16
Technical Support / Re: SOLVED! - GroupID
« on: May 23, 2016, 10:44:29 pm »
That's useful to know, many thanks.
Show Posts
You can view here all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas to which you currently have access.
17
Technical Support / SOLVED! - GroupID
« on: May 23, 2016, 08:32:23 am »
Simple 1 minute question:
I've worked out and configured the HexId, and out the aircraft Reg in the FlightID (I presume that is correct).
What is the GroupID for? Mine is configured as PAWgroup I think, I have refrained from altering it.
I've worked out and configured the HexId, and out the aircraft Reg in the FlightID (I presume that is correct).
What is the GroupID for? Mine is configured as PAWgroup I think, I have refrained from altering it.
18
General Discussion / Project Propeller 2016
« on: May 23, 2016, 08:30:24 am »
Is it worth us, purely for interest, making a list of those operating in this year's event that are taking a PAW Classic with them?
I am taking mine for an 1115-1130 a South Hold slot at Scampton
I am taking mine for an 1115-1130 a South Hold slot at Scampton
19
General Discussion / Re: GPS mouse added to the store...
« on: May 19, 2016, 11:24:29 pm »
Technical question:
Do antenna extension leads (to be coming to a Pilot Hardware store near us soon?!) have any effect upon the signals and efficiency of the unit, and have they been CE tested also? Would they cause any increased power requirement?
Do antenna extension leads (to be coming to a Pilot Hardware store near us soon?!) have any effect upon the signals and efficiency of the unit, and have they been CE tested also? Would they cause any increased power requirement?
20
General Discussion / Re: 4 mins for wifi access to become available
« on: May 19, 2016, 07:30:44 am »
The TRX being red may well be because there is no GPS fix (have a look at the text in the GPS row).
I seem to recall my TRX row only went green on moving the PAW outside and getting a GPS fix, after which it went green and started transmitting without any problem.
I suspect you might be on the right lines, first of all excluding a power issue by use of a mains adapter. Then if that doesn't help, check the USB devices are in the ports as per the QuickStart guide (the double-sided A4 sheet received with PAW), then try restarting, removing one of the USB items each time to see if removal of one consistently resolves the issue.
Hope some of this helps?
I seem to recall my TRX row only went green on moving the PAW outside and getting a GPS fix, after which it went green and started transmitting without any problem.
I suspect you might be on the right lines, first of all excluding a power issue by use of a mains adapter. Then if that doesn't help, check the USB devices are in the ports as per the QuickStart guide (the double-sided A4 sheet received with PAW), then try restarting, removing one of the USB items each time to see if removal of one consistently resolves the issue.
Hope some of this helps?
21
General Discussion / Re: My Pilot Aware arrived today
« on: May 18, 2016, 07:52:29 am »
Mods-- if anyone has the time, is it worth putting a table together listing development / experienced users who are willing to help others, their location, and their username on here to PM if anyone needs help with assembly, setup, or troubleshooting? (you could add a column for the cost as well, vanilla latte for me!)
This might help get the less technically minded user off the ground faster, reduce user frustration, reduce time input from the development team, and don't forget it benefits everyone. The more PAW users we attract or look after, the safer we all are theoretically!!
This might help get the less technically minded user off the ground faster, reduce user frustration, reduce time input from the development team, and don't forget it benefits everyone. The more PAW users we attract or look after, the safer we all are theoretically!!
22
General Discussion / Re: Enhancement Requests
« on: May 18, 2016, 07:46:42 am »
Thanks Lee. That's great news. (My temporary fix is to run a second router set to a subnet other than 192.168.0.* for now then!)
23
General Discussion / Re: Enhancement Requests
« on: May 17, 2016, 11:35:32 pm »
Any chance of making the Ethernet IP address manually configurable or DHCP compliant?
My Classic is set at 192.168.0.100 - believe it or not (don't ask!) I have devices around that range and a printer whose IP is identical I really don't want to change without causing a major headache!
I would have thought it better to set this to use DHCP (if Pi does such a thing?) as every owner's network will be quite different and this might of course be an issue in update problems that could be avoided, saving you from possible support requests?
Great idea, Ethernet enabled updates-
My Classic is set at 192.168.0.100 - believe it or not (don't ask!) I have devices around that range and a printer whose IP is identical I really don't want to change without causing a major headache!
I would have thought it better to set this to use DHCP (if Pi does such a thing?) as every owner's network will be quite different and this might of course be an issue in update problems that could be avoided, saving you from possible support requests?
Great idea, Ethernet enabled updates-
24
General Discussion / Re: My Pilot Aware arrived today
« on: May 17, 2016, 11:23:12 pm »
Mine arrived too!! Many thanks to the team, set up and running within 10 minutes or so.
I don't wish to cause any offence to anyone, as I can only guess how hard you have all worked to get this far, but I would suggest the operational manual needs to be put online as quickly as possible, as I fear newcomers may be confused or put off even, whereas us beta testers know more about the setup and config I suppose.
I was just reflecting that it would be a real shame if some potential newcomers were put off as it was "too technical" or "doesn't work" and such incorrect perceptions started going round.
How about some video demos in the scheme of things later?
Anyone stuck near the North Wales or Chester area, give me a shout and I'll do my best to arrange a meet up and get you running. I think with any luck all existing users and testers will do their best to promote and help newcomers to the device.
Looking forward to using it with Project Propeller!
I don't wish to cause any offence to anyone, as I can only guess how hard you have all worked to get this far, but I would suggest the operational manual needs to be put online as quickly as possible, as I fear newcomers may be confused or put off even, whereas us beta testers know more about the setup and config I suppose.
