I am struggling to find tie-ups for the Singapore PC-21 aircraft that have ADS-B.
The codes starting at 76E721 relate to 9V-YYA etc. But the aircraft actually carry military numbers 9101 etc.
Can any of our Antipodean users help with a list of the tie-ups, so we can add them to the database project.
Regards
ACW367
Got two this morning and entered their details. 9102 and 9118
Hi ACW
I've got tie ups for all the PC21 production list including the Singapore Air Force
I've been offline all day - give me a couple of hours and I'll pm them to you this evening
Regards
Rich
Hi ACW
Please see attachment - I've also pm'd you
Regards
Rich
Can give you a start -
Civil regn are 9V-YYA to 9V-YYS and mil are 9101 to 9119 in that order.
Hexcodes are 76E721 to 76E726 for YYA to YYF, 76E000 for YYG (miscoded), 76E728/729 for YYH/YYI, 76E72A to 76E72F for YYJ to YYO,76E730 to 76E733 for YYP to YYS. All hexcodes follow in ascending order. They used to be regulars in the Perth,WA area.
Thank you all
Have updated the full PC-21 construction list
There seems to be a problem with these tie-ups, or possibly with the dual mil/civ registrations you have entered in the database. I'm not getting data in the data panel now, see my screenshot.
And I guess there's no way we're going to get pictures from Airliners.net with this entry in the AR field.
Perhaps you can look at this.
Rod
Quote from: RodBearden on June 28, 2010, 01:27:56 AMThere seems to be a problem with these tie-ups, or possibly with the dual mil/civ registrations you have entered in the database. I'm not getting data in the data panel now, see my screenshot.
And I guess there's no way we're going to get pictures from Airliners.net with this entry in the AR field.
Yes - if you think about it, having a slash in the registration column is going to mess up both the Airliners.net URL and the thumbnail filenames.
Take it out and you'll be fine:
(http://www.civilaircraftregisters.org/Mode_S_Resources/Singapore%20Air%20Force%20PC-21.jpg)
As a side issue I took the opportunity and filled in the blanks on the database with the 2 aircraft with missing detail.
Alan
Quote from: DaveReid on June 28, 2010, 07:00:45 AM
Quote from: RodBearden on June 28, 2010, 01:27:56 AMThere seems to be a problem with these tie-ups, or possibly with the dual mil/civ registrations you have entered in the database. I'm not getting data in the data panel now, see my screenshot.
And I guess there's no way we're going to get pictures from Airliners.net with this entry in the AR field.
Yes - if you think about it, having a slash in the registration column is going to mess up both the Airliners.net URL and the thumbnail filenames.
Take it out and you'll be fine:
(http://www.civilaircraftregisters.org/Mode_S_Resources/Singapore%20Air%20Force%20PC-21.jpg)
Dave
As you are aware there is currently an issue with the displaying of photographs. As Updaters we have the ability to attribute two photo links, with the idea that this will mean we can get the pictures right, for example with Mil aircraft with more than one air force using a numerical registration. It also means we can exclude photos of older aircraft carrying the ID.
Therefore once the issue is fixed it will not matter if we have dual registrations in the registration field. We will have searched Anet for appropriate pictures and added the correct URLs for all users, when they download it.
Quote from: ACW367 on June 28, 2010, 12:46:09 PMTherefore once the issue is fixed it will not matter if we have dual registrations in the registration field. We will have searched Anet for appropriate pictures and added the correct URLs for all users, when they download it.
But what about thumbnails ?
That will include the thumbnails.
Quote from: ACW367 on June 28, 2010, 02:07:17 PMThat will include the thumbnails.
OK, I'll take your word for it - I'm just curious to know what filenames RadarBox will give to stored thumbnail JPGs of an aircraft that has "9105 / 9V-YYE" in the AR column.
So am I ;-)
And none of this explains why my data panel was empty, except for the Flight ID, even though all the data was there in my database. Could it be a bug caused by the strange entry in the Reg field?
Rod
Slightly off topic, but are we entirely sure the civil part of the registration is worthy of inclusion?
Everything I've seen on these rascals leans solely to the military serial anyway?
They're not just either delivery registrations relating to some odd Singapore import legality are they (wouldn't be the first time they've bee somewhat tetchy over military purchases)??
Maybe we just go with the military serial alone if that's what's only carried on the aircraft?
Rich
Quote from: Marpleman on June 28, 2010, 03:15:48 PMSlightly off topic, but are we entirely sure the civil part of the registration is worthy of inclusion?
Everything I've seen on these rascals leans solely to the military serial anyway?
They're not just either delivery registrations relating to some odd Singapore import legality are they (wouldn't be the first time they've bee somewhat tetchy over military purchases)??
Maybe we just go with the military serial alone if that's what's only carried on the aircraft?
In this case, the assumption appears to be that, since Singapore civil codes are algorithmically related to registrations, then the same algorithm can be applied in reverse to a military hex code to produce a "civil" registration".
I don't know whether that's a valid assumption or not, I only know that I've never come across Singapore civil registrations in the 9V-Y** sequence, and there is certainly no sign of a civil reg painted on the aircraft.
However whether or not those PC-21s have civil registrations, the general issue remains - how to deal with aircraft that definitely do have (and wear) dual civil/military marks.
The Egyptian C-130s spring to mind, for example.
OK while we sort this out, I have deleted the 9V-Y** from these PC21's on the updater. So you can reload them as required to your Navdata.
We will engage with Airnav Dev and work out a way to get Dual Registrations annotated. Alongside the C130s, French Ultralights and French Mil also spring to mind. One could also argue that UK Gliders are now dual registered with a CAA and a BGA identity.
At AeroExpo on Sunday I picked up Breezer Aircraft Breezer F-JRZF / 95-ABA (Code 38A3FC). I have now temorarily removed the latter part until we can sort out how to present it.
Tie-ups you say?
Here are the tie-ups for the Swiss Air Force PC-21 fleet.
Pilatus PC-21 A-101 103 PC21 Swiss Air Force Switzerland 4B7FAE
Pilatus PC-21 A-102 104 PC21 Swiss Air Force Switzerland 4B7FAD
Pilatus PC-21 A-103 105 PC21 Swiss Air Force Switzerland 4B7FAC
Pilatus PC-21 A-104 106 PC21 Swiss Air Force Switzerland 4B7FAB
Pilatus PC-21 A-105 107 PC21 Swiss Air Force Switzerland 4B7FAA
Pilatus PC-21 A-106 108 PC21 Swiss Air Force Switzerland 4B7FA9
Thank you protzenalp
The only Swiss one I had not entered was A-106, as the mode S Yahoo group did not have it as a positive tie-up. As you appear to be from the region, I will now add it as positively tied-up.
Nearly there ;-)
Rod
Quote from: RodBearden on June 30, 2010, 01:20:03 AM
Nearly there ;-)
Rod
Classic!
That explains it then, the MiG must carry the 9V reg - we're only trying to keep one step ahead! ;-)