UPD: those turned out to be ducting events, not software/hardware limits on FlightFeeder’s max range
hello everyone. I have a very specific issue — I have a set of antenna and the latest FlightFeeder v11 I got and based on the Atlantic coast (Portugal) with direct view of the ocean. I used to have an extremely far and stable reception up to 600-700 NM away (not error blips, probably ducting), but after several days of such reception it deteriorated to a very clear limit of 300 NM.
I know for a fact that the antenna is getting far more distant planes. Is there anything I can do to ask FlightAware to check / remove the potential limit?
So far they told me my reception is nominal, but I’d love to see these faraway catches on my maps even if they are discarded in my final stats on FlightAware. There’s nothing on my side that limits the range, all my max-range are set to unlimited, so the only thing left is FlightFeeder decoder limit (which I cannot check on a closed box).
I am attaching a graph1090 screenshot (it’s in KM). I am showing only a part of it, so it was amazing for more days than you see here.
Ducting depends on weather.
You can even see it reduce gradually.
Even if dump1090 is set to a max range limit, it will still forward the messages received from planes further than that.
Only the display / json data is affected by the range limit.
You usually need defined air layers for ducting, for example a temperature inversion.
Most ducting happens with blue sky when it’s hot.
your Malta graph — is this a closed box FlightFeeder or user-managed feeder? It’s quite revealing, actually! So ducting can happen over very specific time periods? I wasn’t aware they open up like that and then disappear. it’s a clear quiet period in September…
As per limits: I’ve read in different discussions FA has limits imposed on their FlightFeeder boxes to avoid bad data or sth like that, 300 NM and 360 NM were discussed in forums.
As far as i know that would not apply to the beast format output. (and your graphs are actually an indication that there is no such limit, a change to that behaviour seems unlikely)
It will apply to what the Flightfeeder map displays of course.
In regards to the data processing on the feed side, not sure which limits are imposed there.
Yeah that’s why i wrote it requires clearly separated air layers (most likely cause is a temperature inversion).
and you’re correct to call me out — I overstated that I know “for a fact” that the antenna gets more distant planes; I used my past experience to state that. My understanding was that I see a hard 300 NM limit right now. I’d expect to see at least some random planes here and there beyond this distance, but I really don’t see them. This is why I wam inclined to think it’s a hard set limit.
Yes, it has been accurate for me. In my experience (I’m in Austin Texas), the extended range I get usually corresponds to weather past South Texas over the gulf.
flightfeeder & piaware software is conservative about what it accepts to feed to FlightAware, but that decision happens downstream from dump1090 et al. The beast format output still has all the valid messages heard.
yeah, I understand it better now, but there’s also some confusion since FlightFeeder is a closed box I cannot access and most people, I would guess, are feeding with their own equipment they can fine tune
