Jason Helkenberg 913355 Posted April 4, 2017 at 02:50 PM Posted April 4, 2017 at 02:50 PM I haven't seen a post about this but if so, please re-direct me. I work in the real world D10 Tracon and our STARS has the Fusion system which is a computer "brain" simulator which takes the target and depicts where it will be in the future which results in a 1 second update rather than the 6 second update. I was curious if there was any way to implement this into the new update. I do believe this fusion is only available at some TRACONs and could be an option in the Facility Engineers options to turn on this feature. Obviously you would not be able to simulate the real Fusion system but you could make the update more realistic to 1 second updates to simulate the Fusion system. Thanks. Jason Helkenberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted April 4, 2017 at 09:25 PM Posted April 4, 2017 at 09:25 PM As I understand it, fusion relies on having multiple radar sites painting the target, so it combines radar returns from more than one radar sensor as well as does prediction to fill in the gaps. In order to simulate this on VATSIM, we would need to have our pilot position updates occur more than once every 5 seconds. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coughlan Posted April 5, 2017 at 07:39 AM Posted April 5, 2017 at 07:39 AM As I understand it, fusion relies on having multiple radar sites painting the target, so it combines radar returns from more than one radar sensor as well as does prediction to fill in the gaps. In order to simulate this on VATSIM, we would need to have our pilot position updates occur more than once every 5 seconds. Ross is right, I believe it's multiple stations painting a target with coordinated, timed sweeps. Even 3 seconds for VATSIM would make a world of difference, sadly though, not gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Helkenberg 913355 Posted April 5, 2017 at 11:50 AM Author Posted April 5, 2017 at 11:50 AM Well who do we need to talk to about this or ask for approval? Would there be a way for you to add a FE function to allow 2-3 sec updates if this was approved? Jason Helkenberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted April 5, 2017 at 12:51 PM Posted April 5, 2017 at 12:51 PM Well who do we need to talk to about this or ask for approval? Would there be a way for you to add a FE function to allow 2-3 sec updates if this was approved? The problem is that it would require an update to all the pilot clients. They determine how fast position updates are sent to the network. I wouldn't say it's not going to happen ... I have been talking with other devs about increasing the update rate because there are many other reasons besides STARS Fusion that would be enabled. It would help for formation flying, ASDE-X displays, and better position interpolation (movement smoothing) for other nearby aircraft. I wouldn't be surprised if it eventually became an official request for the decision makers to consider. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Helkenberg 913355 Posted April 5, 2017 at 01:05 PM Author Posted April 5, 2017 at 01:05 PM Great. I will sit back and hope for the best. You are doing great work and if there is anything I can do to help let me know. Jason Helkenberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dominic Nguyen Posted April 10, 2017 at 01:26 AM Posted April 10, 2017 at 01:26 AM http://www1.metacraft.com/VRC/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4089 I think they'd complain about bandwidth consumption more than anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Wolcott 814793 Posted September 20, 2017 at 09:51 PM Posted September 20, 2017 at 09:51 PM http://www1.metacraft.com/VRC/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4089 I think they'd complain about bandwidth consumption more than anything Because text data takes up so much bandwidth from the year 1999 Seriously question from someone who doesn't know..., how much bandwidth would 500 aircraft position (lat/long, heading, track, altitude, vertical rate, horizontal speed, pitch/roll ) updates use, per second? How large would each packet be per aircraft and what would be the bandwidth needed for both I/O operations at the server AND the client level? I'm sure it doesn't work like this, but I made a text file containing 500 rows of data representing aircraft positions. The file is 28KB. If you transmitted this data to one server that's 28KB of data per second. If all 500 aircraft are reporting every second that is 14MB of data received at the server per second. The server then has to send this data back out and share it with the other servers correct? So that would now be 28MB total per second of data incoming and outgoing (very simplistically). So if this load is split among servers the load and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ociated bandwidth per server would in theory be less, no? I'm not seeing the bandwidth issue, but this is also the viewpoint of someone who doesn't have all the facts or data. Perhaps Ross can provide a clearer set of lenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dominic Nguyen Posted October 1, 2017 at 08:00 PM Posted October 1, 2017 at 08:00 PM Andrew, for getting kicked off for dual connections or observing too long or leaving flights unattended derive from the same argument the SUPs make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts