Important: These forums are for discussions between SkyDemon users. They are not routinely monitored by SkyDemon staff so any urgent issues should be sent directly to our Customer Support.

US Sectional Chart Style


Author
Message
mschmoelzer
mschmoelzer
Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8, Visits: 66
Hi,

I just updated SkyDemon to version 3.6.0 and now the US Sectional chart style is missing. Is there any way I can get it back?

Thanks & kind regards
Martin

Replies
mschmoelzer
mschmoelzer
Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)Too Much Forum (849 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8, Visits: 66
Hi,

so far I was using SkyDemon in Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia.

Here are two screenshots from my not yet updated iPad (version 3.5.1.32):
http://imgur.com/a/xEHsb

The US sectional chart style was my favorite because the terrain elevation was coloured in the following way:
  • light green: [0, 1000) ft
  • dark green: [1000, 2000) ft
  • light brown: [2000, 3000) ft
  • medium brown: [3000, 5000) ft
  • dark brown: above 5000 ft
I like to plan my flights at cruising altitudes of 3500-4500 ft, so I with the US Sectional chart style I could see at a glance (even before defining the waypoints and looking at the virtual radar profile) where this was possible.

The other chart styles do this differently, e.g. the SkyDemon 1 style:
  • white: [0, 500) ft
  • light brown: [500, 1000) ft
  • medium brown: [1000, 3000) ft
  • dark brown: [3000, 6000) ft
  • white: above 6000 ft
I don't need the map to distinguish between [0, 500) and [500, 1000) ft since that makes little to no difference in my flight planning. However, it is (in my opinion) a big advantage to be able to see immediately which parts of the country are in the elevation interval of [0, 2000) ft where a cruising altitude of 3500-4500 ft is sufficient.

I tried the other chart styles:
  • SkyDemon 3 and German DFS are useless to me because there is no highlighting of higher terrain at all
  • SkyDemon 1 and 2: I'll probably use one of these now
  • UK CAA: valleys in the mountains have the same colour as the mountain itself
  • Italian Avianoportolano, French SIA: would be a good replacement, but I don't like the thick blue airspace borders
Perhaps you could introduce a way to fine-tune the map styles by the user by allowing us to modify the elevation interval values?

Kind regards
Martin

Vincent BAZILLIO
Vincent BAZILLIO
Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)Too Much Forum (3.1K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 29, Visits: 92
Martin has perfectly explained the reason why, as many other customers, I choose the US Sectional Chart style to fly in France. I explained it among other pros and cons on my blog : http://20-100-video.blogspot.fr/2015/07/mise-jour-des-impressions-skydemon.html

mschmoelzer (5/4/2016)
Hi,
  • light green: [0, 1000) ft
  • dark green: [1000, 2000) ft
  • light brown: [2000, 3000) ft
  • medium brown: [3000, 5000) ft
  • dark brown: above 5000 ft
I like to plan my flights at cruising altitudes of 3500-4500 ft, so I with the US Sectional chart style I could see at a glance (even before defining the waypoints and looking at the virtual radar profile) where this was possible.
Martin


I'm very disapointed that Skydemon removed it.

Vincent B.
(St-Cyr/LFPZ, Toussus/LFPN, San Diego/KMYF)
Check my blog : http://20-100-video.blogspot.com

Sevyka
Sevyka
Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)Too Much Forum (158 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1, Visits: 8
The US Sectional chart style was also my preferred choice. It was clear, and the terrain was much better. The other styles are not nearly as good. They are too "full" of colors for the airspaces and the terrain, especially when zooming in, is not clear. I am terribly disappointed that you have removed it. Please, consider republishing it with an update, for us it would be great customer service. Thank you for your kind help.
ckurz7000
ckurz7000
Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 538, Visits: 2.2K
It is always a good idea to streamline your app and remove unused junk from time to time. Tim, can you tell us the specific reason why you removed the US Sectional chart style? Was it using too many resources? Too much pain to maintain?

Thanks, -- Chris.

rg
rg
Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)Too Much Forum (11K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 109, Visits: 1.9K
Perhaps you could introduce a way to fine-tune the map styles by the user by allowing us to modify the elevation interval values?

Kind regards
Martin


The ability to create, edit and share chart styles would b great.
ckurz7000
ckurz7000
Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)Too Much Forum (68K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 538, Visits: 2.2K
That would, indeed, be great. However, I believe it runs counter to company strategy.

From what I glean, each chart style is more than the name "style" appears to connote. It is not just a collection of how things ought to look. SD is not a "skninnable" program as many PC programs are. Rather, a chart style encompasses a lot of specific programming logic and intelligence.

Considering this, I wouldn't hold my breath for chart styles to become user customizable. Although I think it would be a great idea.

-- Chris.

GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Threaded View
Threaded View
mschmoelzer - 5/3/2016 8:09:06 PM
Tim Dawson - 5/4/2016 11:53:43 AM
mschmoelzer - 5/4/2016 3:28:19 PM
vbazillio - 5/14/2016 6:19:45 AM
Sevyka - 5/17/2016 9:23:59 PM
ckurz7000 - 5/19/2016 1:11:06 PM
rg - 5/23/2016 5:40:37 AM
ckurz7000 - 5/23/2016 12:35:32 PM
Tim Dawson - 5/4/2016 3:31:50 PM
geohawk - 5/5/2016 3:48:30 AM
Alti-Dude - 5/5/2016 4:20:03 PM
luc - 5/6/2016 6:21:31 PM
Richard747 - 5/6/2016 7:28:24 PM
Jalafu - 5/10/2016 1:41:33 PM
Tim Dawson - 5/19/2016 2:52:03 PM
vbazillio - 5/22/2016 9:12:13 AM
T67M - 5/22/2016 4:46:57 PM
Alti-Dude - 5/29/2016 3:43:20 PM

Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search