Jump to content

Sub Sectorisation - Still To Do?


Luke Brown
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi Ross, many thanks for your recent updates on VATSpy, great to see the ol' gal is still being supported.
 
Just a quick one, I know the to-do list on the website hasn't changed for a very long time, I still see that it says that sub-sectoisation is still planned.
 
In the UK, we're considering changing our logon convention to match that of the Australians, to allow display of sub-sectors in the current state. But if the program is soon to take characters after the first _ into account, then hopefully we wouldn't need to.
 
Any info greatly appreciated.

Network Supervisor | C1 | P1

VATSIM UK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't be adding support for it in VAT-Spy until there is an official data source that contains all the subsectors, and we (VATSIM and developers) come up with a convention for how to map callsigns and frequencies to those subsectors. So it'll be a while, I'm sure.

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

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I was wondering if it is possible to just explode the Callsign-String by the Underlines "_", then check the data, if the Array defined by the First part of the CS-string (station ID) contains a Subdivision equal to the Second part (subdivision identifier) of the string, and if not, just show it as full-coverage? We are only talking about CTR-subdivision anyways, right, so this mechanism would only need to be triggered when the third part (station type identifier) of the callsign says "CTR"?

but most probably i just miss something painfully obvious... 😄
just me thinking... 🙂

edit: just realized that with non-subdivided callsigns you would always have CTR as the second part of the String, this might be considered to be an early-end trigger for the mechanism to make it cover-all?...

Edited by Fabian Gilgen
thinking must be learned :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm open to any convention, as long as it is "official" and works for all regions across the globe. We just need a standard that everyone can follow. Once that standard is written and adopted, and a data source is provided by VATSIM, I will update VAT-Spy to use that new standard and new data source.

And this could be done for approach/departure sectors as well as center.

  • Thanks 2

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

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that an "official" convention will be extremely difficult to achive. However, since it's the vACC's job to keep the sectors updated, we could match certain sectors to certain frequencies and callsigns.

I don't think there will ever be a perfect way because I can log on with a subsector callsign and control the whole airspace as well as logon with full sector callsign but ending up working only one frequency for a smaller subsector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Bernado, if we could assign a specific frequency to a sector + callsign it would be much easier. vACCs would be responsible for keeping their area up to date just like their sector files.

CHRISS KLOSOWSKI
Division Director, VATSIM Middle East & North Africa  
VATSIM Network Supervisor, Team 5
##  [email protected] 
##
 http://vatsim.me/    
     

1185353147_Signature(1).png.e6818c4256541cb309a1888bad7c9d33.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ross Carlson said:

Why? It's already been done for all the data that's currently in the official feed.

I'm talking about an "official" format that all the divisions and vACCs would have to obey to. While I agree that would be highly benefic, I think it will be very difficult to implement, even more with the current character limitation for the login codes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bernardo Reis said:

I'm talking about an "official" format that all the divisions and vACCs would have to obey to.

So am I. We already have that:

https://github.com/vatsimnetwork/vatspy-data-project

That is an official repository for the data that drives VAT-Spy and other applications. That is the format that would need to be extended for this purpose. It's totally achievable.

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

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just trying to understand: Since VATSpy already gathers data from github, what prevents you from implementing this?

As I would see it is that you add the support for the sector splits, but require it to be coded/defined in a special way, which makes those who wanna implement the spits can do that via github. If there is no defined split for a sector (either by unknown split or no data) then show the whole FIR light up.

In my opinion it should use the frequencies to determine the split since many choose to connect as XXXX_1_ CTR (or something similar) when taking over for another controller.

It would also be nice if the sectorsplits are not shown as FIR's when the splits are offline, I would imagine small airspaces would just be a bunch of inactive lines otherwise. 😄 

Adrian Bjerke
Training Director | ACCSCA2
adri[email protected]
VATSIM Scandinavia

Logo VACCSCA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Adrian Bjerke said:

Since VATSpy already gathers data from github, what prevents you from implementing this?

Because that GitHub repository is a VATSIM-controlled data source. I do not control it. I can't just make changes to it on my own. Other applications make use of that data.

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

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...