I've attached a pic showing 3 seperate spikes that have occurred during the past fortnight.
I didn't see any of them actually appear but as far as I know they are not connected to anything electrical like a microwave.
Question: if an aircraft is suddenly detected, however briefly, at the furthest extent of a single spike, would that be sufficient to create the spike itself?
I would have thought that the RB either hears it or it doesn't so once heard, a spike is drawn.
I don't suppose that this is some sort of ducting of signals at high altutudes and therefore freak propagation?
J.
The proximity of the three spikes might suggest some high level activity in that specific area?
Hi i have also noted spikes returning to my screen. I have sorta been complaining that since 2012 3.13 my range had appeared to reduce. I could no longer get out to and beyond the max range rings.
Well in the past week I have noted a slow increase or spikes. I had wondered if it was with the ice etc finally having cleared from my external aerial.
John
I was spikeless since upgrading to 3.13 but mine started yesterday. One yesterday and two today, about 100 miles out.
Brad
Hi, Spikes? You want spikes? I have spikes!! Been running this polar for the last few days and what with the bad weather, it ain`t helped having spikes. I`m running 3.13 - and i`ve got spikes - who needs more spikes?
Hi, have had the attached building up for seven days now. I have compared it with a polar from a previous version of airnav and there are distinct differences. The `spike` issue appears to be a valid comment. With the old 3.3 version running for the same length of time no spikes were noted. The weather pattern was very similar to this week but there are, as you can see on the attachement, some very rough areas of reception. There has been an increase in range in some areas and a loss in others. I would have put it down to natural variations in conditions but i operate on the 23 cems band i have noticed no change in fixed stations i contact twice daily relating to their signal strength. All very puzzling really but to be fair, the system is working well. The software as far as i can tell relating to info etc appears OK. Bi now, Roger - G0SEG
Unless anyone comes up with anything better, I'm going to stick to my theory of the briefest of contacts made by a single very high flying aircraft at extreme distance.
Have a look through MyLog entries for either Lat/Lon recorded in the geographical area of the spike or for small numbers of messages received and see if they belong to an aircraft that appeared in that area.
Will do next time Brian - don't keep records going back far.
Spikes... Since I have had my RB I have noted unusual spikes on my polar diagram, and whilst I don't consider them a big problem, they are an irritant. Today I have noted in mylog a cheeky little sausage, a certain Mr. G-JEMB that is reporting whacky positional data. Sometimes he reports nowt, other times silly positions - that correspond to my spikes. I suggest you look out for this little critter ! I will filter him out for now, but in the meantime does anyone know if this course of action will negate his impact on my polar diagram ?
Quote from: eggplant on January 20, 2010, 10:03:54 PMSpikes... Since I have had my RB I have noted unusual spikes on my polar diagram, and whilst I don't consider them a big problem, they are an irritant. Today I have noted in mylog a cheeky little sausage, a certain Mr. G-JEMB that is reporting whacky positional data. Sometimes he reports nowt, other times silly positions - that correspond to my spikes. I suggest you look out for this little critter ! I will filter him out for now, but in the meantime does anyone know if this course of action will negate his impact on my polar diagram ?
ATP G-JEMB (which was re-registered G-OOAF 3 years ago, you need to update your database)
never reports position as it's not equipped with ADS-B.
The spurious position reports for some non-ADS-B aircraft are a known RadarBox bug.
Edit: To be fair, AirNav need to update their database too - their server is also returning the same out-of-date details and photo for that hex code.
Quote from: DaveReid on January 20, 2010, 10:11:10 PM
Quote from: eggplant on January 20, 2010, 10:03:54 PMSpikes... Since I have had my RB I have noted unusual spikes on my polar diagram, and whilst I don't consider them a big problem, they are an irritant. Today I have noted in mylog a cheeky little sausage, a certain Mr. G-JEMB that is reporting whacky positional data. Sometimes he reports nowt, other times silly positions - that correspond to my spikes. I suggest you look out for this little critter ! I will filter him out for now, but in the meantime does anyone know if this course of action will negate his impact on my polar diagram ?
ATP G-JEMB (which was re-registered G-OOAF 3 years ago, you need to update your database) never reports position as it's not equipped with ADS-B.
The spurious position reports for some non-ADS-B aircraft are a known RadarBox bug.
Edit: To be fair, AirNav need to update their database too - their server is also returning the same out-of-date details and photo for that hex code.
Thanks for the info Dave. I've attached a screenshot of my Mylog data for the aircraft. Do you think this is due to my db being out of date ? - or is this the bug to which you referred ?
Eitherway, I guess other users such as me , i.e with an out of date db could be experiencing spikes due to this ??
Thanks for your advice - I bow to your knowledge !
Cheers
Quote from: eggplant on January 20, 2010, 10:30:56 PMThanks for the info Dave. I've attached a screenshot of my Mylog data for the aircraft. Do you think this is due to my db being out of date ? - or is this the bug to which you referred ?
Eitherway, I guess other users such as me , i.e with an out of date db could be experiencing spikes due to this ??
No, there's no connection between the RadarBox bug and your or AirNav's database being out-of-date.
For a more detailed discussion of the issue re some ATPs showing spurious positions on RadarBox see www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=3763.msg36963#msg36963
I'm hoping that when the 3D software is finally passed for shipping that Airnav will get down to going through the bug reports and start dealing with the remaining irritating but non-fatal bugs in 3.13, but when that will happen I don't know.
Quote from: Fenris on January 21, 2010, 02:05:44 PM
I'm hoping that when the 3D software is finally passed for shipping that Airnav will get down to going through the bug reports and start dealing with the remaining irritating but non-fatal bugs in 3.13, but when that will happen I don't know.
hi fenris.
You can not please everyone, but airnav have gone from strength to strength
by getting things right, and not rushing them, well done airnav.
from pat
Quote from: DaveReid on January 20, 2010, 11:06:21 PM
Quote from: eggplant on January 20, 2010, 10:30:56 PMThanks for the info Dave. I've attached a screenshot of my Mylog data for the aircraft. Do you think this is due to my db being out of date ? - or is this the bug to which you referred ?
Eitherway, I guess other users such as me , i.e with an out of date db could be experiencing spikes due to this ??
No, there's no connection between the RadarBox bug and your or AirNav's database being out-of-date.
For a more detailed discussion of the issue re some ATPs showing spurious positions on RadarBox see www.airnavsystems.com/forum/index.php?topic=3763.msg36963#msg36963
Dave,
I have read through the thread, and noted your comments. The aircraft in question (modes 400A92) appears on mylog as ADSB equipped and giving positional data which marries precisely with my spikes. Although my database is clearly out of date I think I am correct in understanding from you, and believing that the out of date database has no link with this. Again, If I understood you correctly, the reports I receive are not due to a bug. You also say this aircraft never gives out positional data ? Thus do you have any idea how/why this aircraft may appear to give positional data that matches my spikes ?
I don't mean to be a pain in the proverbial, would just like to understand what is happening here.
Thanks
Quote from: eggplant on January 22, 2010, 10:47:38 PMAgain, If I understood you correctly, the reports I receive are not due to a bug. You also say this aircraft never gives out positional data ? Thus do you have any idea how/why this aircraft may appear to give positional data that matches my spikes ?
The positional data matches your spikes because they are both derived from the same source, so no surprises there.
However the source is invalid. The ATP in question is not equipped with either 1090 Extended Squitter or ADS-B.
However it is ELS-equipped and will send 112-bit packets (Comm-B Capability, Flight ID, TCAS RA, etc) in response to a ground station interrogation. RadarBox appears to be misinterpreting some or all of these responses as 1090ES Airborne Position Squitters (which are also 112 bits).
This phenomenon appears to be confined to RadarBox - I have SBS logs featuring said ATP going back to 2006 with no indication of any ADS-B capability.
I hope that makes sense, feel free to ask if you need any more background. Likewise AirNav, if you plan on doing anything about this bug I'm happy to provide as much information as I can.
Thanks very much for the info Dave - though the tech stuff goes a bit above my head I can understand the principles behind what you're saying.
Much appreciated.
Eggplant - you have stolen what I thought to be my personal spike. Identical.
Morning all. For Bratters. Looks as though you`ve proved your point about the spikes being long range intermittent strikes. Had three turn up in quick succession yesterday whilst i was watching. I`ve been keeping my eye on the French Radarvirtuel site and sure enough, they plotted the aircraft on the spike locations just out of normal range for here. makes you wonder how they get such good coverage unless they have spies planted all over the place - some site to say the least! Bi now and thanks, Roger
g0seg
Reading Dave Reid's post above, it looks as though our distant aircraft are phantoms and the result of "misinterpreted" signals, all of which which is a bit of a shame.
At ranges of 260nm and 280nm for my two, it didn't seem outlandish for real highflyers, but I bow to superior technical knowledge.
Quote from: bratters on January 23, 2010, 06:33:45 AM
Eggplant - you have stolen what I thought to be my personal spike. Identical.
Bratters - I think we have all been cheated. I too thought they were mine and mine alone. Sniff.
Quote from: bratters on January 23, 2010, 08:24:19 AMReading Dave Reid's post above, it looks as though our distant aircraft are phantoms and the result of "misinterpreted" signals, all of which which is a bit of a shame.
At ranges of 260nm and 280nm for my two, it didn't seem outlandish for real highflyers, but I bow to superior technical knowledge.
I agree, 260nm wouldn't be out of the question for a high-flyer given a bit of ducting - although I would hesitate to describe the ATP as a "high-flyer" :-)
But bear in mind that, as well as those position reports showing N48.0 E0.0, Eggplant's log/screenshot showed other reports from N24.0 E0.0 and even N12.0 E0.0.
Apart from those coordinates being suspiciously rounded, AirNav don't need me to tell them that the last pair of lat/lons would put the aircraft in Burkina Faso - a distance of around 2400nm, which would certainly qualify as "outlandish" in my book !
Thanks Dave - no doubt a glitch that Airnav will clear up in the fullness of time.
After which in our new spike-free world, we can indulge in a little competition to record the most distant signal.
PS & OT Burkina Faso eh? Not many of us got that one in our passports.
I'm pleased the spikes matter has now been understood, thanks to Dave. During the posts on this thread I have learnt that the aircraft 400A92 was incorrectly detailed on my database. I've corrected it now - but am wondering how many other inaccuracies I have in my database, and more importantly how to correct them. Going through each modes code one by one and checking it against www.airframes.org really is impractical - Does anyone know if there is a better way ?
Thanks