Hello,
When I view the map view of KDAB and enlarge it I am only shown half of the state’s traffic. It splits FL down the middle and there is no traffic shown to the west of the state eventhough the geography is shown on the map.
Thanks.
Yes, there is something going on and there has not been an answer from the staff as to why it is. I posted the same issue and got directed to another post, but there was not answer there either.
What is going on FlightAware? 
You’re getting a great product with a few - very few - minor bugs in for the extremely high price of NADA. Don’t complain - the staff will fix the problem as soon as they can.
In the meantime, use the search feature to find out how to access Bugaware.
I agree, great product. Top notch!
But what got me upset is that there was not a real answer to three of us asking the same question. I was not sure if the staff was aware of it. That was really what I was trying to communicate. If your last reply was the first, it would have solved my inquiry from the get-go. 
Regards and Thanks,
Jeff
We’ve identified the problem and the fix should be in place tonight or tomorrow.
Thank you very much!
Great job! 
Jeff
The FlightAware mapping team is in the midst of a major upgrade to the software, which we call TrackStream 5.0. When complete, map generation will occur concurrently with page generation, making maps often come up immediately when a page is first rendered by your browser. Also we will have new search capabilities, and greatly improved detection of continuation of flights where currently we think it is a new flight, which often happens on transoceanic flights.
And, of course, zooming and other new user controls over the appearance of generated maps, plus a bunch of other cool new stuff we’re not quite ready to talk about.
While working on this, we needed to alter some data structures, subroutines, etc, in support of an impending change in our data feed that, over time, will make much of our flight track position data sixty times more accurate (!).
As '5.0 requires us to regenerate a history table containing literally billions of aircraft positions, and due to the fact that 5.0 is simply not yet ready for production, the impending change in the feed required us to backport the higher-accuracy feed changes to the current TrackStream software, a task which fell to one of our more junior guys, who appeared to successfully do that. Reports of problems with maps followed shortly thereafter and, honestly, this fellow was in a state of denial about it for a while and, frankly, was a bit lost trying to figure out what was going on.
Finally your calls and posts broke through my own tunnel vision to get '5.0 out and we put our attention on this in earnest. After careful study we discovered a rounding error due to an accidental implicit type conversion of function arguments from floating point to short integer which caused the latitude/longitude selection “box” to be truncated by up to one degree of latitude and/or longitude, resulting in a map that was larger than the box that selected the aircraft to be shown. (In my opinion, this condition should generate a warning by the compiler unless explicitly cast, but, dig, the compiler writers didn’t ask me. 
)
Maps should no longer have any “dead areas” and the more accurate data, once it appears (it has been delayed externally to us), will automatically be picked up.
I apologize to anyone who was inconvenienced or annoyed, etc, by this lapse. Just because FlightAware is free doesn’t mean we aren’t committed to providing an extraordinarily high level of quality, reliability, and value – we are. It is inevitable that there will be some problems and teething pains when 5.0 comes out – it is simply impossible for us to replicate the behavior of hundreds of thousands of users in our test environment at this point in the evolution of the organization. After the kinks are worked out, however, the result will be a huge improvement in the performance and capabilities of FlightAware, and I can hardly wait.
Regards,
Karl Lehenbauer
Mapping Team Leader
FlightAware
Um, yeah, get right on that. (Y’know, I THOUGHT that’s what was going on… 
)
No need to apologize. Even the people who have complained seem to realize what a great tool this site is. The fact that you guys:
a)provide free membership
b)address any/all technical issues with the urgency of a 911 dispatcher
c) explain those technical issues and upgrades in detail to the members
speaks for itself on how comitted you are to providing a useful service to all who visit the site. I know I sound like a kiss-ass, but I’m constantly amazed at the diligency of the staff. If there are Web Awards of some kind out there (They must exist somewhere, right?), the FA staff truly deserves several for unmatched commitment to excellence and accuracy.
I agree completely with Planeaholic with everything. Sometimes I can’t believe this is real, watching airtraffic on my screen at home - almost as if I was at an ARTCC or Tracon!
Bravo!!
So it had nothing to do with the Kansas Triangle or the People of the South Wind?
I’m glad it was something more technical and you guys at FlightAware are the best!
Now I can go back to being a lurker…
UKGuy (not from the Midlands or Cornwall)
Dorset?
Notlob??
Nope, not Dorset or Bolton
keep guessing…