Jump to content

Radar "Hole" problem


Chris Pawley
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi Everyone,

 

We have some problems with implimenting RADAR holes within Euroscope files.

 

We have an off site secondary feed combined with a primary feed on the airport.

 

When traffic goes directly over the airport we expect to lose primary feed - but we don't - we only lose the feed if the traffic is too low (and thus out of the cone)

 

To simulate this - we input the feeds into the ESE file as specified - and drew a 2nm circle around the airport and defined this as the "hole".

 

I attach the code below, could someone perhaps shed some light as to why this works, but not entirely?

 

Thanks

 

Chris.

 

[RADAR]
RADAR:Pease Pottage:N51.04.56.000:W000.11.53.000:0:60000:0:0:60000:0:100:200:16
RADAR:PSR (SOU):N050.56.57.00:W001.21.39.00:74:70:75:0:60000:0:0:60000:0
HOLE:60000:60000:60000
COORD:N051.06.28.605:W001.16.43.026
COORD:N051.05.11.646:W001.12.26.571
COORD:N051.03.11.002:W001.08.57.913
COORD:N051.00.37.393:W001.06.35.591
COORD:N050.57.44.467:W001.05.32.252
COORD:N050.54.47.590:W001.05.53.524
COORD:N050.52.02.479:W001.07.37.516
COORD:N050.49.43.803:W001.10.34.988
COORD:N050.48.03.886:W001.14.30.171
COORD:N050.47.11.604:W001.19.02.168
COORD:N050.47.11.604:W001.23.46.811
COORD:N050.48.03.886:W001.28.18.808
COORD:N050.49.43.803:W001.32.13.991
COORD:N050.52.02.479:W001.35.11.463
COORD:N050.54.47.590:W001.36.55.455
COORD:N050.57.44.467:W001.37.16.727
COORD:N051.00.37.393:W001.36.13.388
COORD:N051.03.11.002:W001.33.51.066
COORD:N051.05.11.646:W001.30.22.408
COORD:N051.06.28.605:W001.26.05.953
COORD:N051.06.55.041:W001.21.24.490
COORD:N051.06.28.605:W001.16.43.026
COORD:N051.05.11.646:W001.12.26.571
COORD:N051.03.11.002:W001.08.57.913
COORD:N051.00.37.393:W001.06.35.591
COORD:N050.57.44.467:W001.05.32.252
COORD:N050.54.47.590:W001.05.53.524
COORD:N050.52.02.479:W001.07.37.516
COORD:N050.49.43.803:W001.10.34.988
COORD:N050.48.03.886:W001.14.30.171
COORD:N050.47.11.604:W001.19.02.168
COORD:N050.47.11.604:W001.23.46.811
COORD:N050.48.03.886:W001.28.18.808
COORD:N050.49.43.803:W001.32.13.991
COORD:N050.52.02.479:W001.35.11.463
COORD:N050.54.47.590:W001.36.55.455
COORD:N050.57.44.467:W001.37.16.727
COORD:N051.00.37.393:W001.36.13.388
COORD:N051.03.11.002:W001.33.51.066
COORD:N051.05.11.646:W001.30.22.408

Chris Pawley I3

Vatsim-UK

generate.php?mid=856109

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the holes are for all defined radar sites, there is no hole-radar [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignment.

I think if you define a hole overhead the field, you won't get secondary there either? I use the hole technique at Gloster (EGBJ), but I simulate the real life primary-only, so it works fine. (No secondary radar feed at all).

 

When doing a different position that has secondary radar, I disable the radar definitions.

Mike Pike

VATSIM-UK

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are misunderstanding the two things. If you have two radar stations, one at the North, one at the South. You CAN'T define a radar hole for the North station only, the hole will be "active" for both stations. That is what I wrote. But you can have radar holes for different TYPE of radar stations: primary, secondary, S mode, I thought that was obvious from the radar hole definition.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...you can have radar holes for different TYPE of radar stations: primary, secondary, S mode, I thought that was obvious from the radar hole definition.

Sorry. Yes it is obvious, I just hadn't read it lately. I must have confused a different problem at Gloster which I can't remember now. Apologies for the confusion.

Mike Pike

VATSIM-UK

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
I can't remember if in this case the polygon was auto closed , but your end should be the same as your start coordinates.

 

Hi Todor (and everyone),

 

I've had a chance to look at our .ese and have a play in the simulator again - the coord loop is now closed explicitly in the .ese - but the hole still does not work.

 

Does anyone have any other ideas?

 

Reading between the lines above - it doesn't seem to be a function of having two RADAR sites - but that might be a problem...I'm not sure.

 

Chris.

Chris Pawley I3

Vatsim-UK

generate.php?mid=856109

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect our returns to disappear when they go over the RADAR head (as it cannot look directly up) - so we drew a 2nm circle around the coordinates of the site and used HOLE:60000:60000:60000 to filter all traffic upto FL600.

 

However - the Hole appears to have no effect at all.

 

Chris.

Chris Pawley I3

Vatsim-UK

generate.php?mid=856109

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...