Ground Radar plugin 1.2.2 beta 4

[Juha Holopainen]

Beta 4 is now available:

Ground Radar plugin version 1.2.2 beta 4

Changes from beta 3:

• Added APP window altitude filter
• Updated Stands data file syntax (HEADING line type added)
• Added settings to make it possible to display the highlighted (mouse-over) track in a special way in the ground mode
  • Dedicated color
  • Label border with selectable color and transparency
  • Label area fill with selectable color and transparency

Edited June 24, 2020 by Juha Holopainen

[Adrian Bjerke (1339353)]

Would it be possible to select the state status of an aircraft directly in the ground radar tag instead of using the flightplan lists?

[Juha Holopainen]

Opening the ground state menu from the label menu can probably be done without causing any issues, I'll have a look.

[Max Kuhla (1157125)]

Maybe with a righ mouse click would be an alternative?

[David Falke]

Hey there,

I know that might sound silly to you but...

is it possible or might it be possible to modify the settings in a way so one could see if someone handoff an aircraft to you or to see if im tracking an aircraft myself?

 

regards

[Juha Holopainen]

Not silly, but also not a feature of the real system either as far as I know, so no. That information should be gathered using other means such as flight strips, the EuroScope lists or something like that. Given that I have rather little detailed information on the real system, should I in the future find out something like this really exists, I'll certainly consider it.

[Oliver Gruetzmann (961224)]

Hi,

is there a chance to also allow a polygon for gate definitions? Circles usually work fine, but especially when it is about A/B positions of one gate it gets really hard to place a circle small enough to avoid false readouts, while also keeping the tolerance big enough to allow for different parking skills and small scenery offsets.

[Juha Holopainen]

Using polygons to define stand areas is actually in the code already, even in the release version 1.2.1. Why it's not documented, I don't remember to be honest. Either the functionality is not 100% ready yet, or I've just forgotten to update the documentation. If it's the former, I don't really remember what remained to be done, so it's probably best to just try it out and see how it goes...

To use it, the stand definition needs to be "STAND:icao:name", i.e. the coordinates and radius left out. Then, the polygon is defined using at least three "COORD:lat:lon" lines where the lat and lon are in either decimal degrees or the sector file format.

[Oliver Gruetzmann (961224)]

Looks like this is working already

Thanks!

Edited April 21, 2020 by Oliver Gruetzmann

[Oliver Gruetzmann (961224)]

Found a discepancy between lists. UAE 35Q Is on Stand 113X (I put headings into the stand definition).

The Stands List has that correctly, the departure list sees it on stand 113A.

EDIT: Those Stands overlap, laterally, the aircraft is on both of them.
 

STAND:EDDM:113A
COORD:N048.21.08.235:E011.46.58.696
COORD:N048.21.08.422:E011.47.01.048
COORD:N048.21.08.659:E011.47.01.011
COORD:N048.21.08.491:E011.46.58.661
HEADING:070:10
CALLSIGN:AFL:EZY:UAE:SXS:SXD:TUI
NOTCALLSIGN:GROUP_EDDM_STARALLIANCE
PRIORITY:1
USE:A

STAND:EDDM:113X
COORD:N048.21.08.849:E011.46.58.494
COORD:N048.21.08.417:E011.46.58.444
COORD:N048.21.08.339:E011.47.00.949
COORD:N048.21.08.773:E011.47.00.908
HEADING:093:5
NOTCALLSIGN:GROUP_EDDM_STARALLIANCE
PRIORITY:1
USE:A

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by Oliver Gruetzmann

[Juha Holopainen]

So it wasn't quite finished yet after all, good thing I didn't document it then. It'll improve in the next version but as the code was so old, we'll just have to see if I find all the places where changes are needed.

[Patrick Weineis (1244867)]

Hey Juha
Also found a possible bug with the gateassignment with the restriction REMARKS:Text:Text:Text:…

I addet this line REMARKS:Gaya
the gate assignment give him this gate, also when he don't have "Gaya" in the remarks.

