GlynH
Wg Cdr
  
Reputation 83
 Offline
Date Registerd:June 15, 2009, 01:09:59 AM
Posts: 85
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2009, 02:11:57 PM » |
|
I asked for it Anmer, and was told that I was a lone voice in the wilderness. Apparently they said most of their non-techy users wouldn't know what to do with it....  I remember seeing you in that same wilderness Brian! There were more of us but AirNav in their infinite wisdom decided it wasn't really needed as most of us wouldn't know what to do with it... They did hint that they had plans for an upgraded RB but of course never expanded on this. They might be persuaded now... -=Glyn=- |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Anmer
Administrator
MRAF
   
Reputation 3936
Offline
Date Registerd:March 09, 2009, 09:05:28 AM
Posts: 3740
SBS-1 with Ethernet, Peterborough, UK
|
|
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2009, 02:13:00 PM » |
|
It will all be in RadarBox 2010, Tarbat says so.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MikeC
________________________
SBS-1 and SBS-1e Customer
ANRB User.
|
|
|
|
tarbat
Guest
|
|
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2009, 02:27:20 PM » |
|
It will all be in RadarBox 2010, Tarbat says so. You'll be sadly dissapointed then. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fenris
Gp Capt
Reputation 409
Offline
Date Registerd:March 05, 2009, 12:44:35 AM
Posts: 245
|
|
« Reply #33 on: November 17, 2009, 02:40:52 PM » |
|
I believe that 3.0x, when released officially, will be called RadarBox 2010, I'm sure that Andre said that a few weeks ago somewhere. So yes, 2010 won't have the features, other than the 3D upgrade and we'll see how popular that is.
As for the sensitivity Tarbat, I think it's not possible to get better absolute sensitivity than the RB or SBS-1e, that's down to simple physics. What can be improved is the performance at very low signal:noise ratios and with multipath or collisions, which will do away with the odd bit errors that seem to cause RadarBox to show a new aircraft or corrupt other parameters occasionally. But unless the transmissions have checksums, and they don't in the main, you are always vulnerable to corrupted data at the limit.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
--
Brian
RadarBox owner and public beta-tester
Planeplotter Master User
|
|
|
Rix
Fly Of
Reputation 2
Offline
Date Registerd:April 19, 2009, 09:15:58 PM
Posts: 3
|
|
« Reply #34 on: November 17, 2009, 03:16:28 PM » |
|
USB is one of many possible interfaces. I prefer tcp because it is easier with long lines, and makes it possible to install a box on a remote place.
So far, I only see an empty black box, and an antenna not for SHF :-(
/Rix
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jannuh
Gp Capt
Reputation 535
Offline
Date Registerd:September 10, 2009, 01:53:54 PM
Posts: 285
|
|
« Reply #35 on: November 17, 2009, 03:49:52 PM » |
|
It will all be in RadarBox 2010, Tarbat says so. You'll be sadly dissapointed then. But Tarbat is testing something, see PlanePlotter forum on realtime network tests. (or does he still have a SBS1??) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
RB in Euregio(NL-BE-DE)www.air.middenlimburg.net
|
|
|
Anmer
Administrator
MRAF
Reputation 3936
Offline
Date Registerd:March 09, 2009, 09:05:28 AM
Posts: 3740
SBS-1 with Ethernet, Peterborough, UK
|
|
« Reply #36 on: November 17, 2009, 03:52:23 PM » |
|
Tarbat says he's sold his SBS-1. Maybe someone let's him borrow one Can't give it up.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MikeC
________________________
SBS-1 and SBS-1e Customer
ANRB User.
|
|
|
Airradiouk
Wg Cdr
Reputation 276
Offline
Date Registerd:March 11, 2009, 04:30:55 PM
Posts: 114
|
|
« Reply #37 on: November 17, 2009, 04:09:29 PM » |
|
Remember old saying.
You can please some of the people some of the time.
But you cannot please all of the people all of the time.
