Improved Routing Information

[ACW367]

Of those 84 you quote around 25 are Bizjets who use the same callsign on many different routes and should be discounted.  I think FDX9006 and AEU781P are non revenue positioning routes that can also vary.  And NOA990 is a US mil charter over various routes.  Takes the numbers right down.  

Another one is
THT7   LFPG   KLAX      20100930000000   LFPG   NTAA   20100924000000
I believe this route to be LFPG-KLAX-NTAA and maybe in Airnav the middle stop is included
The two AIC correctly in Airnav have start and end of route (and no doubt) middle whilst FD only has the Europe to USA sector.
Doesn't make such a big difference now

[flightinair]

I'm certainly not about to engage in discussion with an organisation that thinks posts like #286 above are acceptable.

Dave - while you have a lot to add - if I was AirNav I would have banned you for the constant sniping which adds little to to this forum. You must accept that this forum is owned by AirNav - please respect that.

I am an "outsider" but I even feel dubious when you start offering services.

This is an AirNav forum and so all suggestions must be for the benefit of Radarbox users in general or else they do not belong here.

Quote.
"I would have banned you for the constant sniping which adds little to to this forum."

Well said Chris11 its about time someone said that, must people on this site would be scared to say it, again well done Chris11.

[dumpty]

I'm certainly not about to engage in discussion with an organisation that thinks posts like #286 above are acceptable.

Dave - while you have a lot to add - if I was AirNav I would have banned you for the constant sniping which adds little to to this forum. You must accept that this forum is owned by AirNav - please respect that.

I am an "outsider" but I even feel dubious when you start offering services.

This is an AirNav forum and so all suggestions must be for the benefit of Radarbox users in general or else they do not belong here.

Quote.
"I would have banned you for the constant sniping which adds little to to this forum."

Well said Chris11 its about time someone said that, must people on this site would be scared to say it, again well done Chris11.

I think Dave's great!!

[DaveReid]

On which point the very limited time I spent this afternoon working on EGNX flights was sufficient to convince me that I can crack the majority of lo-cost flights, esp. Ryanair & BMI in and out of EMA.

That's very good news.  If you don't fancy banging those into the database via the website one at a time, I should have the CSV import working later today, so feel free to post them as a file.  Hopefully we will be able to tie up at least some of the far ends of the routes, which will be to everyone's benefit.

[DaveReid]

DaveReid,

Considering you have tried to sell your services (Aircraft, Routes) to us at vastly high price and used the forum to try and leverage us on more than once occasion. We would have to question your motive here.

We would just like to make our customers aware what and whom they are dealing with.

It would appear that the above post by AirNav is confusing at least a couple of members, maybe more.  That may or may not be its intended purpose - I don't know.

Either way, allow me to put the record straight.

It's no secret that, several months ago, AirNav and I negotiated re the supply of aircraft data.  Equally, it's no secret that we couldn't come to any agreement in the end - that's how business works, you can't win 'em all, and I have no problem with that.

I have no problem either if AirNav now choose to describe the product I was offering as having a "vastly high price" - they are entitled to their opinion.  Likewise, if I said that it, and AirNav's subsequent actions, simply demonstrated that they don't understand the value of anything, I would just be expressing mine.

So far, so good.

However for AirNav to assert that I have been trying to sell them a commercial Routes service (which I don't have) is simply a lie.

Sure, I operate www.flightroutelookup.com, and have done for some time now.  It's an enthusiast service, with hundreds of users, both direct and via FlightDisplay.

It's open to absolutely any individual or organisation (AirNav included) , it's free to use, and comes with no warranties whatsoever.  

How that translates into me trying to sell routes to AirNav, I have no idea.

Ditto for the new, collaborative route update service that I and several forum members are now working on - that's there for anyone to use, on the URL I posted, and the results of matching takeoffs to landings will be freely available to everyone to import into their local databases, should they so desire.

So, AirNav, I would suggest that you either produce some evidence that I have been trying to sell you routes, or acknowledge that you are lying when you say so.

I hope this clarifies things for any members who may have been misled.

[Deadcalm]

What an absolute shower.

[Runway 31]

Oh oh the bad boys are back in town.  Give it a rest both sides and allow us to get on with our hobby.

P.S.  you may not have noticed but the route look up doesnt work as well as intended.

Alan

[DaveReid]

P.S.  you may not have noticed but the route look up doesnt work as well as intended.

Meaning ...  ?

[Chris11]

Dave - you have made it very clear you do no want to share with AirNav - remember the "teach a man to fish" comment
Have you changed that?
I have also been into your site and can't see how to download - am I missing something.
So far, in this topic we have the Flight numbers for three airlines and ideas for sorting out more codes. Please do not sidetrack that.

PS -  I am also well on my way to produce the file for UAL. I have a pdf file of all their routes and am in the process of converting that to text for an import file

[Runway 31]

Meaning that we all know and have done for some time that the routes detailed are not correct or non-exittant and I feel that this thread is going on and on and covering old ground each time as if the problem has just been discovered.

Yes I would like the correct routes to be shown and Airnav have asked for some patience while they try and sort it out, if they can and I appreciate the efforts being made by users to overcome the problems.

Unfortunately the debate always seem to sink into mudslinging by people who should really know better.  Airnav are just as bad as some of the members in this and while I understand their annoyance at some of the more graphic posts by some of the radarspotters elements who frequent the board for their own ends, they should show some moderation in their postings and do not take the bait.  While I can understand wanting to reply, the tone set doesnt help matters.

Alan

[tarbat]

Of those 84 you quote around 25 are Bizjets who use the same callsign on many different routes and should be discounted.

Yes, I suspect these are coming from Libhomeradar, so I've now excluded Libhomeradar from the FD7 lookup sequence.

[DaveReid]

Dave - you have made it very clear you do no want to share with AirNav - remember the "teach a man to fish" comment
Have you changed that?
I have also been into your site and can't see how to download - am I missing something.
So far, in this topic we have the Flight numbers for three airlines and ideas for sorting out more codes. Please do not sidetrack that.

PS -  I am also well on my way to produce the file for UAL. I have a pdf file of all their routes and am in the process of converting that to text for an import file

No, I haven't changed my view about AirNav learning to fish :-)

Specifically, delivering what they promised us - a working algorithm that will produce many more routes from network traffic than we could ever hope to populate manually as as individuals.

In the meantime, the matched routes download, in the form of both CSV and SQL statements, should be up on the site later today, although of course it's early days yet and we need a lot more recorded takeoffs and landings before it will start to produce results.

All contributions are welcomed, either via the website or as files.

[Bob SEN]

All I get is "server error 403 - Forbidden: Access is denied...You do not have permission to view this directory or page using the credentials that you supplied." when I try n look at http://www.flightroutelookup.com/ ????.................................

[DaveReid]

All I get is "server error 403 - Forbidden: Access is denied...You do not have permission to view this directory or page using the credentials that you supplied." when I try n look at http://www.flightroutelookup.com/ ????.................................

Sorry, I should have made it clear that these are the URLs:

www.flightroutelookup.com/FlightRoute/FlightLookup.wso?op=FlightLookup for the main FRL database to look up routes - that's also the address for the web service interface, and there's a link at the top where you can download the WSDL if you want to build your own automated lookup client

www.flightroutelookup.com/FlightRoute/FlightRouteUpdate.asp for the collaborative database that will match observed landings and takeoffs to derive routes that are currently unknown

[tarbat]

All contributions are welcomed, either via the website or as files.

What format for the files, and where do we send them?  I can produce a file of daily Inverness arrivals/departures.  Thanks.