 

Tested scenario was
Airline:AUA
Aircraft:A388 (A388    79.8    73    24.1    560000    A)

 

STAND:LOWW:D26:N048.07.03.632:E016.33.41.751:15
ENGINETYPE:J
PRIORITY:+3
BLOCKS:D27
BLOCKS:D24,D28:79.80
USE:A
NON-SCHENGEN
NOTCALLSIGN:AAR,ACA,ADR,AEE,AIC,ANA,ANZ,AVA,BEL,CCA,CMP,CSZ,CTN,DLH,ETH,EVA,LOT,MSR,SAA,SAS,SIA,SWR,TAP,THA,THY,UAL
WINGSPAN:20.00:79.80
LENGTH:73.90

STAND:LOWW:B58:N048.07.18.738:E016.32.54.213:15
USE:AC
REMARKS:Gaya
BLOCKS:B57,B59
BLOCKS:B52,B53,B61,B62:89.99
WINGSPAN:20.00:79.99
LENGTH:83.45


He gets sometimes gate D26 assigned, but most time Stands which need the remark Gaya (Due scenery diffrent)

 

 

Edit:
also GROUP:Staralliance:AAR,ACA,ADR,AEE,AIC,ANA,ANZ,AVA,BEL,CCA,CMP,CSZ,CTN,DLH,ETH,EVA,LOT,MSR,SAA,SAS,SIA,SWR,TAP,THA,THY,UAL
CALLSIGN:GROUP_Staralliance seems not to work

 

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by Patrick Weineis
new bug

[Juha Holopainen]

On 01/05/2020 at 19:24, Patrick Weineis said:

I addet this line REMARKS:Gaya
the gate assignment give him this gate, also when he don't have "Gaya" in the remarks.

...

He gets sometimes gate D26 assigned, but most time Stands which need the remark Gaya (Due scenery diffrent)

...

also GROUP:Staralliance:AAR,ACA,ADR,AEE,AIC,ANA,ANZ,AVA,BEL,CCA,CMP,CSZ,CTN,DLH,ETH,EVA,LOT,MSR,SAA,SAS,SIA,SWR,TAP,THA,THY,UAL
CALLSIGN:GROUP_Staralliance seems not to work

The current development code already has a number of fixes made to the stand assignment code, but I'll recheck those parts. Note that even with all bugs fixed, it is possible for aircraft without the specified remarks to get the stand, but only when no stand could otherwise be assigned. Getting D26 assigned appears correct assuming it was a non-Schengen flight (or no other stands available), and with priority +3 should actually always be preferred over B58 whose priority is the default 0.

I'm going to need more information on the group issue - what was defined (stand details), what was the scenario (aircraft details), what did you expect to happen and what actually happened. (disregard this if the group definition is actually using comma separators, see below)

Edit: sorry, just realized that your group definition is using commas (,) separating the callsigns. Should be colons (:). The code is actually seeing just one very long callsign there instead of the intended list. Yes, the datafile formats could be more user-friendly, some of them use commas and others colons. I'll have to see if I can improve that. The colon is necessary in some parts such as the remarks, as the wanted remarks text could actually contain the comma character but not the colon as it's a field delimiter in the network protocol.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Juha Holopainen

[Patrick Weineis (1244867)]

Hi Juha
Just redone the Test cause wasn't shure about the test was done with shengen aircraft.

New scenario performed
default System_SchengenArea
BAW102 | B748 | KJFK-LOWW | No remarks
D24,D26,D27,D28 isn't blocked 

the only possible gate for him is D26 which is completly free and the Bxx stands, which need Remark GAYA.

The group issue was my fault, only a copy paste error
old config:
CALLSIGN:AAR,ACA,ADR,AEE,AIC,ANA,ANZ,AUA,AVA,BEL,CCA,CMP,CSZ,CTN,DLH,ETH,EVA,LOT,MSR,SAA,SAS,SIA,SWR,TAP,THA,THY,UAL (which need ,)
new config:
GROUP:Staralliance:AAR:ACA:ADR:AEE:AIC:ANA:ANZ:AUA:AVA:BEL:CCA:CMP:CSZ:CTN:DLH:ETH:EVA:LOT:MSR:SAA:SAS:SIA:SWR:TAP:THA:THY:UAL (need :)
CALLSIGN:GROUP_Staralliance
 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Patrick Weineis

[Juha Holopainen]

Based on a short test the development code (that just became beta 5) appears to handle group definitions and callsign and remarks lines as expected, so please test again on that version. If it still doesn't work as it should, report it as a bug on the beta 5 thread.