AI Traffic Labels

[SidStarz]

Is it possible in a future release to add  a selection where AI traffic (on the same ATC freq as your a/c), changes to a color of one's choice?

 

See image. I chose green for this illustration.

 

FSC had this and I'm just wondering if it would be possible in v2.

[KiloJuliett]

5 hours ago, SidStarz said:

AI traffic (on the same ATC freq as your a/c)

How do you think this can be determined? Especially as it is only artificial traffic.

[SidStarz]

I'm not a programmer, just a happy user of EFB so I can't answer the question directly but I was just asking to see if it were at all possible.

 

Not sure how FSC managed or how they did the the coding for AI traffic.

 

Some snapshots of FSC. Green traffic is all a/c on the same ATC freq as I am.

 

 

 

[PeterDowson]

On 9/3/2018 at 11:08 PM, Mr. ATC said:

How do you think this can be determined? Especially as it is only artificial traffic.

 

The COM1 frequency tuned in by AI aircraft can be read. FSUIPC supplies it in the base TCAS_DATA structure.

 

Pete

 

[SidStarz]

Thank you Pete for supplying the answer.

 

Now for Aivlasoft, do you think that the request I made can be incorporated into a future release?

[aivlasoft]

Currently there are many other items to be implemented which have a higher priority. This is not a NO, but also not a YES. Time will tell.

[lonewulf47]

4 hours ago, SidStarz said:

Thank you Pete for supplying the answer.

 

Now for Aivlasoft, do you think that the request I made can be incorporated into a future release?

Maybe it will allow a simple minded layman like me to understand this: what is the benefit of such information?

[SidStarz]

Oskar - No benefit whatsoever. 

 

After using FSC for so many years, I was used to seeing the AI traffic on the same freq as me change colors.

 

It was just a simple request to see if it could/would be considered as an added feature in a future release to be utilized by those users who choose to use it.

[Akila]

i think this a is a very good feature request with very high value for user experience.

I loved the Idea. thanks SidStarz 

[lonewulf47]

4 hours ago, Akila said:

i think this a is a very good feature request with very high value for user experience.

I loved the Idea. thanks SidStarz 

Well, PatB already answered this with his statement (see above): " No benefit whatsoever ". I leave it to you two to finally find out about the "very high value for user experience". EFB v2 is neither a client for Radar Controllers nor does it provide any means to communicate with AI traffic.

[Akila]

I am sure PatB did not mean that how you read his last statement as a not relevant feature or he would not raise 

this request in the 1st place, he was simply replying to the functional relevancy.

but in any case from User Experience I see it as a very high value.. 

[lonewulf47]

48 minutes ago, Akila said:

...but in any case from User Experience I see it as a very high value.. 

Ok, we may continue this discussion eternally, but even if it sounds like a repetitive question: What is the "very high value" from User Experience? As a complete noob in aviation (I got only 20'000+ flying hours as commercial pilot and flight instructor of which I agree that it is close to nothing compared to many simmers invaluable experience) I would really learn how to benefit from the information provided by the fact that an AI traffic is on my frequency. Maybe I have missed something substantial in my almost 40 years of commercial and private flying. I'm always willing to learn something new...?

[Akila]

your claim/example of personal flying experience is relevant in this case/feature, as in real life there is no AI

but in the Simulator it is a different ball game. different crowd, different needs & different added values

if it wasn't important, nor Peter Dowson or FSC would have that feature available..

 

just to give you a simple example (one out of many) of an added value in SIM. when

using an ATC program, you want to know what planes are with you under the same COM1

to know who is else under ATC control apart from yourself at that phase of the flight and you can see them on your map as reference
to your location.

[lonewulf47]

2 hours ago, Akila said:

when using an ATC program, you want to know what planes are with you under the same COM1

 

to know who is else under ATC control apart from yourself at that phase of the flight and you can see them on your map as reference
to your location.

Not that I wanted to give the impression that we are all ignorant developers that do not understand the user's wishes, I might need to point to a few facts from the developer's view. EFB v2 is primarily designed to be what the 3-letter acronym means: an Electronic Flight Bag! This said, it will also become clearer that if we had decided to produce a Radar Scope, we would have changed the name and had implemented all necessary functions. Same applies for a Flight Planning Tool: if EFB v2 were primarily designed as a Flight Planning Tool, we would have renamed it and focused on flight planning features.

 

So, as a conclusion. even if there are a n umber of wishes from the community's side, the decision to implement each new feature should still be with the developer. As long as a few important features regarding EFB are on our to-do list, we will not be focusing on other "goodies", especially not if they do not produce a specific value to the common user of an EFB. First-Minute Users will have realized that even since introduction of EFB v2 on July 1st, 2018, a few new features were implemented upon user's requests or suggestions. It is however simply impossible to always include all specific wishes and suggestions of any users. And again, the decision to do what is reasonable and doable within our scope for EFB v2 should still remain with the developers.

[Akila]

no one claimed otherwise.

you asked for reason, I provided one.

Developers would prioritize it or not, i have no control over.