On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 5:16:05 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 4:39:25 PM UTC-8, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 4:18:30 PM UTC-8, Andy Blackburn wrote:

One other thing. To my knowledge, the Stratux code doesn't allow you to set horizontal or vertical ranges for traffic display, so you are going to see everything. You may or may not think this is a good thing. Another reason to go with one of the Flarm-based devices.

Andy

And at times that might be a problem for some traffic displays, not sure, but that easy to test/simulate.


Seemed to work fine in a busy terminal area (SFO) on my Oudie. I can't speak for the smaller, dedicated displays, which I presume have less processing power.

The other thing I'd point out is running Stratux on a Raspberry Pi draws about 5-6 times as much power as an integrated Flarm device, plus you still have to run Flarm if you are being serious about glider traffic, plus a K6 MUX to combine the traffic (or a separate display, which draws power). That adds up to nearly an amp of current drain, which can be a lot depending on how much battery capacity you are carrying. Andrej was able to turn down the WiFi output power since we weren't connecting to an iPAD for our operations, but that helps only a bit.

Fun project, but it ultimately it will be overwhelmed by more robust, less complicated and less power-hungry solutions. It convinced me that TIS-B and ADS-R service capability is the best path to fill out the current holes in traffic visibility.

Andy Blackburn
9B