Hey its Ramy posting as himself again... with the same IP as
too funny.

Anyway issue here is the software has an bug we need to figure out if
its in Seeyou or Strepla.

The calibration of the electronic charts cannot be trusted as the error
in one package or the other would throw off the accuracy of the plot.
Then you get into calibration errors when projecting scanned paper maps
onto an electronic file.
Ever had a fax slip on you when sending? This is the same issue when
calibrating sectionals for programs. Lets not forget the airspace
files which are also suspect.

So Ramy your solution will not work.

The most basic method of checking would be to hand plot a flight on a
paper sectional but the tolerances we are now flying and trusting in
world wide turnpoint exchanges files are so close that a pen width of
ink would not show the true plot.

Al



Ramy wrote:
Marc, although I decided to stay out of this discussion (and any other
discussions on RAS), and ignore any pathetic comment from Al, I see
the need to steer it to the right direction. I don't think it matters
what Strepla or SeeYou reports which may indeed not be accurate, what
matters is what you see when you plot the trace on a sectional. I am
not familier with Strepla, but SeeYou has the option to download
sectional maps, so you can clearly see if there is a violation. I would
expect the SSA will use the same method.

Ramy

Marc Ramsey wrote:
Doug Haluza wrote:
No, you can't blame the software. You are the operator, you control the
input and receive the output, and you have to check the results. This
goes for any software, whether its SeeYou, StrePla, Quicken, Excel,
Word, or whatever.

I have to agree with Al on this one, I'm afraid. What is the SSA
"official" source of SUA data and "official" software that will be used
for detecting possible violations? Without that information, there is
no way for anyone to be certain that they have either the correct input
or output...

Marc