I noticed that no planes heading to FMMI are ploted on all the prominent online radars despite the fact that most of them are likely equiped with ads-b.
What does it take to remedy that lack of coverage?
For services like FlightRadar24 they typically get data in two ways: via volunteers hosting ADS-B receiver stations on the ground, and directly from the ATC radar system in places where that data is readily available.
For the ADS-B equipped aircraft these services would need volunteers in the area of Ivato Airport (FMMI) to host ADS-B receivers. They would almost certainly be happy to have more receivers, and they even offer free "premium" services (and occasionally free receivers) to people who help provide data. If it's legal in your area, and you are willing to run a receiver station you may want to look into it, and this will get you aircraft which are broadcasting ADS-B data (Mode S+ES with GPS position information).
For the aircraft which are not broadcasting ADS-B information (because they lack an appropriate transponder or GPS system) the problem is a little more complicated - the organization that runs ATC in Madagascar would need to set up radar sites (which presumably exist), and make that information publicly available (which may or may not be the case). A system would then need to be developed to allow the online radar services to process that data and make the flight tracks available (subject to whatever delays may be imposed in that process).
As I don't know much (anything really) about the ATC system in Madagascar, so I'm not sure how robust the radar infrastructure is or how open they might be with their data, so I can't really comment on that half of the system.
I noticed that no planes heading to FMMI are ploted on all the prominent online radars despite the fact that most of them are likely equiped with ads-b. What does it take to remedy that lack of coverage?
? Questions include: Is it correct to assert that radar coverage will effectively become a less precise, backup only, data feed? I am suggesting this because my understanding (which could easily be incorrect) is that ADS-B will mandated for most (everyone?) and so aircraft will be actively reporting their precise position without the need for a radar track. Will existing radar coverage eventually be phased out? Seems unlikely due to airspace security issues alone. But are there any other reasons to keep radar coverage?
While reading the description of ADS-B given on the FR24 website (ADS-B How it works), I came across this sentence: The farther away from the receiver an aircraft is flying, the higher it must fly to be covered by the receiver. What is the relation between height and coverage in this case?
I've seen multiple videos online of evacuation slide tests and they all tend to be almost violent as they are very fast and loud, but I can't help thinking that it must put a lot of force on those seams when they inflate and along with that the material. Is there any limit to how many times these may be deployed before they must be retired?
The FAA offers instrument approach procedures on their website free of charge, and EASA does too. Does Canada have them online for us to use?
As we all know from our instrument training, the MOCA is: MINIMUM OBSTRUCTION CLEARANCE ALTITUDE (MOCA)- The lowest published altitude in effect between radio fixes on VOR airways, off-airway routes, or route segments which meets obstacle clearance requirements for the entire route segment and which assures acceptable navigational signal coverage only within 25 statute (22 nautical) miles of a VOR. Whereas the MEA is: MINIMUM EN ROUTE IFR ALTITUDE (MEA)- The lowest published altitude between radio fixes which assures acceptable navigational signal coverage and meets obstacle
I enjoy tracking air traffic at my local KORD. I listen on LiveATC and use my private virtual radar setup to get "real-time" traffic info. I understand which instructions need to be read back by the pilots per this question however on more than one occasion I don't hear read back on critical vector info on departure, despite the visual confirmation of instruction (pilot making proper vector and speed adjustments). I tend to notice this with bigger birds (777,747,340), however smaller regional jets almost always promptly read back. Questions: Is there an alternative way of ATC
Reading the NTSB's accident report on US1549, there is a transcript of the CVR from page 149 onwards in the PDF (marked as page 130 on hardcopy). Small clips of the ATC/crew communications exist, but I'm curious to know whether the NTSB also release the full audio recording, per the transcript provided? It's much longer than other clips I can find online. Related: Can I get official recordings of ATC audio? (asks for FAA, not NTSB).
I'm thinking of building some of physical aspects of a flight simulator, such as the overhead panels and pedestal. Is there a publication available where I could find detailed dimensions of cockpit panel sizes of say Boeing 737 and A320s? I've found some pictures online but they don't quite have the detail I would like. Google images shows a few results with detailed dimensions, so I'm wondering where they got theirs from... actual measurements perhaps? (there are photos of measurements, but i'd like something maybe a little more exact) Is there maybe a standard size of these panels, also
Are there any online records that may indicate why a specific DPE may have lost qualifications recently?