Goods not being released untill January, by then it may have been updated.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Regards
Mike M
|
|
|
DaveReid
Air Cdre
Reputation 424
Offline
Date Registerd:March 17, 2009, 06:21:08 PM
Posts: 397
|
|
« Reply #38 on: November 17, 2009, 04:27:37 PM » |
|
if it decodes mil aircraft i will be the first to have one What do you mean ? Both SBS/BaseStation and RadarBox already decode Mode S from military aircraft, no reason to believe that a new Mode S receiver will be any different. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Definitely and conclusively not associated in any way, shape or form with AirNav or Kinetic.
|
|
|
Fenris
Gp Capt
Reputation 409
Offline
Date Registerd:March 05, 2009, 12:44:35 AM
Posts: 245
|
|
« Reply #39 on: November 17, 2009, 04:34:25 PM » |
|
How about multiple antennas, and position fixing by time of arrival differences?
Got to use that DSP for something!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
--
Brian
RadarBox owner and public beta-tester
Planeplotter Master User
|
|
|
satcom
Gp Capt
Reputation 187
 Online
Date Registerd:August 01, 2009, 05:39:01 PM
Posts: 179
|
|
« Reply #40 on: November 17, 2009, 11:01:30 PM » |
|
How about multiple antennas, and position fixing by time of arrival differences?
Got to use that DSP for something!
Planplotter ! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
junglejet
Gp Capt
Reputation 209
Offline
Date Registerd:March 20, 2009, 09:52:47 PM
Posts: 189
|
|
« Reply #41 on: November 17, 2009, 11:21:29 PM » |
|
I believe they will be aiming to Multilat, too. Together with a UDP peer-to-peer network that sounds familiar.
P2p also eliminates the use of central server and its infrastructure. Everybody can control its data and to who it is sent and who not. Private networks will popup soon. I run a P2p network across Europe since 4 years and it works well in real time. However with the increased data flow from IPTV and videos it is hard to retain a 1 per sec update rate across the entire network. But every 3 secs is still no prob.
I believe this concept is much superior to a central server and RB will have a hard time to keep pace if it does not open for this route (or scrap the delay)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
3NM - a very good friend of Boris
|
|
|
Fenris
Gp Capt
Reputation 409
Offline
Date Registerd:March 05, 2009, 12:44:35 AM
Posts: 245
|
|
« Reply #42 on: November 17, 2009, 11:31:03 PM » |
|
How about multiple antennas, and position fixing by time of arrival differences?
Got to use that DSP for something!
Planplotter ! I was thinking about Lateration by a single ground station. Probably need 4 receiver channels and 4 antennas though. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
--
Brian
RadarBox owner and public beta-tester
Planeplotter Master User
|
|
|
satcom
Gp Capt
Reputation 187
Online
Date Registerd:August 01, 2009, 05:39:01 PM
Posts: 179
|
|
« Reply #43 on: November 17, 2009, 11:39:34 PM » |
|
How about multiple antennas, and position fixing by time of arrival differences?
Got to use that DSP for something!
Planplotter ! I was thinking about Lateration by a single ground station. Probably need 4 receiver channels and 4 antennas though. Exactly , so why re invent the wheel. PP MLat is already in place with a system of over 100 ground stations running most of the time. Peer to peer mlat within a small group could work , but would be very limited. Keeping an mlat network up and running properly is an extremely labour intensive project. Wide area coverage is the way forward and I suspect that the introduction of a competitively priced box , like that proposed by Aurora will open up the way for more people to use PP as an accepted add on , which in turn could lead to an even more extensive PP multilateration network. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fenris
Gp Capt
Reputation 409
Offline
Date Registerd:March 05, 2009, 12:44:35 AM
Posts: 245
|
|
« Reply #44 on: November 18, 2009, 12:47:57 AM » |
|
You may be right, but if it could be made cheap enough and thus allow self-contained lateration of non-positional aircraft it would suit those that don't want to be part of a network like PP.
I'm trying to work out what else you could do with the DSP in the box you see, it must be something cunning or they wouldn't have wasted the cost and power consumption of putting it in there....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
--
Brian
RadarBox owner and public beta-tester
Planeplotter Master User
|
|
|
|
Radarspotters
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
