be?
I didn't buy an aviation related product, to be continually told that the clearing of known issues were on hold until a totally new non-aviation product was launched, considerably later than initially promised.
Whilst part of me sympathises with your desires to enter into the nautical market, I find it remarkably naive to keep using this excuse to block development of an existing product.
I work for a very succesful US owned semiconductor manufacturer, some end products of which will undoubtedly be within the "guts" of everyones laptop/pc and even RadarBox of everyone on this forum.
We serve two distinct customer product bases - analogue products and discrete products.
I really hate to think what one set of customers would do if they were told, "sorry guys, it's time for analogue! We're only going to look at developing discrete products once we've sorted out our desires in the analogue market".
That is effectively what you are implying above.
Both sets of customers should be catered for at the same time.If they can't, then I think we're looking at a distinct lack of resource available to maintain a stable platform for RadarBox to grow from?
To be honest, this is nothing more than simple business common sense.
We don't even have two sets of customers here, as we only have one product!
Unfortunately MLAT gets drawn into this debate - it's inevitable, especially as you've implied it is on the horizon? however, it's not really the core issue.
It may sound harsh, but to abandon your existing customer base, on the whim of a new untried product, is akin to committing commercial suicide.
-
>It may sound harsh, but to abandon your existing customer base, on the whim of a new untried product, is akin to committing commercial suicide.
Copying the last statement of our post: "You are part of the biggest Virtual Radar Community and be sure we are here to work hard and continue to improve all our products.".
-
Please be patient as we have dozens of new ideas for RadarBox which will be implementd after ShipTrax is released. You are part of the biggest Virtual Radar Community and be sure we are here to work hard and continue to improve all our products.
Can you kindly advise when you expect Shiptrax to be released then if only to give us a clue when to expect these ideas for RB to surface?
-
Hello
I dont really understand why all the Radarbox users on here are so against Shiptrax as there is no obligation for any of us to buy shiptrax just because we have Radarbox. There will be a completely new set of people who will appreciate Shiptrax as we do Radarbox. Not all aviation enthusiasts like ships but also not all ship enthusiasts like aviation. Each of these products will have their own following and if the dislike of Shiptrax is because of the delay in updates, then, as said earlier we still have the coverage on Radarbox to what we got it for in the first place.
Andrew
-
No one is against Shiptrax. It is just irritating that it is absorbing every minute of development time so not even minor bugs in RB are being fixed
-
Well said chris and to the point, but will they listen to what we have to say,
and orkney yes keep the shiptrax to their own forum not here.
-
Hello
I dont really understand why all the Radarbox users on here are so against Shiptrax as there is no obligation for any of us to buy shiptrax just because we have Radarbox. There will be a completely new set of people who will appreciate Shiptrax as we do Radarbox. Not all aviation enthusiasts like ships but also not all ship enthusiasts like aviation. Each of these products will have their own following and if the dislike of Shiptrax is because of the delay in updates, then, as said earlier we still have the coverage on Radarbox to what we got it for in the first place.
Andrew
C'mon Andrew, let's think about it. Nobody has said anything against Shiptrax. I'm sure it is - or will be when released - a first class product. Maybe some on here will buy it.
But, whilst it is an Airnav brand, it has naff all to with Radarbox and aviation, which is why we are all gathered here.
Look at this way - my Saab needs a service. I take into my dealer and he says " sorry, can't touch that for a while, we're behind in our aircraft development".
Diversification means many product ranges, but each product has to have its own integrity and its own management . You can't sell toasters one day and knitting needles the next. That won't work - and judging by all the rumblings on here, it isn't doing.
-
Bratters
By the time your SAAB gets serviced, it will be out of warranty ;-)
I find it disheartening that we have to start using ridiculous analogies like you and I do to get the message across........
But hey-ho, we've got a patch of sunny weather approaching, so it's onto the box for a couple of hours
Just hope none of the bugs rear their ugly heads whilst I'm using it!
Rich
-
But, whilst it is an Airnav brand, it has naff all to with Radarbox and aviation, which is why we are all gathered here.
It does has something to do with aviation if you want to track the position of search and rescue helicopters ;)
http://www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=5639.0
-
The RadarBox Support says that when we bought the RadarBox we've got what they promised. But that's not true. It's true that MLAT is an addon. But for all the bugs it's simply not true! For example I've posted the bug that the altitudes in the 3D view are incorrect. All aircraft are flying too high because the altitude in feet is interpreted as meter.
OK, it was not promised that the 3D view is working correctly. But when I buy a RadarBox 3D, I assume that the 3D view is working properly! And it's quite a long time ago that I've posted that bug.
I'm really really disappointed about the way Airnav fixes (or doesn't fix) the bugs. If I had known that before I think I bought a comparable product elsewhere although the RadarBox software is quite nice.
