PilotAware
British Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: JimN on September 21, 2016, 03:09:43 pm
-
Over the last few days I've tried logging into pilotaware.com
A couple of days ago all I got was errors and now there is something not worth having.
Please admin, take down the new pilotaware.com website and put the old one back until the new one is developed.
Having a quarter finished website with no useful information and no working links on it looks very poor and won't do the image of pilot aware as a serous product any good at all.
Very sad I had to write this.
-
you can still access the old website
http://www.pilotaware.co.uk - old site
http://www.pilotaware.com - work in progress
-
Hi Jim
Apologies for this. We are updating the PilotAware website and it has a lot of information on it. We are getting this done as soon as possible. In the the meantime the old website can be found at pilotaware.co.uk (http://pilotaware.co.uk)
-
Google takes you straight to the new web site which is how most prospective new users would get to it I think.
A temp home page directing to the old site perhaps?
-
As mentioned the new website is not work to get documentation etc. and the links on the old site are broken. Any idea how to access ops manual, etc?
-
These documents are also available from the 'downloads' tab on www.pilotawarehardware.com
Regards
Peter
-
Sorry chaps IMHO all that bling is retrograde step.
Animation and flash type stuff just makes website a pain in the a**e.
You are not trying to sell overpriced cars to chavs.
K.I.S.S.
-
I agree. I would vote with my mouse if I didn't already know all about the device.
(edit) It appears that I have caused offence, for which I apologise, and have removed the word in question.
-
Lee and Team,
I'm in favour of the new web-site. It's informative, slick and professional looking. There is the odd typo here and there but overall I feel it presents a good image for the product/system without being overly "techie".
Hopefully some of the existing documents such as the Operations Manual will remain available for download from the Hardware site (oops just noticed it's available here also!)
Thanks for all your hard work.
Regards,
Chris
-
Hi Chaps
Thanks for the feedback which will help us to tailor the website over the next few weeks.
Steve we will tone down some of the what you call Bling thanks for the input.
Jim all the latest information is now available on the website under the pages tab.
Chris thanks for the opposing view.
Producing the website is always a juxtapose between KISS and getting across a lot of technical data and introducing the product to those who know nowt.
Cheers
Keith
-
Had a crawl round the new web site.
A bit blingy, but most seems to be there and fairly easy to find.
Easier to use than the old web site.
No obvious link though to licencing, both cost and "how to", which with people I've talked to seems to be one of the most asked questions.
Keep up the good work.
-
No obvious link though to licencing, both cost and "how to", which with people I've talked to seems to be one of the most asked questions.
Hi Jim
Thanks for the feed back. The "how to" is in fact in the Easy Start Guide under Pages Downloads. We'll have a look at bringing it to the fore.
Thanks
Keith
-
Is the PAW protocol document available on the new site? Actually, just noticed it doesn't seem to be on the old one either!
Alan
-
Is the PAW protocol document available on the new site? Actually, just noticed it doesn't seem to be on the old one either!
Alan
This doc needs a serious rewrite.
If you tell me what your intention is, I can probably briefly describe what you need.
The C Header File will tell you the datatypes and their meanings, but does not describe the framing
information for the passing of longer messages.
Thx
Lee
-
Thanks Lee. At the moment it's just idle curiosity though I was also a little worried that you were doing a Flarm and going "closed"!
Actually I do have one question, though maybe it needs a new thread. With the unsurprising emergence of ground stations for tracking purposes, I did wonder if the protocol provides for a "do not track" flag, as does Flarm. Although I am not a fan of Flarm's closed model, they have ended up doing many things quite well, including this. Also, I suspect if you have ambitions outside the UK, you may need to provide this facility (I believe Flarm were compelled to adopt it rather doing it on their own initiative). Since Flarm has a mandatory periodic firmware update this was quite easy for them to do, but as Pilotaware has (I believe) no firmware lifecycle, then it might be better to provide for it sooner rather than later.
Alan
-
I am idly curious as well. I was initially attracted to PAW as an open project, using an off the shelf transceiver with a published interface, and a published message protocol. However, with the demise of the ARF, is there any point in publishing the P3i message protocol? Is there any means of accessing the message stream so that we can use it? Or will the specification and interface to the new bridge transceiver be made public? Without these things, is PAW any more open than FLARM?
Richard
-
PAW and FLARM, are totally different in this respect.
If you tune a software defined radio to the PAW 869.525mhz or FLARM (un-published) frequencies, you will get a series of bytes.
The PAW bytes directly represent the data held in the protocol, the FLARM bytes represent nothing intelligable (un-published) . This is because the FLARM data is encrypted using a set of keys which are kept secret (un-published), and should you be able to decrypt the data, the format of the unencrypted data is secret (un-published) .
So based upon this, is it really fair to question whether we are more open than FLARM ?
If anyone were to try to create a software defined radio implementation for pilot aware I would actively encourage this and help in any way I could. Unfortunately I do not have the necessary skills to do this myself
Thx
Lee
-
Thanks Lee, that's very encouraging. I was under the misapprehension that the transmissions were tied to the bridge transceiver in some way, it's good to know that in principle an SDR could be used. I don't have the skills either, and I am resisting the urge to gain them :) I would rather be flying.
Thanks for the explanation,
Richard
-
I think the new site looks and feels very professional and is a positive change. Inevitably there at be a few teething troubles but I'm sure you will soon get them fixed. Two little points I noted were that I had trouble scrolling some bits of the audio alerts document (the two boxes detailing the settings options) (using Chrome), and on the Contacts page, the links to this forum (and to the nav apps) is just off the bottom of the screen when it opens and the layout is such that unless you look at the scroll bar it looks like it is just a screen giving your email etc and nothing more.