I’ve been building MLAT Airspace Console, a multilateration-focused aviation data platform that uses CKB as a receiver registry/identity layer while keeping signal ingestion, multilateration processing, storage, and delivery off-chain.
What I’m building
The goal is to support a distributed receiver network where:
- receiver identity and metadata can be discovered through CKB
- observations can be processed into aircraft positions
- downstream users can consume those outputs through an API and dashboard
The role of CKB here is not to store aircraft telemetry directly.
Instead, CKB is being used for:
- receiver identity
- receiver metadata
- registry-backed discovery
- ownership/coordination workflows
What is already working
CKB / registry layer
- receiver-registry contract built in Rust
- deployed on CKB testnet
- on-chain receiver registration path built
- receiver discovery from CKB working
Off-chain runtime/product layer
- MLAT runtime for correlation and solving
- SQLite persistence
- REST API
- dashboard / hosted demo surface
- readiness instrumentation
- benchmark tooling
- live-ingest scaffolding through:
- command-jsonl bridge
- Beast TCP adapter
- multi-receiver Beast bridge
What is still missing
The main blocker is no longer architecture or tooling.
The real blocker is:
No actual live observation source is currently connected
So while the project can already demonstrate:
- registry behavior
- product structure
- benchmark workflow
- readiness/quality / freshness / reliability instrumentation
it cannot yet honestly claim:
- live MLAT accuracy
- completeness
- freshness superiority
- reliability superiority
- better coverage than incumbents
Why I think this is interesting for Nervos
I think this project is interesting because it demonstrates a practical pattern for CKB:
- Use CKB for decentralized infrastructure registry/state
- Use off-chain systems for high-throughput computation and delivery
- potentially use Fiber later for low-cost access settlement or receiver incentives
What I’d like feedback on
I’d especially appreciate feedback on:
- whether the role of CKB here is well-scoped and justified
- whether this feels like a useful Nervos infrastructure reference pattern
- What would need to be true before this is a strong grant candidate
- whether the current product direction should lean more toward:
- receiver-network control plane
- aviation data API
- MLAT infrastructure
- benchmarkable data platform
Current next steps
- obtain real live receiver observation input
- move from replay/simulation output to real aircraft outputs
- run the first meaningful external benchmar