Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Philip,

 

In the default Matias TAG yes, you have a TAG item that indicates if the plane is squawking different from [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned. In the next release there will be more built in TAG sets so you can select another if you prefer. Or simply create your own set ad delete that warning from there if you do not need it.

Gergely.

EuroScope developer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, to realize that best, there would have to be a new detailed TAG Type for unidentified aircraft, to be at least able to reset and display the squawk in the TAG, and an option to keep the aircraft unidentified not only for squawk standby but also when setting a wrong squawk.

 

Personally since most work is done within the TAG, I don't think it should be suppressed, but I don't know if the real world works that way. I however doubt that it works that way, as this would be a huge security problem as you wouldn't be able to monitor aircraft with a damaged transponder, as you weren't able to get any information about them, even though you might be able to identify them by position and they were squawking C, just not the squawk you [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned to them.

Stephan Boerner

VATEUD - ATC Training Director

EuroScope Board of Designers | GVCCS Beta Tester

edff,euroscope,ger1oic,lhaoic.jpg

EuroScope Quick Start Guide

Link to post
Share on other sites

The real SATCAM in Bulgaria shows the full details information when the entered squawk is wrong but valid. In this case, as in ES, a warning is shown to inform for the miss entered squawk by the plane. The TSSR could be changed though, as it is simply aircraft with no secondary transponder information, but there is always ES v3.x. But be aware that the plane callsign and other information is show in many others location in ES's radar screen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In real life, it's working this way:

 

Long time ago, when the computer systems weren't so developed, the controllers used paper flight strips. These flight strips looked exactly the same way as if you press F6 in ES, or in ASRC. There was a squawk code written on it. E.g. MAH200, LHBP-LTBA, etc.etc, sq 2627. When the aircraft took off, the ATC saw only a blip crawling up on the screen with this four-digit number, 2627. When the plane checked in, the callsign and the squawk was the same as on the strip next to the radar scope, so it was identified. But one could never see a callsign on the radar... saw only 2627 all the time, and more or less had to remember, that she's MAH200.

Now, that the computers are already developed, also graphically, they could make a system, which stores these flight strips electronically, they don't need to be printed out. You can see these electronic flight strips when you open Departure List, or Sector Inbound List. So, there is a list of flight plans. This is one thing. What happening on the radar screen, that's a different thing. Now, let's say, there is MAH200 taking off, and there is the strip as well (electronically, of course). A radar blip with an SSR code of 2627 appears. The computer begins the process, and checks the position(!), time(!), and the SSR code. If they are in the allowed range, and the SSR code also matches, it does a tag coupling! The aircraft datatag you can see in ES is the result. All the data, callsign, altitude, FIR exit point, etc etc visible on the tag is taken from the flight strip! But VERY important: it does NOT replace the identification process by the ATC!!! The coupling may also be wrong! How? Here's an example (happened to me in real life):

2 planes are waiting for departure:

MAH200, LHBP - LTBA, sq 2605

MAH844, LHBP - EPWA, sq 2615

The blip appears on the scope, 2605, and the coupling happened: MAH200 appeared. Shortly can be heard the plane goes: "Approach, good afternoon, MAH844 with you, climbing 7000 on LITKU3D departure"

I begin to think quickly, what could be wrong, and taking a look on the flight strips again, in the meantime asked: "Departing aircraft, confirm MAH844!" He said "I confirm, MAH844". Quickly replied: "Ok, reset squawk 2615". After a few seconds a decoupling happened, as the system dropped off the tag from the blip, and suddenly only a 2615 appeared, then a few seconds later a coupling happened again with MAH844, already with the correct strip. I hope it tells everything, how it works. So the computer just helps us to label the planes, but label mistakes may happen, if wrong squawks are set.

 

Now, the way Vatsim works, is completely different. If someone connects to the network, he connects already with the callsign. So there is no sense actually to identify, because if the callsign he says equals to the callsign we see, then he is identified. From this point it doesn't matter at all, what squawk he sets. The callsign will remain the same on that blip anyway. I could say: There is no sense to use squawk codes on Vatsim. Maybe that sounds harsh, but actually, this is the truth. Why to use it, if we can always see everyone's callsign? Even in sq standby mode? A plane coming into my sector, I can see, clearly, with correct datatag, MAH201, LTBA-LHBP, etc.etc. He goes: "Budapest, good evening, MAH201 inbound BUDOP, FL400" I say: "MAH201, good eve, sq 2624" "Sq 2624 coming". She sets 2624, and then I say "Radar contact". Isn't it a joke? Why, she wasn't identified earlier? Of course she was!! Nothing has been changed in the datatag, that she set a different squawk code! Because Vatsim already identified this aircraft. Actually, all aircraft are identified in the very moment she connects to the network!