For Airnav it would be so easy to have satisfied customers! I can't understand why they seem to ignore that. I business nothing is more important than having satiesfied customers who tell other people how good the product is. That's invaluable.
-
I am personally also waiting for new Radarbox 5ХХ and am also disappointed that we probably won't see a new release until the end of this summer. But in Arnav’s answers here I have found a very constructive point for me personally. MLAT isn't a first priority and work on a new release will start (or have already started) with bugs fixing and implementing more useful new features in the software. Sure it’s not the right place for new features suggestions, but more powerful statistic features in a new version are much more important for me.
Let’s stop some kind of hysteric concerning the timeline for new software and other issues. Airnav obviously isn’t Microsoft and probably doesn’t have enough resources to move a few projects simultaneously. Nothing is wrong with it.
I’ve been working with Radarbox software/hardware for almost two years and during the last seven months in 24/7 mode. I see bugs, these bugs sometimes seem very unpleasant and even irritating, but not enough for me to say that I want any other software. Even my 3.13 has tank like stability and as for some network server problems – I am not an ATC controller, it’s a hobby for me and from my point of view we don’t have any serious problems with the network now.
As for the 3D version “10% of the 3D models expected” – when you downloaded 4.03 demo you have a chance of doing a careful inspection of the content of GE_Models directory. If number of models and liveries isn’t enough for you, just don’t buy this upgrade or this version of software. Nobody promised to us to create additional models and liveries. If you want to create additional liveries yourself please contact Airnav. I had a very pleasant experience from cooperation with Airnav Support when I was creating some more liveries for Russian airlines.
So, why do we see so much pressure on Airnav concerning new version of software? Probably because customers understand that only Airnav may give us something that we’re looking for as a new generation amateur plug-and-play ADS-B platform. Whether Airnav competitors like it or not, it seems to be true.
As for continuous requests about MLAT development, I have simple questions to authors of these requests. Are you ready to pay additional money for this feature, as for 3D? Or, how many customers are ready to pay for new hardware if the only difference comparing with current one will be MLAT support?
MLAT has found its place in the real ATC world because this technology in its professional (!) implementation, besides other things, provides even higher levels of accuracy than conventional SSR. Personally I don’t need some MLAT portion in my Radarbox software that will provide accuracy let’s say around 10 miles and will require any manual operations in the interface to see every single non-positional aircraft.
I prefer to see the full picture of non-ADS-B traffic in automatic mode, as I see ADS-B traffic now, but I clearly understand that this approach is very difficult to implement for hobby market if we take in consideration that manufacturer must keep prices for hardware/software and support the network on amateur level.
As for current almost free MLAT and other technologies implementations in the other software, we need to understand one fact – these implementations aren’t real solutions even for amateur customers, but just basic technology demonstrators mainly for UK residents.
As far as I understand Airnav works on some compromise MLAT (or other) solution for Radarbox. It’s a completely different thing from technological, financial and timeline points of view.
Airnav, you know, in the former Soviet Union we have such thing as “word of communist”. If a man gives this word (to do something) and falls to provide, this will entail very bad implications in his career:-) Sure Airnav staff doesn’t have “red books”, but anyway can you , Airnav, give us, your customers, “word of communist” that we’ll see a new Radarbox software release before November 7 (Great Revolution Holiday in the former Soviet Union :-)
Regards,
Nick
Р.S And a few words about the market leadership and innovations. Once Airnav announced that ShipTrax project is near to completion, we could all see that competitors also decided to follow this way.
-
Good balanced post Netcop with many valid points.
A couple of things I would say:
"So, why do we see so much pressure on Airnav concerning new version of software? "
These boxes are £400 each plus maybe £100 for an aerial so hardly surprising that people expect the bugs to be sorted and the update system to be fully functional. Not so much hysteria, more irritation at the seemingly endless delays.
"Airnav obviously isn’t Microsoft and probably doesn’t have enough resources to move a few projects simultaneously."
That is very true. There is an English saying: If you can't ride two horses at once, you shouldn't be in the circus. That is also very true.
"Are you ready to pay additional money for this feature, as for 3D? Or, how many customers are ready to pay for new hardware if the only difference comparing with current one will be MLAT support?"
Yes. If I were satisfied that my Radarbox was a sound solid unit, working properly and regularly updated I would be happy to consider buying into the latest developments. We all want to keep right up to date with the latest technology.
Look at TV - surround sound, high definition, 3D - all recent innovations and selling on the back of a well established product. Same theory.
Overall Netcop we agree; it's a good product that just needs sorting out a bit.
