Looking For ESE Mentor ...

[Rob Killins 897126]

I am [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed the challenge of re-writing our FIR's sector and ese file to make it more accurate and to function more effectively using Euroscopes unique features. I'm discovering I'm not a pro, and although their are docomeents (wiki and the user manual), I find the information not comprehensive enough and vague in the expanations of the various components of writing a good ese. The basics are there, but there are not enough examples of how to apply things, especially when things can be so unique between different FIR activities. Even these forums are light in discussion of ESE components. I've looked at other ESE files, but am seeing a whole different syntax and commands being used not discussed in any of the available docomeents.

 

Would anyone be willing to provide some coaching with me to help me understand and apply the ESE components to my unique needs? I would ask questions here, but sadly, I have doubts I'd be able to phrase my question in an understandable means to be answered. I'm looking for someone that has had experience and success in writing an ESE file and will have the patience to guide me along. Someone that has had success tapping into all the great features of ES that could be applied to our sectorfile situation would be a most valuable resource. I can't offer much in repayment, perhaps as a community a heartfelt and honest thank you would be reward enough.

 

Here are a couple things I find myself confused with:

For example ... I know how to display borders of sectors within my FIR (internal sectorlines) with the three parameters, but how do I display a sectorline bordering a neighbouring sector outside my FIR? Do I need to define their sector as well as my own?

 

And also ... how do I display a tower control zone sector boundry line. It will be displayed when I'm online, but what about parameter 3? When others above me are only? There counld be several possiblilities from departure, arpproach, and anyone of several centre positions? I'm confused?

[Stephan Boerner 945550]

First of all, if you find some parts of the docomeentation to be not easy to understand, point them out specifically. Then it might be possible to rephrase them.

 

Second, the easiest way to go is probably to just ask your questions here. You would have to phrase them anyway, so why not just do it here when other might be able to benefit from it, too?

 

For example ... I know how to display borders of sectors within my FIR (internal sectorlines) with the three parameters, but how do I display a sectorline bordering a neighbouring sector outside my FIR? Do I need to define their sector as well as my own?

There is no difference between sectorline inside or outside your FIR. You create different sectorlines, and you use them to build sectors. It does not matter if those sectors are your FIR or your neighboring FIR. Sectors are just sectors, and sectorlines are just sectorlines. And yes, you also need to define your surrounding sectors.

 

And also ... how do I display a tower control zone sector boundry line. It will be displayed when I'm online, but what about parameter 3? When others above me are only? There counld be several possiblilities from departure, arpproach, and anyone of several centre positions? I'm confused?

Again, a sector is just a sector, and a sectorline is just a sectorline, no matter if it's a CTR sector, an APP sector, a TWR sector or even a GND sector. It all works the same. I am not quite sure where your question points to ... are you asking about

DISPLAY:MGT:MGT:BUD

? The first MGT is your sector you are covering, and the other two are the two sector that are compared to have different owners.

[Rob Killins 897126]

Thank you Stephen ... I appreciate your response and I'll do my best to express my questions here to the group as a whole.

 

And yes, you also need to define your surrounding sectors.

OK ... lets see if I can do that with the information I know.

 

no matter if it's a CTR sector, an APP sector, a TWR sector or even a GND sector. It all works the same. I am not quite sure where your question points to ... are you asking about

 

Hmmm ... if you are in the tower position, and you want "your" sector (control zone) to have it's boundary displayed, it will require a neighbouring position to be online. For example, a tower's bordering sector in order of hierarchy would be DEPARTURE. ei DISPLAY:TWR:TWR:DEP. But suppose DEP isn't online, and the next neighbouring position is APPROACH, the code would be DISPLAY:TWR:TWR:DEP. Now, in the hierarchy of positions, TWR can be bordered by positions as high as FSS. Does each possible neigbour have to be coded?

[Stephan Boerner 945550]

Hmmm ... if you are in the tower position, and you want "your" sector (control zone) to have it's boundary displayed, it will require a neighbouring position to be online. For example, a tower's bordering sector in order of hierarchy would be DEPARTURE. ei DISPLAY:TWR:TWR:DEP. But suppose DEP isn't online, and the next neighbouring position is APPROACH, the code would be DISPLAY:TWR:TWR:DEP. Now, in the hierarchy of positions, TWR can be bordered by positions as high as FSS. Does each possible neigbour have to be coded?

No, you are not thinking of SECTORs, you are thinking of POSITIONs.

 

Example: you have the sectors TWR, APP, CTR and the controllers are 1 (TWR), 2 (APP) and 3 (CTR).

