Author Topic: ATOM coverage  (Read 2513 times)

neilmurg

ATOM coverage
« on: April 16, 2021, 11:39:07 pm »
I flew from Blackbushe EGLK to Lands End EGHC today
I used Bluetooth to access the SD warnings generated from PAw, it was a bit quiet, but worked well. I wasn't in my usual plane so the hard wired PAw audio to Audio panel wasn't available. Apart from that the SD warnings worked well and they (or PAw warnings) are needed right now, there's a lot of GA and gliders. I only [edit]say see[/edit] ~30% of what I received, but the increased SA was great.
I checked regularly and it seemed like I was always in receipt of ATOM coverage, therefore also local QNH and METARs.
That was a big help when I decided on a diversion and precautionary stop
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 11:25:47 am by neilmurg »

Ian Melville

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2021, 09:31:52 am »
IIRC SkyDemon alerts are to potential threats only, Unlike PAW, which tells you about everything within the ranges you have set.

neilmurg

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2021, 11:36:23 am »
Yes that's right, and the SD logic might not tell you about something you want to know about.
But in a busy sky, less can be more, you get a handy runway annunciation as you enter, it says 'glider' when the target is a glider, which I found useful.
It's hard to compare the two annunciations side by side, but my main points are:
1) PAw very useful right now, and when flying solo
2) ATOM coverage pretty much the whole way from Blackbushe to Lands End
3) If you have SD, try the their voice for comparison.
4) with aircraft call outs with location, it's still hard to spot the little buggers
5) set annunciation criteria tight (close) so you're not trying to see gliders more than 2 miles away

exfirepro

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2021, 11:45:22 am »
Hi Neil.

Pleasantly surprised you got consistent coverage all the way down to Lands End, though I know Keith has been working hard to expand the network in that area - and I can see the stations via VRS.

Just noticed the new ATOM Station is 'Up' at Glenforsa as well BTW, which should help those hoping to fly up this Summer. Remember that travel between Scotland and the rest of the UK is still prohibited (except for essential purposes) until at least the 26th April, though we have at least been 'allowed out' now - I had my first flight yesterday since Christmas)  :)  :D

Regards

Peter
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 11:49:37 am by exfirepro »

PaulSS

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2021, 07:50:04 pm »
The ONLY bug bear I have with the SkyDemon audio is that bearingless targets are not announced in any way.

Ian Melville

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2021, 07:51:48 pm »
With more and more people getting EC that is becoming less of an issue

exfirepro

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2021, 08:24:29 am »
Hi Paul / Neil / Ian,

Yes, that’s certainly true Ian, but my ‘guesstimate’ would be at least 50% of GA still pure Mode C or S.

My one frustration with Tim D, is that despite all our good work together Tim still flatly refuses to accept the benefit to informing pilots that there is a known aircraft nearby at a known relative altitude. Even better to know whether that altitude is constant or reducing. Despite my continual reminders to him that up to 50% of GA must still be Bearingless, he still flatly refuses to recognise the benefits.

There is of course the technical issue that the existing GDL90 protocols don’t cater for Bearingless traffic, though with a bit of effort that can be overcome.

I’ll just have to keep on reminding him that he is denying his customers the benefit of readily available safety information. It worked eventually (after about 5 years) with getting him to display Ground Stations as Masts instead of Aircraft, but he seems even more reticent with this one. Maybe a few ‘near misses’ might help to change his mind - as long as they are ‘misses’.

Best Regards

Peter

neilmurg

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2021, 09:05:11 am »
Yes that's a shame. But Bearingless still gets displayed.
Maybe we could organise an OBE deathmatch between Tim and Keith. Keith wins:- SD bearingless annunciates relative approximate range and level. Tim wins:- SD bearingless annunciates "Zulus, 'fahsends of 'em! Or maybe not".

mariko

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2021, 12:03:05 pm »
Maybe we can try to ask for adding a simply beep warning in case of bearingless traffic detected, to call pilot attention to the screen.
Ciao
  Mariko

PaulSS

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2021, 02:19:16 pm »
I think it would be great if everyone had EC and we didn’t have to think about bearingless targets. I’m sure it will get better, as Ian suggests but there are still plenty of Mode C/S bits of kit hanging around. The ones that cheese me off a bit are people like the CTC school at Bournemouth etc. Their aircraft spend a lot of time in the air, in a busy part of the country and yet they don’t do anything more than blurt out Mode S.

I, too, am at a loss with Tim’s attitude. He constantly says he doesn’t want to put out a ‘warning’ that ‘an aircraft is in your vicinity but we don’t know anything more’. I’ve said that is somewhat facetious as we do know other information and it does alert someone, as opposed to no alerts and a sudden face full of Cessna. I certainly look harder when the circle appears (and my PAW audio talks to me), so think it is a genuinely good thing. However, it is his very, very good train set, so I suppose he gets to do what he wants

steveu

Re: ATOM coverage
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2021, 10:23:49 pm »
I think it would be great if everyone had EC and we didn’t have to think about bearingless targets. I’m sure it will get better, as Ian suggests but there are still plenty of Mode C/S bits of kit hanging around. The ones that cheese me off a bit are people like the CTC school at Bournemouth etc. Their aircraft spend a lot of time in the air, in a busy part of the country and yet they don’t do anything more than blurt out Mode S.

But in the presence of ground stations the mode-S stuff may be MLAT'ed? I went for a jaunt in an aircraft I helped fit a PAW to and most of the targets last week had a bearing, only two or three without in close to an hour's flying.

I, too, am at a loss with Tim’s attitude. He constantly says he doesn’t want to put out a ‘warning’ that ‘an aircraft is in your vicinity but we don’t know anything more’. I’ve said that is somewhat facetious as we do know other information and it does alert someone, as opposed to no alerts and a sudden face full of Cessna. I certainly look harder when the circle appears (and my PAW audio talks to me), so think it is a genuinely good thing. However, it is his very, very good train set, so I suppose he gets to do what he wants

Ah yes, complacency, MySpace, Friends Reunited...

As I use SD more and more, I start to see the annoyances of SD, one of which is the way it incorrectly plots some NOTAMs that are correctly plotted by free resources elsewhere.

Coming from free flying we've had two then three then four superb free apps, all of which better Skydemon but are not optimised for power.

XCSoar, LK8000, XC Track and XC Guide. XCSoar will work on hacked e-ink readers like the Kobo.

I've given up reporting issues on SD. I'm left with the impression the train set is perfect... but after one or two (software) crashes recently I've taken to running Easy VFR on a second device.