Tim Barker

Giorgio, This actually doesn't answer the question I asked. All this says is the refresh rate is high. Not to the specifics of the question I posed. In the FAA we primarily use two fundamentally different radars for in air surveillance. The ASR is a terminal based radar. It has fast rotation and therefore a fast update rate. But in the high altitudes we use a LRR. Since it is designed for long range surveillance so the rotation must be slower to receive a radar return at greater distances otherwise the radar wouldn't get the return . This was my first question. This has nothing to due with the connection update rate for pilots. Also the ASR radars are not used above a certain height above the ground so being able to set a ceiling per radar site would allow this to be an option in a realistic radar mode. If both of these are an option then fundamentally you could in theory develop a radar definition for ASDE-X radar specifically as their rotation speed is even higher than ASR radar sites. Respectfully, Tim

Euroscope has one refresh rate so no it doesn't do what I'm asking.

I assume you are going to have a way to incorporate realistic radar coverage. Will there be an way to define the radar site's rate of rotation and a way to define a site's ceiling. For instance an ASR radar updates faster than a LRR radar due to one is designed for long range and the other one is designed for short range so the rate of turn and update is slower for the LRR. For instance setting up an ASR radar only to be designed to view up to 20k feet or so.

Any news on the status towards Beta release? Things have been relatively quiet in the past couple of months.

Richard, To attempt the AI to Online Approach, you would probably have to have it defined to do that at a certain location. This would require a ton of engineering and personalization per airport I think. For example, most approach controls arent a circle so you couldnt use a base mileage from the airport. You would need to define a fix for every instance. But what if your flight plan doesn't have a switchover fix? What if you're an overflight with the switchover fix in your route? What if the airport in question uses a different approach control first for example, KMDW landers from the east go through South Bend Approach then go to Chicago Approach.

The problem with VATSIM events is you have all the traffic going between two or three city pairs. That doesn't happen in the real world. ZAU sees around 6000 planes a day in the summer but not all of them are landing at ORD or MDW. It is a mixture of planes going to different places in ZAU and overflights. Frequency congestion is a real issue as well. Real world sectors are at a maximum of 15 to 30 planes (depending on the size of the sector) on any one given frequency at a time as well.