I converted 2D conventional flight tracking into 3D(aeris.edbn.me) |
I converted 2D conventional flight tracking into 3D(aeris.edbn.me) |
How challenging would it be to create a VR experience to view it?
Fwiw, my use-case is simply throwing it on the TV as a screensaver of sorts for my nephews when someone they know is travelling. Just a way to make the world seem smaller!
It's led to some cute situations where their mom was flying almost directly over my dad living in our childhood home, and we video called him and directed him to the spot in the sky where my sister (his daughter) was flying over. Her kids were ecstatic. We live in interesting times
Mercator projection looks really strange when you look at it sideways to see the layers of aircraft, but the world doesn't fall away on the horizon.
It would be really cool to visualise the sightlines available when on a flight at 10km altitude.
Modelling only the most common aircraft types sounds like a good approach.
With the ICAO type code, maybe you could group aircraft (wide-body / narrow-body / regional / cargo) to provide an accurate visual fallback when a specific 3D model isn’t available. Also, a slightly different shade for the generic aircraft could help signal that it’s just a placeholder rather than a real model.
The altitude seems a little off - is it supposed to be to scale? Some aircraft flying around 1,000-3,000 ft looked closer to FL20 from my experience as a passenger and pilot.
0. https://tech.yahoo.com/phones/article/2011-11-26-siri-wolfra...
It's amazing and in some ways frightening that I had an interesting problem, and within a couple hours I had a fully functional app that completely solved it.
I wonder how feasible it would be to render all airplanes at once, not just those near the chosen airport. A quick google says there are about 12-14k planes in the air at any given time, which sounds reasonable to render with some optimizations
For the same reason, I made it open source, you can throw in your keys in there and can render all the flights, but keeping it open and free was the priority here, so had to compromise on the distance, but within a given city it has all the flights accurately.
For longer flights, large passenger aircraft will generally aim for something like 30k feet - the thinner air means less air resistance so more fuel efficiency (the cost is the fuel required to get there, which is why I said "for longer flights").
However, at that altitude the "jet stream" can cause winds of 100+ mph. This can be helpful with your direction of travel, or it can slow you down. If the jet stream was strong and trying to blow you backwards, it may have been more efficient to travel at a lower altitude where the jet stream wasn't present.
Is the vertical distance to scale? Jets look a little higher than they should be to me.
Maybe I missed it, but it is always fun to see the origin and destination when looking at flight tracks.
Both this post's viewer and the older one I linked directly above have greatly exaggerated vertical scaling. It is not proportional to the distances on the map. With actual 1:1 height scale all these planes, even the stratospheric jets, would be much closer to the ground.
But that's not what this is. Here only the airplanes are in the third dimension. The world map isn't even a globe
A non flat visualisation is what you could see for example on a 3D screen, augmented reality, or virtual reality.