I thought it would be interesting to do a comparison between my R820T dongle, RadarBox and Beast.
They are using different indoor antennas, but they are at the same location so that hopefully makes things a little fairer.
The dongle is using an Airnav whip antenna. The RadarBox is using a MD-1100SBS. The Beast is using a PCB-antenna.
My results for 10 January are (all three receivers were started and ended at the same time over a period of approx. 15 hours), and they include the subtraction of duplicate contacts are-
R820T dongle - 339 contacts
RadarBox - 303 contacts
Beast - 474 contacts
Considering the price of the dongle, in my opinion this is an excellent result.
Stephen
I received mine in this morning's post and connected it to my SSE-1090 SJ Mk2 Antenna which is mounted on the chimney of our bungalow in place of the Beast. I'm very pleased with the results, max range in PP so far is 227 nm - very good considering there is no ducting at all today. All five blue lights are constantly on and the purple one flashes from time to time indicating 120+ valid packets/sec received.
Over a 10 hr period yesterday the R820T logged 455 individual flights (1,569 contacts). This seems to compare quite favourably with the Beast, though I need to analyse previous logs to confirm this.
I left the dongle running on PP overnight with tracks on and the longest tracks recorded were;
235 nm on a bearing of 129º from my location.
229 nm @ 095º
226 nm @ 063º
205 nm @ 040º
Has anyone else noticed that PP shows a lower off-air message rate from the R820T than RTL1090 shows as sending to PP?
I used a log for the Beast from the same day a week previous (05.01.13) and here are the results compared to the dongle:
Beast: Contacts 1,972 Flights 771
R820T: Contacts 1,569 Flights 455
Thanks for the updates Tom.
Would you sell the Beast and keep the DVB-T dongle?
Quote from: Anmer on January 14, 2013, 09:30:01 AM
Thanks for the updates Tom.
Would you sell the Beast and keep the DVB-T dongle?
No, I would not Mike, but I'll keep the DVB-T dongle as a backup. However, if I were starting out from scratch I might be temped to buy the dongle instead as I'm surprised and impressed at its performance. If my Beast ever dies I will certainly replace it with the dongle if the cost of repair is too much. Due credit to the guys at jetvision.de and others who wrote the software and provided the instructions to make it possible for people to get into radarspotting at such a modest cost.
Thanks Tom.
May seem a stupid question,but with the dongle,do you have to have a internet connection? Obviously yes,running it with Plane Plotter,but was
thinking along the lines,like the SBS-1.Where you could run it without.
Sounds like a nifty mobile set up though.May well end up getting one.
You can run your dongle without an internet connection.
i use mine when out and about. ;D
Is it possible to have planes showing on a screen,like in Basestation,when not connected to the internet?
Regards,
David.
Quote from: Magic440 on February 21, 2013, 05:24:51 PM
Is it possible to have planes showing on a screen,like in Basestation,when not connected to the internet?
Yes, as long as the dongle is receiving Mode-S data and you're using suitable software to decode the messages and display the aircraft.
Quote from: Magic440 on February 21, 2013, 05:24:51 PM
Is it possible to have planes showing on a screen,like in Basestation,when not connected to the internet?
Regards,
David.
Try software such as adsbSCOPE, free and available from www.sprut.de (there is an English section)
An excellent "How to set up a dongle with adsbSCOPE" can be found at http://sonicgoose.com/using-a-rtlsdr-dongle-for-ads-b/
Stephen
Will have a read, and see if i feel confident enough to download it.
Would like to take the laptop up onto some higher ground,and see what range i get,and where abouts they are! If that make sense? lol.
David.
Not sure how,but managed to get the Dongle displaying on my Planeplotter charts,
without a internet connection.Now to have go at this Beamfinder jobby!
Any tips guys? Watched Bev's tutorial,and think i get the idea!
David.
You don't need an internet connection for PlanePlotter itself. Only to share data and het Mlat plots.
Quote from: Bethsalem on January 12, 2013, 12:11:26 PM
I thought it would be interesting to do a comparison between my R820T dongle, RadarBox and Beast.
They are using different indoor antennas, but they are at the same location so that hopefully makes things a little fairer.
The dongle is using an Airnav whip antenna. The RadarBox is using a MD-1100SBS. The Beast is using a PCB-antenna.
My results for 10 January are (all three receivers were started and ended at the same time over a period of approx. 15 hours), and they include the subtraction of duplicate contacts are-
R820T dongle - 339 contacts
RadarBox - 303 contacts
Beast - 474 contacts
Considering the price of the dongle, in my opinion this is an excellent result.
Stephen
Shame on you, Radarbox !
A USD 500 RadarBox can't out-perform a USD 50 Dongle !
Quote from: Anmer on January 14, 2013, 09:30:01 AM
Thanks for the updates Tom.
