Messages

1

Technical Support / Updating Classic from RPi 2 to RPi3 - how long to obtain license key?

« on: August 29, 2024, 11:59:55 am »

Hi,

I have replaced the old Raspberry Pi 2 in my PAW Classic with a Raspberry Pi 3 and have emailed support@pilotaware.com to request my license be transferred to the new device.  Does anyone know how long it normally takes for this to be done?

Also, I noticed that the homepage on the new device says "PilotAware Rosetta-RX" where on the old Pi 2 it said "PilotAware Classic" - is this expected, even though I'm using the same version of the PAW software and the same classic PAW bridge?

Many thanks,
Tim

2

Technical Support / Using PAW Classic's 5v header for fan power?

« on: October 06, 2023, 01:44:34 pm »

Hi,

I have a "classic" PAW in a repurposed Stratux case which has been working well since the earliest days of PilotAware.  I recently added a second wifi dongle to use iGrid, this works very well until the unit has been running for an hour or so when the wifi connection to my tablet starts to intermittently drop.  I have isolated the cause as excessive heat (primarily generated by the RTL dongle) causing the wifi dongle to drop out, and adding a small 5v fan to the case seems to entirely solve the problem.

As I'm using a Raspberry Pi 2 which does not have built-in wifi I do not have any spare USB ports to power the fan.  I've been testing with a separate cable running to the second USB port on my powerbank, but notice there are unpopulated pads on the classic PAW board JP2 header marked 5v and GND which appear to route directly to the GPIO pins on the Pi.  The fan only draws 60mA (though presumably has a slightly higher draw at start-up) - would I be OK to power it from these unused pads on the PAW board?

Many thanks,
Tim

3

Technical Support / Re: Track analysis

« on: October 31, 2017, 10:04:05 pm »

Many thanks. In that case zero PAW contacts on my flight on Sunday. Bit surprised, but on the plus side lots of ADSB and bearingless targets and I definitely saw at least 2 aircraft  on conflicting tracks much sooner than I would have done without PAW. 

4

Technical Support / Re: Track analysis

« on: October 30, 2017, 11:28:05 am »

Is there an easy way to tell which contacts were PAW (if any)?  I've tried the post processor which shows a large number of contacts, but I can't tell which were ADSB versus PAW, etc.

Thanks,
Tim

5

General Discussion / Re: Ideal all-in-one case

« on: August 30, 2016, 12:27:40 pm »

Very nice - and your installation is a lot neater than mine!

Cheers,
Tim

6

General Discussion / Re: Odd Mode-C traffic

« on: August 25, 2016, 07:46:20 pm »

To confirm whether this is the case, Tim, you have already said you were on the ground when you took the traffic screen grab. Can I ask whether you were close to a major airport  please ?

Regards

Peter

Hi Peter,

I'm south of Woking - about 12 miles as the crow flies to Heathrow (10 to Farnborough if you'd call that a "major airport"!)

Cheers,
Tim

7

General Discussion / Re: Odd Mode-C traffic

« on: August 23, 2016, 09:17:07 am »

Thanks, Lee.

Out of interest, how does PAW filter out the aircraft's own transponder if it's mode-c only and therefore doesn't transmit a hex-id?

Thanks,
Tim

8

General Discussion / Re: Odd Mode-C traffic

« on: August 22, 2016, 03:44:38 pm »

Thanks, Lee, understand now.  As you say, the filter should take out most of these.

Cheers,
Tim

9

General Discussion / Re: Odd Mode-C traffic

« on: August 22, 2016, 01:15:05 pm »

Doh!  Of course - thanks, David.  I did actually know that, having RTFM!

Still, would expect the squawk and altitude to be accurate since that's all mode-c actually provides.

Cheers,
Tim

10

General Discussion / Odd Mode-C traffic

« on: August 22, 2016, 10:14:59 am »

Hi,

I've just updated to the latest release which includes beta Mode-C detection.  I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something, but there are some very odd results showing on the traffic page (see attached).  Perched next to an upstairs window for a couple of minutes just to check it was working, a few things strike me as very strange:

- No hex-id is shown for any mode-c traffic
- No squawk is shown for any mode-c traffic
- One contact with an altitude of 16 feet (or possibly minus 16 feet) is shown!
- One contact with an altitude of over 62,000 feet is shown!

Are these in some way corrupted contacts, hence the lack of hex-id or squawk?  It seems highly unlikely that I am detecting an aircraft at 16 feet from my house in a built-up area, and it seems equally unlikely that there are many aircraft at over 62,000 ft - especially squawking mode-C!

I also noticed the "Noisy" test setting for sensitivity seems to have gone?

Thanks,
Tim

11

General Discussion / Re: Ideal all-in-one case

« on: August 17, 2016, 12:49:05 pm »

I did, yes - think if it was directly connected it would be OK but with the attenuation from the passive mixer it's not.    Might also have been drowned out by the constant noise from my wife and toddler in the back!

Cheers,
Tim

12

General Discussion / Re: Ideal all-in-one case

« on: August 17, 2016, 12:16:58 pm »

Just as an update, I took the PAW flying again on Sunday and tried out the audio input into a spare rear mic socket.  It did work, but as feared the audio level was far too low.  I heard a very quiet "Traffic, danger" while waiting the hold as a Cessna landed right in front of me but above idle the alerts were drowned out completely.  I've ordered a tiny 5v audio amplifier from eBay and will give that a go.

Cheers,
Tim

13

General Discussion / Re: First flight - questions

« on: August 09, 2016, 09:40:30 am »

Thanks, Ian - amazing!  At least I know my PAW bridge is working!

14

General Discussion / Re: Ideal all-in-one case

« on: August 08, 2016, 01:15:13 pm »

Fortunately I know the rear headset sockets are "dead" as far as the PTT are concerned (and the P1/P2 PTT switches are correctly wired to transmit only from the relevant mic!).

I have only been able to test the setup so far using an adapter circuit I built to interface a headset mic to a PC's mic (essentially emulating an aircraft's mic socket).  Although it does work, the audio level is very low to the point of being unusable - I've just used a 10uF electrolytic in series plus a 10k pot as a potential divider.  Regardless of the pot's setting the volume is still way too low.  Any ideas?

Thanks,
Tim

15

General Discussion / Re: First flight - questions

« on: August 08, 2016, 01:12:14 pm »

Hi Ian,

Have sent you a message.

Cheers,
Tim