November 7th - revolution day - is an excellent choice of target date. :)
-
As for continuous requests about MLAT development, I have simple questions to authors of these requests. Are you ready to pay additional money for this feature, as for 3D? Or, how many customers are ready to pay for new hardware if the only difference comparing with current one will be MLAT support?
I, for one, would just like some honest answers - is MLat even possible with the original RB, some say "no", ANSupport and Dev. seem to say "maybe", but then say we can't say more because of commercial/competitor interest. If it's not possible with original RB, just say so, then we'll know that we have to go to PlanePlotter - which I haven't done to date, because I haven't got a clue how to use it, and am not very computer literate and struggle with technicalities. Most of us want MLat to be able to follow, or identify military traffic, which for most operational uses won't use full ADS-B even if so equipped, for very obvious reasons. All I ask is for some honest and definitive answers...................and yes, I would pay extra for MLat, rather than the Real-Time which I find is a waste of money, if a plane is more than 100nm fom me, what odds does a 5 minute delay make?
-
There isnt anything difficult about using planeplotter, Jon, its more or less download and install as RB cannot be used to feed planeplotter. You have to tell planeplotter you want to Mlat but thats about it. There is a small annual cost of around £13 to get the benefit of Mlat.
I would imaging that Mlat would offer sugnificant opportunities for Airnav in being able to offer it to commercial customers to track non ADSB equipped aircraftit giving them a bigger customer pool. Also Mlat isnt the be all and end all as there has to be sufficient boxes to triangulate the aircraft position accurately. Even although you may be sufficient similarly capable users in your vacinity to enable it to work. Planeplotter is good but there are plenty of holes in the set up which can only be filled by more users feeding the raw data. I dont know how often I have been watching an aircraft and it suddenly jumps a 100 miles or so from the current position.
Taking the TV analogy used by Bratters, having the latest and most up to date technology doesnt always offer a significant advantage over what you already have. I have an HD ready TV and sat box but dont see any great advantage to temp me to pay the hefty monthly fee to get it and the same goes for 3D. I still get a very good experience using the TV without HD and 3D so continue using it with no desire to upgrade. I would imagine that it will be the same with radarbox especially if there are additional costs.
I wonder id useers have been taken up by the hype of the next version and may be underawed by what it will become. The majority of users wouldnt be able to identify many of the bugs of the current version and dont use anywhere near the full capabilities of the system as they will be like me in just wanting to know what is above them in the sky by seeing it on screen.
I am more than happy waiting to see what comes along and see what advantages the next version will offer to make a good system even better. I would rather wait until it is ready than rush things and make a complete mess of it. nothing would be more off putting for current and possible new users.
Complaining about the lack of progress wont make it happen any faster and my main comment to Airnav would be to be a bit more conservative conservative with the hype and ensure they can produce what they say before opening their mouth.
Alan
-
I wonder id useers have been taken up by the hype of the next version and may be underawed by what it will become. The majority of users wouldnt be able to identify many of the bugs of the current version and dont use anywhere near the full capabilities of the system as they will be like me in just wanting to know what is above them in the sky by seeing it on screen.
Agreed. Users may be excited about the prospect of MLAT, Beamfinder, etc., but the novelty of the hit-and-miss nature of multilateration can soon make it less appealing. I've used MLAT for a year, and have decided not to renew my subscription to PP MLAT this time around. Too many aircraft jumping around, zig-zagging from east to west coast, making it pure guesswork where the aircraft is. Sure, if you live in the heavily populated areas of the UK, MLAT may be useful.
Complaining about the lack of progress wont make it happen any faster and my main comment to Airnav would be to be a bit more conservative conservative with the hype and ensure they can produce what they say before opening their mouth.
Agreed. Less hype from Airnav would be appreciated, so that they're not then having to constantly defend against non-delivery of over-hyped features. Just fix the bugs as a first priority. And don't be so frightened of the competition from PP MLAT.
-
As for the 3D version “10% of the 3D models expected” – when you downloaded 4.03 demo you have a chance of doing a careful inspection of the content of GE_Models directory. If number of models and liveries isn’t enough for you, just don’t buy this upgrade or this version of software. Nobody promised to us to create additional models and liveries. If you want to create additional liveries yourself please contact Airnav. I had a very pleasant experience from cooperation with Airnav Support when I was creating some more liveries for Russian airlines.
Netcop,
Although I agree that a 3D Demo is to 'try it first, so that you can see it before purchase ' , it should also be MADE CLEAR if Im going to have to actually finish a large percentage of all the 3D artwork myself after purchasing. Why should I have to go through all the folders and see whats in and whats out....
If you are buying a car, you might like to try out a demonstrator car for a test run. But when you finally order the new model with alloy wheels, you dont expect the new car to be delivered without any tyres on the alloy wheels. You expect them to be on there so you can use it properly.