Of course, a radar client could be written, which wouldn't allow to see the callsign, and anything until the correct sq code is not set. When Euroscope was in early development, I talked to George about this, but he said "Oooh, that would be too difficult, and anyway, would be too complicated for many people on Vatsim." I said OK, then let's not do it this way. Later we talked about it again, and I told him there could be 2 versions of ES, one basic, and one ES advanced, or something like that, which would work exactly as the real one. ;D He said it's not a bad idea, but first he wants to be published already, and make all the features we planned, and then he'll think about it.

 

But before everyone gets too excited about this incoming realism, I would say, that maybe better, if we don't do anything about it. Why? Just because the way Vatsim works now, is the future in real life. Probably many of you heard about the mode S. Many aircraft in real life already operating with mode S. Mode S means that the aircraft, instead of the 4-digit squawk code, transmits the whole everything about itself: callsign, altitude, rate of climb/descent, IAS, etc.etc. As on Vatsim. Mode S is now implemented in Hungary. But of course, many countries yet don't have this radar capability. And as well, many aircraft don't have this kind of transponder. So, 4-digit squawk codes still have a long way to go. Eventually, George will decide what he wants to do with ES. But maybe I'll drop by, and will use some persuasion... he just lives 10 mins away from me.

 

Thinking it over and over... if Vatsim would work as it is in real life, you couldn't see the aircraft's callsing on Servinfo. You would just see sq numbers, mostly 2200 everywhere. You wouldn't know who is that, where he's flying. Would that be good?

Or, if there would be and advanced ES, which would work as the real one, but you had any problem with identification, you would eventually use Servinfo to help identification. And I still haven't talked about the hundreds of llama pilots, who don't even know how to set a sq code... moreover, what's that anyway... I just imagine a Budapest Overload. It would be a complete mess... It is already a mess; even with this system.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Official squawk codes, which can be [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned on Vatsim can be found here: http://vateud.org/default.php?section=4&sub=5

 

Hungary got 2600-2677, as it is in real life. A speciality in Hungary, that overflying traffic entering the country at the southern border usually needs a new squawk due to the ORCAM system. For them the system usually [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignes a code of 46xx.

 

George says ES generates a squawk code randomly. The reason was just to not to get bored of the 2601, 2602, 2603, etc. But actually, as I observed, it's not really random. First aircraft always gets 2627, second gets 2676, etc.etc. Always! So there's nothing random in it. So now I got bored of 2627, and 2676. And also there are problems with this "forced random" squawk: The TWR has a visibility range usually max. 30 NM. It happened sometimes, that a departing a/c got 2637. The TWR didn't see already the departing, because she was 100NM away from the airport, but for the next connected departing a/c ES gave 2637 again. So for me in the Radar, duplicated codes appeared. I really don't know why ES doing this, but I wish I could just turn off random sq [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignment; it would be much more simple just to increase one on the sq, and that's all, until the TWR is online, and not to revert back to a previously used code. I'll ask George about why this is happening, but I cannot reach him now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attila, you can switch off the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignment of random SQ from the General Options next to the VFR filed.

As Gergely explained to me, the reason for the DUPE is that there is a "leak" in the ES logic: ES check for [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned SQ all airplanes inside the visual range and the simulated traffic. The problem is that the simulated traffic is updated in 20min so during this time, the TWR's ES can see the 100nm away plane and his SQ, and the simulated data is out-dated....and you have DUPE. Also keep in mind that "random" in programing is not real random

Link to post
Share on other sites

Attila,

 

OK, I changed ES to keep track of the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned squawks even in random mode and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igns the same SQ only after all values in the range has been [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned (or tested) at least once. I also added a srand() call to make it more random.

Gergely.

EuroScope developer

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

good day,

i will use this 3d, because I think could concern in the same subject.

First of all tnx to Gergely and all the people managed with the ES. great Job.

 

I prepared a ESE file as described in the guide, but when I load the sectors, I have not the updat on the squawk range on general settings. it Should be the FIR range, should not it?

 

this is an expample of a single line of the POSITIONS part:

 

LIMM_CTR:Milano Center:127.450:MN:M:LIMM:CTR:-:-:5400:5477

 

Tnx.

Giovanni

Proud to be a VATITA ATC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The next time you open ES the last used position's SQ range will be displayed, but on the first opening of ES, the range should not be updated.
Does it? ... my ES always shows the standard squawkrange no matter which active one was last used. I can not even save the a change to the standard range. It's always 2600-2677.

Stephan Boerner

VATEUD - ATC Training Director

EuroScope Board of Designers | GVCCS Beta Tester

edff,euroscope,ger1oic,lhaoic.jpg

EuroScope Quick Start Guide

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephan,

 

I just thought that to use your range you must login as controller. If you login as controller you must have a login name that matches a position (if not you will miss several functions). Then you also have the range from the position. So I just could not see any reason to save your last range between sessions.

 

Gergely.

Gergely.

EuroScope developer

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...