Jump to content

TDM Not Working / Ground Clutter


Recommended Posts

Ross,

 

At Denver International (KDEN), I am unable to make top-down-mode show me the information we're supposed to see. All I see are targets with no secondary/beacon information.

 

Also, even while using altitude filters, I am unable to eliminate ground clutter at Denver. I see the same thing as described above: all targets.

 

Could this be an elevation issue with the airport?

Link to post
Share on other sites
At Denver International (KDEN), I am unable to make top-down-mode show me the information we're supposed to see. All I see are targets with no secondary/beacon information.

 

TDM targets aren't supposed to have secondary or beacon info.

 

Also, even while using altitude filters, I am unable to eliminate ground clutter at Denver. I see the same thing as described above: all targets.

 

How do you have your radar sites set up?

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites
At Denver International (KDEN), I am unable to make top-down-mode show me the information we're supposed to see. All I see are targets with no secondary/beacon information.

TDM targets aren't supposed to have secondary or beacon info.

Sorry, what I meant was that I don't see the callsign, aircraft type, or scratchpad for the targets as the manual says we are supposed to.

Also, even while using altitude filters, I am unable to eliminate ground clutter at Denver. I see the same thing as described above: all targets.

How do you have your radar sites set up?

I'll have to check with Casey to verify the setup, but we have two radar sites modeling the real airspace. Irondale ASR is just south of DEN, and Platteville about 40 miles north of DEN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As promised:

 

   <RadarSites>
     <RadarSite IsPrimary="true" Character="I" ID="IRO" Elevation="5269" FloorSlope="-4" PrimaryRange="60" SecondaryRange="120" ConeOfSilenceSlope="49.95">
       <Location Lon="-104.67433" Lat="39.82334" />
     </RadarSite>
     <RadarSite IsPrimary="false" Character="P" ID="PLA" Elevation="4991" FloorSlope="0.459" PrimaryRange="60" SecondaryRange="120" ConeOfSilenceSlope="49.5">
       <Location Lon="-104.71858" Lat="40.296639" />
     </RadarSite>
   </RadarSites>
   <RadarSite>-1</RadarSite>

 

Not sure what that last radar site thing is. But it was created by vSTARS via an export, so I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume it should be there.

 

And I'm not sure I have Ross' email. Where would I find that?

Casey

ZDV_CI C1

MTN1474 / Mountain Air VP of Administration / Commercial Captain

Link to post
Share on other sites
(Or email it to me, my email is the same as the vstars website with the first dot changed to an @.)

 

From my question regarding MSAW polygons in which he then proceeded to use Voodoo magic to fix.

 

Cheers!

Rahul

Rahul Parkar

"On second thoughts Nappa, catch it, catch it with your teeth" -- Vegeta

Professional Nerd. (Professionally not professional)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah. Yes. I did that while testing and I guess I forgot to put it back.

 

That is the site nearest to KDEN and I was trying to figure out why TDM wasn't working. I didn't think that was the issue, but was testing with the negative value. Doing so [obviously] allowed me to see the aircraft on the ground, but didn't seem to make TDM work at all. No, the radar site doesn't look down. The actual floor slope should be "0.459", just like the other one. And we have confirmed that the RW radar site cannot 'see' aircraft on the ground due to the slope, so I'm pretty sure that floor slope is accurate (.459, not -4).

 

And I send Ross a link to our file via PM, and he has already responded; so I'm not going to bother emailing him.

Edited by Guest

Casey

ZDV_CI C1

MTN1474 / Mountain Air VP of Administration / Commercial Captain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, you might be right. BUT.... both of those numbers (as best as I can tell) are accurate. If you look at an topo map of the area around KDEN, it is a real mess. And just because it is below the actual airport, doesn't mean they can see ground traffic on their scopes. What with buildings and such.....

 

Let me test a couple different set ups with this info in mind.

Casey

ZDV_CI C1

MTN1474 / Mountain Air VP of Administration / Commercial Captain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that did it. It looks like it was the fact that the radar site actually sits below the airport by a couple hundred feet. So what was happening was that TDM wasn't activating. And therefore aircraft that hadn't filed a flight plan yet were showing up as primary targets only, with none of that other useful info.

 

Bummer that we can't use the real elevation data for that radar site.. but... oh..... wait..... Ok, now I don't care anymore.

 

Thanks all.

 

Harold, I'll email you a link to the file with this fix in it.

Casey

ZDV_CI C1

MTN1474 / Mountain Air VP of Administration / Commercial Captain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Of course. When I said that, I was [Mod - Happy Thoughts]uming that was clear to everyone. That comment was referring to earlier in the thread where I said that we confirmed that on the real world scopes they cannot see aircraft on the ramp on their scopes.

 

So what I was saying was, the difference between real world and vSTARS could be precisely that. They can't see them in the real world because of the obstructions, and that isn't modeled by vSTARS.

 

Good lord, making MSAWs is bad enough, if we had to input terrain or other obstruction info......

Casey

ZDV_CI C1

MTN1474 / Mountain Air VP of Administration / Commercial Captain

Link to post
Share on other sites
... there is no terrain/obstruction modeling in vSTARS.

 

Feature request?

 

I came very close to adding the ability to define terrain ridgelines that could block radar signals. Then I decided that if I'm going to do terrain modeling, I really need to do it right, using actual digital elevation models of real terrain. Definitely might happen in a later version.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Board of Governors

I came very close to adding the ability to define terrain ridgelines that could block radar signals. Then I decided that if I'm going to do terrain modeling, I really need to do it right, using actual digital elevation models of real terrain. Definitely might happen in a later version.

 

Defiantly do it right and use the digital elevation models. Not of much use for the terrain databases for us in ZMA for the obvious reason that Florida is generally flat. Still would be an amazing feature though.

Nick
Vice President - Supervisors
VATSIM Board of Governors

Contact the Supervisor Team | Could you be a Supervisor?

Vatsim-color-tagline.png.afe5bb8b98897d00926a882be4e2059c.png

Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own and not representative of the official opinion of the VATSIM Board of Governors

Link to post
Share on other sites
What I would like more is putting the weather radar on top of the screen.

 

That's something that I'll only do if VATSIM develops a weather system that has the precipitation in the same place for both controllers and pilots. Otherwise it's just eye candy.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites
aren't the Vatsim metars used by controllers the same as those available to pilots who choose to use Vatsim weather? pilots can chose to use other weather, but there will never be any way to force pilots to use Vatsim weather.

 

Which doesn't matter much anyway as each Flight Sim client renders it differently. The METAR affects an area, and if it's -RA (for instance), the rain spots will be in different places, tops of clouds different, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...