#1628
- Created on2016-01-19 09:05
- Reported by
- StatusFeature Request
- PriorityNormal (3)
- Assigned to-
- Milestone
- Plan Level-
- Estimate0.0
- Due Date-
Modification of multi-leg patrols
From Rob Pickles:
1. Making it easier to simply switch between transportation type
2. Preserving separate patrol leg tracks rather than concatenating
3. Simplifying the new patrol wizard
I'm providing an example in the slides attached.
1. We have quite a few instances in different sites in which a team may patrol one stretch, then move to a different drop off point by vehicle before patrolling a second stretch. In this instance there may be multiple 'stretches' in a single patrol. These are all discontinuous and the team would switch off the GPS between drop off points and save them as separate tracks however when importing the tracks into SMART, they are concatenated with long straight lines joining the individual patrol stretches.
2. When we have complex amphibious patrols constantly switching from short foot patrols to boat patrols back to foot and back to foot, we can't enter this as multi-leg patrols very efficiently. This would be the same case for motorbike patrols in other sites. Can we have the ability to switch transportation type by waypoint?
3. The Patrol Type- land/water/air is redundant given the transportation option and should be removed as it imposes a specific medium on the entire patrol and doesn't account for amphibious patrolling.
1. Making it easier to simply switch between transportation type
2. Preserving separate patrol leg tracks rather than concatenating
3. Simplifying the new patrol wizard
I'm providing an example in the slides attached.
1. We have quite a few instances in different sites in which a team may patrol one stretch, then move to a different drop off point by vehicle before patrolling a second stretch. In this instance there may be multiple 'stretches' in a single patrol. These are all discontinuous and the team would switch off the GPS between drop off points and save them as separate tracks however when importing the tracks into SMART, they are concatenated with long straight lines joining the individual patrol stretches.
2. When we have complex amphibious patrols constantly switching from short foot patrols to boat patrols back to foot and back to foot, we can't enter this as multi-leg patrols very efficiently. This would be the same case for motorbike patrols in other sites. Can we have the ability to switch transportation type by waypoint?
3. The Patrol Type- land/water/air is redundant given the transportation option and should be removed as it imposes a specific medium on the entire patrol and doesn't account for amphibious patrolling.
Leave a comment
1. I think this a side effect of how it is modeled in SMART and imported. If you set this up as x different patrol legs for each discontinuous section then the tracks can be discontinuous.
However if you set it up as a single patrol leg then the tracks must be continuous. I believe if you use Cybertracker (and you ended the patrol and restarted) you would be forced to import as a new leg and get the behavior you want. If you use a GPS then it is up to the user to model it using the patrol legs and import the tracks correctly.
2. This has been requested before - see ticket #1445.
3. I partial agree with this. Part of the reasons it was setup this way was because of the way the requirements came out of the old system. At the time I think we figured there would be substantially different UI's (and analysis) for the various patrol types requiring this distinction. The reality for the UI is that the only thing that changes is the patrol pilot field. However I think this is a questions for the users and not me.
However if you set it up as a single patrol leg then the tracks must be continuous. I believe if you use Cybertracker (and you ended the patrol and restarted) you would be forced to import as a new leg and get the behavior you want. If you use a GPS then it is up to the user to model it using the patrol legs and import the tracks correctly.
2. This has been requested before - see ticket #1445.
3. I partial agree with this. Part of the reasons it was setup this way was because of the way the requirements came out of the old system. At the time I think we figured there would be substantially different UI's (and analysis) for the various patrol types requiring this distinction. The reality for the UI is that the only thing that changes is the patrol pilot field. However I think this is a questions for the users and not me.
For some clarity I will try to summarize how I see this general idea of simplifying data entry for complex patrols with a number of transport type changes etc:
1)If you are using cybertracker and each team that splits off has their own cybertracker enabled device, pretty much everything will work as required. The only issue is the debate concerning any actual need for patrol types(air/ground/water).
2)If you are using GPS only devices and doing manual data entry, everything that is required to enter very complicated patrols like the examples given is possible, but not very user friendly and if the tracks are not imported correctly the first time there is not a nice editor to make changes to them (there is in Missions, not patrols).
If the user/steering council agree that patrol types are superfluous, we could remove that concept from SMART altogether. This is independent of the above tasks, so I will make a separate ticket for that request (#1629)
1)If you are using cybertracker and each team that splits off has their own cybertracker enabled device, pretty much everything will work as required. The only issue is the debate concerning any actual need for patrol types(air/ground/water).
2)If you are using GPS only devices and doing manual data entry, everything that is required to enter very complicated patrols like the examples given is possible, but not very user friendly and if the tracks are not imported correctly the first time there is not a nice editor to make changes to them (there is in Missions, not patrols).
If the user/steering council agree that patrol types are superfluous, we could remove that concept from SMART altogether. This is independent of the above tasks, so I will make a separate ticket for that request (#1629)