I was just reflecting that it would be a real shame if some potential newcomers were put off as it was "too technical" or "doesn't work" and such incorrect perceptions started going round.
How about some video demos in the scheme of things later?
Anyone stuck near the North Wales or Chester area, give me a shout and I'll do my best to arrange a meet up and get you running. I think with any luck all existing users and testers will do their best to promote and help newcomers to the device.
Looking forward to using it with Project Propeller!
25
General Discussion / Re: When willl the PAW be ready?
« on: May 12, 2016, 10:17:27 am »
I can't recall - is the MAC address required the MAC address of the WIFI dongle or the LAN on the Pi itself?
26
General Discussion / PAW was really helpful today - even as ADS-B only
« on: January 10, 2016, 11:54:10 pm »
We were running along, running 2 iPads off of PAW, the weather not being the most congenial to a good lookout and early visuals. On the penultimate leg of our journey, we spotted an aircraft with an examiner call sign at the same level and a good 10 miles out but manoeuvring about our intended track. Both of us working different ATS's and not aware of each other by RT. This gave us loads of time to sharpen the lookout in that direction, plan a change of level and manoeuvre so as to pass with plenty of space between us.
We got visual, eventually, I would say 1.5-2 miles by eye and the same confirmed on SkyDemon. I estimated closing speed at around 250kts or so. Had we not been using PAW, we may have got quite a surprise, and had to manoeuvre more abruptly.
Very, very impressed chaps, thanks again for all your hard work. Can't wait for the forthcoming radio units and Mode C/S implementation.
We got visual, eventually, I would say 1.5-2 miles by eye and the same confirmed on SkyDemon. I estimated closing speed at around 250kts or so. Had we not been using PAW, we may have got quite a surprise, and had to manoeuvre more abruptly.
Very, very impressed chaps, thanks again for all your hard work. Can't wait for the forthcoming radio units and Mode C/S implementation.
27
General Discussion / Re: Moving Forward
« on: December 13, 2015, 09:04:04 pm »
Thanks Lee. That's great to hear that Mode C/S is hot on the agenda and that it will be selectable. Once you get to that point, it will be quite easy for some of us to report back on how well the range algorithm works. There is an area not far away from me where there is always some Mode C/S traffic and on RT. It is therefore quite easy to hear them, visually identify, and comment on whether the appropriate warnings are helpful in an air-air role.
28
General Discussion / Re: Moving Forward
« on: December 11, 2015, 06:53:04 pm »
What will be fascinating, is whether PAW overtakes the FLARM market at the potential cost the unit can be put together for and with what it can do.
29
General Discussion / Re: Enhancement Requests
« on: December 10, 2015, 06:42:20 pm »
Would it be possible to put a beta test option in, which a user could enable via the web interface if they wish, to add bearingless Mode C & S data in to the data feed to the tablet? A number of us could test this out while airborne and advise the team of how accurate / inaccurate the algorithm is. I would suggest data for threats detected within an assumed 5nm range are what would be most helpful for most GA operations. (Thinking ahead to when this area gets looked out in more detail)
30
General Discussion / Re: Moving Forward
« on: December 10, 2015, 03:35:16 pm »
I too sense a reduction in momentum while we all await the necessary testing and production of the new RF & baro add-on board. This is a shame, but we all have to be patient.
I do think that testing opinion on Mode C & S signatures should be investigated. The comments Lee has made about accuracy and possibly misleading information are very true, but a lot of us would sooner have a warning to help remind us to look out more attentively than no warning at all. Mode A is another matter, and I think is best left out as a bearingless, heightless threat with only an approximate range is not that helpful.
Ultimately this device is never going to be a TCAS level technology, and I view it as a prompt to remind us to look out when VFR (no offence intended), and you could argue that therefore inaccurate Mode C&S representations on the navigation software are not really an issue therefore.
I do think at a tiny fraction of the cost of a TCAS (or even PowerFLARM) system that once the P3i element of the system is stabilised, the device will be a bit hit and popular amongst the GA fraternity. There is certainly a lot of interest when I speak to people at my local airfield about it, and we certainly have a group who intend to use it following release of the new RF.
Would it be possible to put a beta test option in, which a user could enable via the web interface if they wish, to add bearingless Mode C & S data in to the data feed to the tablet? A number of us could test this out while airborne and advise the team of how accurate / inaccurate the algorithm is. I would suggest data for threats detected within an assumed 5nm range are what would be most helpful for most GA operations.
Congratulations Lee & the team on their work so far.
I do think that testing opinion on Mode C & S signatures should be investigated. The comments Lee has made about accuracy and possibly misleading information are very true, but a lot of us would sooner have a warning to help remind us to look out more attentively than no warning at all. Mode A is another matter, and I think is best left out as a bearingless, heightless threat with only an approximate range is not that helpful.
Ultimately this device is never going to be a TCAS level technology, and I view it as a prompt to remind us to look out when VFR (no offence intended), and you could argue that therefore inaccurate Mode C&S representations on the navigation software are not really an issue therefore.
I do think at a tiny fraction of the cost of a TCAS (or even PowerFLARM) system that once the P3i element of the system is stabilised, the device will be a bit hit and popular amongst the GA fraternity. There is certainly a lot of interest when I speak to people at my local airfield about it, and we certainly have a group who intend to use it following release of the new RF.
Would it be possible to put a beta test option in, which a user could enable via the web interface if they wish, to add bearingless Mode C & S data in to the data feed to the tablet? A number of us could test this out while airborne and advise the team of how accurate / inaccurate the algorithm is. I would suggest data for threats detected within an assumed 5nm range are what would be most helpful for most GA operations.
Congratulations Lee & the team on their work so far.