[RESOLVED] Radar track files never age out i

[Santi871]

So from what it looks like the WCS creates a track file in TWS upon first radar sweep over target. Upon the second sweep it calculates the difference with the original track information and adds velocity information.

 

However, if the radar only manages to sweep once over the target before it dissappears (notched, outside scan zone, etc.), the track file will never age out, even if it's outside the scan zone, which results in a lot of "ghost" track files.

 

The only way to remove them is by switching to a pulse mode so the WCS drops all tracks.

 

 

How to reproduce:

 

In TWS modes, let radar sweep once over target, then fly so that the target is outside radar scan zone before it sweeps over it a second time. The created track with no velocity information will never age out.

Edited February 13, 2020 by IronMike

[shagrat]

So from what it looks like the WCS creates a track file in TWS upon first radar sweep over target. Upon the second sweep it calculates the difference with the original track information and adds velocity information.

 

 

 

However, if the radar only manages to sweep once over the target before it dissappears (notched, outside scan zone, etc.), the track file will never age out, even if it's outside the scan zone, which results in a lot of "ghost" track files.

 

 

 

The only way to remove them is by switching to a pulse mode so the WCS drops all tracks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

How to reproduce:

 

 

 

In TWS modes, let radar sweep once over target, then fly so that the target is outside radar scan zone before it sweeps over it a second time. The created track with no velocity information will never age out.

From the online manual, section about the CAP, TARGET DATA category:

(...)The SYM DELETE (symbol delete) allows the RIO to manually drop/remove a track or waypoint from the TID if no longer relevant. Own aircraft and data link track symbols can not be removed.(...)

[Santi871]

From the online manual, section about the CAP, TARGET DATA category:

(...)The SYM DELETE (symbol delete) allows the RIO to manually drop/remove a track or waypoint from the TID if no longer relevant. Own aircraft and data link track symbols can not be removed.(...)

 

Oh yeah that's another way to get rid of them too. Bug should still get fixed though.

[Santi871]

Bump, I think this one got buried rather quick a few months ago

[QuiGon]

Interesting. The Tomcat radar does indeed produce a lot of ghost contacts on the TID and what you described there might indeed be what causes it. :thumbup:

 

I'll see if I can observe the same behaviour.

[Naquaii]

Thanks guys, I'll talk to our radar guy, this might actually explain some behavior we haven't been able to figure out.

[IronMike]

I see, I never replied to this thread. Gyrovague actually fixed the issue 4 months ago, I just forgot to let you know. Hence it is suprising if that is still happening to you, I did not see this in ages.

 

Are you sure you are not confusing it with contacts that are ghosting for a while after track was lost? Or tracks that drift off when they were lost?

 

Like Naquaii said, we will take a second look. Anything that hasn't formed a track should time out very quickly.

[gyrovague]

I've not been able to reproduce this... There was a bug like this which was fixed in October 2019 already.

 

Date:   Fri Oct 11 17:29:57 2019 +0200

   Fix untracked contacts in TWS not timing out (must form track within two scan frame times).

   Fixes #655

[Santi871]

Sorry, it's fixed. I must've not noticed it working properly since then and assumed it was still a bug since the report got buried quickly and didn't get a response. Thanks for letting us know though :)

[IronMike]

Sorry, it's fixed. I must've not noticed it working properly since then and assumed it was still a bug since the report got buried quickly and didn't get a response. Thanks for letting us know though :)

 

 

Ok, good to know. We were not able to reproduce it and got worried there for a sec haha, but it is my fault for not telling you earlier.

 

 

 

Thanks again for helping us fix this.