Would you sell the Beast and keep the DVB-T dongle?
Hehehehe - what about he sell you his RadarBox and keep the Beast & Dongle ?
Quote from: birdie link
Shame on you, Radarbox !
A USD 500 RadarBox can't out-perform a USD 50 Dongle !
The RadarBox comes with an auto-populating software package.
And who the hell pays $50 for a dongle anyway?
Quote from: viking9 on April 11, 2013, 09:45:05 AM
The RadarBox comes with an auto-populating software package.
Which appears to stop working if you turn sharing off?
http://radarspotting.com/forum/index.php/topic,2455.msg11448.html#msg11448
Well, doesn't PP do that if you don't share or pay the annual fee?
Quote from: viking9 on April 11, 2013, 05:11:32 PM
Well, doesn't PP do that if you don't share or pay the annual fee?
Not unless the fees have changed?
PP used to charge a one-off licence fee to enable sharing. The annual fee relates to Mlat.
It isn't a condition of sale (nor mentioned anywhere) that RadarBox customers must share in order to download aircraft data.
Well you are right Mike. I was forgetting that AirNav only provides full ADS-B sharing. Whereas COAA only charges for mlats.
Mlat is only payable if you don't share regularly
from PP sit
"Multilateration to locate Mode-S aircraft that are not transmitting ADS-B position reports, is a premium service within PlanePlotter. Only "Master Users" of PlanePlotter can initiate multilateration requests.
Users who are regular raw data providers are automatically Master Users. If you have a suitable receiver and if you have set up your system to provide raw data to the multilateration scheme and your system has been validated and you make it generally available for other users' benefit, then in return for your contributing raw data, you are automatically entitled to Master User status and there is no additional fee for using this feature. Note that providing raw data is not the same as the routine Internet sharing of aircraft data between users and very occasional or intermittent provision of raw data does not qualify. Only regular raw data providers have automatic Master User status.
If you are a PlanePlotter licence holder but you cannot contribute raw data regularly, you can request temporary Master User status for an experimental period of 21 days using the link below. If you request the 21 day trial, you are not committed to paying any fee unless you want to continue to use it after the end of 21 days. After that, you may choose to pay a small annual fee of Euro 12.00 (plus VAT in EU countries) to continue as a Master User. To request your 21 day free trial, please follow the link below."
Quote from: viking9 on April 11, 2013, 09:45:05 AM
Quote from: birdie link
Shame on you, Radarbox !
A USD 500 RadarBox can't out-perform a USD 50 Dongle !
The RadarBox comes with an auto-populating software package.
And who the hell pays $50 for a dongle anyway?
I saw a comedian trying to sell it in eBay.
Quote from: Bethsalem on January 12, 2013, 12:11:26 PM
I thought it would be interesting to do a comparison between my R820T dongle, RadarBox and Beast.
They are using different indoor antennas, but they are at the same location so that hopefully makes things a little fairer.
The dongle is using an Airnav whip antenna. The RadarBox is using a MD-1100SBS. The Beast is using a PCB-antenna.
My results for 10 January are (all three receivers were started and ended at the same time over a period of approx. 15 hours), and they include the subtraction of duplicate contacts are-
R820T dongle - 339 contacts
RadarBox - 303 contacts
Beast - 474 contacts
Considering the price of the dongle, in my opinion this is an excellent result.
Stephen
I've been experimenting with two R820T dongles. Firstly by attaching indoor 1090Mhz antennas to them, and then by chaining them together, so that both are detecting different areas of the sky viewable from my apartment from different windows.
By doing this, I would say they are now detecting as well as my Beast.
All this, at a fraction of the price of dedicated hardware.
Quote from: viking9 on April 11, 2013, 09:45:05 AM
Quote from: birdie link
Shame on you, Radarbox !
A USD 500 RadarBox can't out-perform a USD 50 Dongle !
The RadarBox comes with an auto-populating software package.
And who the hell pays $50 for a dongle anyway?
I used USD 50 as a basis of comparison against a USD 500 Radarbox.
I bought my dongle for USD 19.90 each.
Don't forget RadarBox Supreme Feature - the Radarbox also comes with Data Stealing Features that "re-opens" your door by itself after you shut it ( you are deceived into thinking you can shut it ).
Getting ready for holidays and I thought I would check out the R820T against the PlaneGadget Radar box that I usually take with me.
No doubt that the dongle is more sensitive but it's using at least 25% CPU on a netbook (RTL1090 and PlanePlotter) whereas the PlaneGadget Radar is using 3% CPU (PlanePlotter).
That's probably going to be a significant reduction in time before the battery needs charging.
I'll probably take both and try them while away but from experience the PlaneGadget is sufficient for anything likely to be in visual range.
Ian