You want TWR to have it's border displayed whenever someone is covering APP, so the DISPLAY line looks like this: DISPLAY:TWR:TWR:APP

 

Now let's have a look at the controllers: in your example TWR will be covered by 1, since you are 1. It does not matter if 2 or 3 is online, as long as their ownership of APP is correctly set. If 2 is online, 2 will cover APP. If 2 is not online but 3 is online providing top-down cover, 3 will cover APP and CTR. So the OWNER-definitions should look like:

 

OWNER:3 for CTR

OWNER:2:3 for APP

OWNER:1:2:3 for TWR

 

Either way, TWR and APP have different owners, so the border will be displayed.

 

It's about the SECTORs, not about the POSITIONs.

[Rob Killins 897126]

Good explanation Stephen ... lets see if I can manage to keep "positions" out of the mix for now.

[Rob Killins 897126]

Stephen, in your post of 27-Jan you stated:

 

It does not matter if those sectors are your FIR or your neighboring FIR. Sectors are just sectors, and sectorlines are just sectorlines. And yes, you also need to define your surrounding sectors.

 

I'm not sure how to apply this concept to neighbouring ACCs.

 

I cannot see to get this to work:

 

My neighbour ACC is CYEG_CTR. I'm working CYWG_BR_CTR.

The sectorline, will illuminate when I'm we're both online ...

 

SECTORLINE:E13 ;Broadview/Edmonton
DISPLAY:CZWG_BR_CTR:CZWG_BR_CTR:CYEG_CTR
COORD:N048.59.58.773:W110.00.18.410
COORD:N049.49.20.550:W109.00.20.850
COORD:N051.11.08.460:W108.59.08.120
...
COORD:N054.46.00.000:W108.25.00.000
COORD:N055.12.27.440:W107.39.26.010

 

The sectors are defined as:

SECTOR:CZWG_BR_CTR:0:65000
OWNER:WGBR:WGW:WGC:ZWGRDO   ;positions
BORDER:E11:E12:E13:I23:I24           ;E13 CYEG boundary; I23,I24 internal sector boundaries

 

SECTOR:CYEG_CTR:0:60000
OWNER:EGC                                  ;positions
Border:E13:E14:E15                       ;

 

Am I on the right track? Will the boundary line "light up" when supposed to? Do I need to define the entire neighbouring ACC with it's sectorlines, or just the one that borders with me?

[Stephan Boerner 945550]

Looks fine so far. ES does not know if a sector is your FIR or "just" a neighbouring ACC. Treat them all equally, just as ES does.

 

You should define at least the next sector around you, so your border should nowhere have no adjecent sector.

 

On a sidenote: with CANSCOPE there already is one of the big plugins made and available for VATCAN. So there should be at least some ESE file already existing. Did you check if there are already some sectors available? This is one of the areas where centralization and teamwork within vACCs/divisions is a great help, because everyone has to define neighbouring sectors, so if you all work for yourself, most sectors are created at least twice, maybe even more often. If You work together and exchange your work, you can not only save lots of work, you also have matching sectors.

[Rob Killins 897126]

Thanks again Stephen for your help.

 

I was only curious about my code because I wasn't sure how much of my neighbour's ACC needed to be defined, if just the common boundary needed to be. As a diagnostic, when I go into Display Settings of ES and select SECTOR:CYEG_CTR in the Sector definiotions, the active sector background illuminates some crazy deviation. Since no one in my ACC will ever be controlling this neighbouring ACC sector, I guess this oddity is of no concern.

 

And yes ... somewhat familiar with CANSCOPE, and had used it with mixed success. Our FIR isn't included in that project, perhaps this effort can be contributed. I hadn't found much benefit in using CANSCOPE (likely because it didn't relate to CYWG). It did a great job of mimicking recognized radar scope layout and schemes, but it turned out I was changing most settings to meet my individual needs anyway. But will certianly look into the ESE and see if I can find any hints from there.

 

Thank you for your continued [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istance. No better source of learning than from someone who has had the experience.

[Stephan Boerner 945550]

I was only curious about my code because I wasn't sure how much of my neighbour's ACC needed to be defined, if just the common boundary needed to be. As a diagnostic, when I go into Display Settings of ES and select SECTOR:CYEG_CTR in the Sector definiotions, the active sector background illuminates some crazy deviation. Since no one in my ACC will ever be controlling this neighbouring ACC sector, I guess this oddity is of no concern.

If you want any specific opinion you need to include screenshots, I have no idea how your lines or sectors look like