If you can’t handle the truth about the system’s demonstrable and apparent limitations then please stop ‘spamming’ this discussion
@gaznav , once again even though @Cub asked not to start a bun fight - you immediately drift off into stuff and nonsense again
Lets dispel some of your false claims - not that I think you will take any of this information on board, but where there is life there is hope
gaznav wrote:Just to illustrate. Here is Little Rissington detecting me intermittently before I turn away at 1352:
gaznav wrote:So this is why I believe the reliability is poor and that is one reason why drawing conclusions from Vector is really tricky and likely to make you draw the wrong conclusions.
Let me illustrate the reverse situation:
To have an EC 'conversation' two participants are involved, you claim that the intermittent nature of reception is the groundstation - not your EC device, lets put that to the test ...
Here is a diagram of the EC reception from Little Rissington for all EC types
Stunning isn't it
both in range and capture near to ground level
Let me explain - the rings are spaced at 20km distances, so the outer ring 80km, we trim any 1090 reception from a transponder at 60km MAX, that is why you see the drop off of many signals at the 60km ring. For other EC types there is no such trimming
So as can be seen the performance of EGVL is absolutely stunning, with faultless reception capability
I would also add to this that I am incredibly grateful to the RAF in deciding to equip their airfields with ATOM stations to compliment the GRID network and promote air safety for all.
Coming back to your own issue, looking at your data from VECTOR for your CAP1391 device
I have seen an interesting trend in a number of these device images where there is an emphasis on Emissions, either Front-to-Back, or Left-to-Right, as you can see from yours there is a visible bias from Left-to-RightDo you still mount your device on the side window ?
The reason I ask is that you previously posted a screenshot of the PCB antenna a while back here
Now I am no expert on antenna theory (I am sure there are others who can comment)
Could the bias be caused by the planar effect of the Antenna, whereby the beam is restricted along the surface plane of the PCB ?
Imagine rotating the PCB through 90 degrees
Could this explain the focusing effect we see where the beam appears greater ?
- Emissions Front-to-Back (EC Device Front/Rear mounted), or
- Emissions Left-to-Right (EC Device Side mounted)
A good experiment would be to dig out your old SkyEcho1 which had an omni-directional dipole antenna
then we could compare/contrast against the data we have collected from your current device
Actually, I think I found one as this says it is emitting SIL=0
I think the blanking to the rear is from the tail rotor section, so that can be discounted, but certainly their is no visible bias either Left/Right or Front/Back - no smoke, no mirrors, simply raw data - but I think we can both see it is significantly better than your plots. and I think the only difference is the antenna type, the underlying electronics is the same I think ?
So in summary, I think EGVL Little Rissington is performing extremely well, as I am sure will the other RAF ATOM stations which are currently in the pipeline
In which case what conclusion would you now like to draw, having been provided with definitive data ?