A plane tracking site that shows the Arctic?

No way then can. No ADSB receivers up there. And typically not tracked on radar. At least not radars that have public access.
 
Could be interesting. Any specific reason why?
 
Besides the charts, there's also the tracklog data in text format. But that has a gap north of about the 60th parallel, which is surprising not very far north. Anchorage is about there.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAE229/history/20230208/0605Z/OMDB/KSEA/tracklog

Wed 01:51:49 AM 29.5016 56.2728 ↑ 7° 519 597 30,500 508
arrow_up.gif

Wed 01:52:21 AM 29.5761 56.2835 ↑ 7° 522 601 30,800 352
arrow_up.gif

Wed 01:53:10 AM 29.6944 56.3006 ↑ 7° 524 603 30,975 8
arrow_up.gif

Gap in available data

Wed 04:17:52 AM 49.1467 62.7718 ↑ 7° 473 544 32,000 7
arrow_up.gif

Wed 04:18:28 AM 49.2219 62.7853 ↑ 7° 470 541 32,000
 
You might need to ask a polar bear to set up a receiver.
 
Space based ADS-B would have picked it up just not sure if FlightAware and Flight Radar have a deal with any of the suppliers.
 
Are the Chinese involved again?
 
I’m guessing NORAD, but the website might be behind a rather fierce firewall.
 
A growing number of aircraft over the ocean are being tracked by GPS. Arctic routes should be seen by GPS too. Might not be reported, tho.
 
EK221 is at longitude 82, lat 21 right now on flightaware, dubai to dallas.
 
murphey said:
A growing number of aircraft over the ocean are being tracked by GPS. Arctic routes should be seen by GPS too. Might not be reported, tho.
Click to expand...
GPS satellites don't "track" anything. Devices use GPS satellite signals to figure out where they are. Once they know, that information can be disseminated, for instance through the ADS-B traffic system used by the FAA.

FlightAware uses the FAA's ADS-B system for a lot of its tracking information, but they also consume information from other sources...I dunno enough about how they get all their info to know what's possible for them to track and what's not. Here's what they have to say about it: https://flightaware.com/about/datasources/

Regardless, unless a plane is publishing its position in a way that it can be picked up by some tracking system that you're also tied into, you're not going to see it. In practical terms, these days that means you can see (via sites like FlightAware) almost everything (except military and those paying to hide their data) flying over the US, and you can see a lot of what's flying over other populated areas in the world. Over the oceans and poles, though, things get a lot more spotty.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think there is gps coverage at the poles in any case.

GPS satellites are in the west to east orbit. I don’t believe there are gps satellites in the polar orbits that are launched south to north.

Could be wrong
 
WDD said:
I don’t think there is gps coverage at the poles in any case.

GPS satellites are in the west to east orbit. I don’t believe there are gps satellites in the polar orbits that are launched south to north.

Could be wrong
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true. From the GPS "Standard Performance" spec (https://www.gps.gov/technical/ps/2020-SPS-performance-standard.pdf):
The terrestrial service volume for the baseline 24-slot constellation and expandable 24-slot constellation coverage comprises the entire near-Earth region which extends from the surface of the Earth up to an altitude of 3,000 km above the surface of the Earth which is not physically obscured by localized obstructions.
Click to expand...

This is more of a press release, and it's not dated, but it also talks about world-wide coverage: https://www.schriever.spaceforce.mi.../50-sw-completes-gps-constellation-expansion/
The GPS constellation consists of 24 operational slots positioned within six equally-spaced orbital planes surrounding the earth. This plane/slot scheme and enhanced satellite placement ensure GPS users receive the most accurate navigation data at any time, at any place around the world.
Click to expand...

So I think you can use GPS to tell where you are in polar regions. But there may not be a handy communication network where you could then easily tell anyone else where you were.
 
WDD said:
I don’t think there is gps coverage at the poles in any case.

GPS satellites are in the west to east orbit. I don’t believe there are gps satellites in the polar orbits that are launched south to north.

Could be wrong
Click to expand...
There is, as my GPS devices calculate a position when I fly to Asia from Chicago. The route often flies very close to the north pole.
 
NoHeat said:
Actually there is.

If you take a helicopter tour to the North Pole, that’s how the pilot finds it.
Click to expand...
I always just assumed that the pilot would just fly straight magnetic north right until the compass says he's going south.
 
WDD said:
I don’t think there is gps coverage at the poles in any case.
Click to expand...
There is coverage. Don't know about the Artic but all aircraft in Antartica use GPS to navigate around with no issues. The altitude accuracy tends to be off at times but they only fly VFR. Even McMurdo Station can be seen on Google Earth.
 
Baked Potato said:
I always just assumed that the pilot would just fly straight magnetic north right until the compass says he's going south.
Click to expand...

If you are a pilot, I REALLY hope you know that the magnetic north pole is not at the North Pole (geographic).
 
Pinecone said:
If you are a pilot, I REALLY hope you know that the magnetic north pole is not at the North Pole (geographic).
Click to expand...
Nah, all I know is that sometimes my heading on the Garmin and the standby compass have different readings, which confuses me so I just put post-it notes over both of them.

Unrelated, but I'm leading an Arctic sightseeing tour next month if you want to fly as a passenger. PM me for details!
 
Narwhal said:
The FMC in the 747 inhibits GPS position updating to the Flight Management Computers above 88.5 N or S. The jet uses inertial reference systems there. I don't know if this would affect the ADS-C/ADS-B gps data (it doesn't in the sim for what that's worth). I've never flown through those lattitudes in the real jet. I suspect the reason the tracking data isn't public is because the air traffic agencies receiving the data in oceanic or remote continental airspace don't share the information publicly, and there are no private recievers in those locations. Additionally Inmersat Satcom is inop above 84 deg, but HF datalink is still usable albeit at increased latency compared to satellite. Iridium satcom should keep working.
Click to expand...
Hypothetically...

If a jet is going up over the (geo) north pole on a polar route and had a reason it needed to turn back, how do the nav systems handle that at that latitude if GPS isn't valid? A mag compass is almost useless up there when you'd be north of mag north.
 
Todd82 said:
If a jet is going up over the (geo) north pole on a polar route and had a reason it needed to turn back, how do the nav systems handle that at that latitude if GPS isn't valid? A mag compass is almost useless up there when you'd be north of mag north.
Click to expand...
What Narwhal said. In the days before GPS, there were still inertial systems for navigation. Essentially, it's using mechanical systems to accomplish very precise dead reckoning. Modern systems combine inertial measurement functions with GNSS (GPS) functions; the inertial system is constantly getting re-initialized with updated GPS position information if it's available, and if the GPS signal is lost or degraded, then the inertial system continues to propagate position estimates starting from the last GPS fix.

https://aerospace.honeywell.com/us/en/about-us/blogs/what-is-an-inertial-navigation-system
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top