The Cheapest AND the Most Stable EFB / ADS-B Solution

No name tablet. No name receiver. Clunky, WIRED receiver, at that.

I'm not bashing you, but while this may be the absolute cheapest way to get it, I doubt it's the most reliable. Actually, it's probably the least reliable solution you could throw together.

While an iPad and Stratus may be the most expensive, a solid middle ground would simply be a cheap tablet like my Asus MEMO and the *wireless* XGPS 170. Use Avare if you want, but iFly is much more powerful.
 
Considering that three days ago my Stratus One died, and I have a Nexus 7, I'm going to give this try.

If I decide to spring for another Stratus I have a backup, or if I roll my own Stratux I have the antenna anyway.

Doesn't seem I can lose.

thanks!!
 
The OTG cable may not work with all tablets. It seems to be a finicky thing. Shop wisely!
 
jimmyjack said:
No name tablet. No name receiver. Clunky, WIRED receiver, at that.

.... *wireless* XGPS 170. Use Avare if you want, but iFly is much more powerful.
Click to expand...

I agree that the cheapest Android tablet will probably disappoint, if you're on a tight budget consider a used Nexus 7.

Otherwise I would would point out that:

1) The dongle receiver is probably using the same chip as Stratus.

2) the XGPS 170 costs ~$500, so that wireless feature costs you about $480.


One of these things isn't like the other.
 
If you can get a good case and power source, the stratux is a cheap solution, while the software is still in development, it is developing fast and cant beat it for the price.
 
jimmyjack said:
No name tablet. No name receiver. Clunky, WIRED receiver, at that.

I'm not bashing you, but while this may be the absolute cheapest way to get it, I doubt it's the most reliable. Actually, it's probably the least reliable solution you could throw together.

While an iPad and Stratus may be the most expensive, a solid middle ground would simply be a cheap tablet like my Asus MEMO and the *wireless* XGPS 170. Use Avare if you want, but iFly is much more powerful.
Click to expand...

I use iFly, and Naviator, and Avare, and all three offer about the same features, but I like Naviator's UI best. When I want to see IFR plates, I pull up Avare. When I want a nice vector map, I pull up iFly. I use an XGPS170 with all three too and it is nice, but since my tablet (and most android tablets) have excellent GPS chips built in, the XGPS170 doesn't do anything more than what the $12 dongle does.


Not sure how you jump to a "least reliable" conclusion without trying it or hearing from those that have.

You can actually put a rubber duck type antenna right on the dongle, and then the only wiring you have is the OTG. My android tablet sits in a cradle with the OTG and dongle behind it. No wires, no mess at all.

As far as reliability, none of these tablets, iPad included, should be trusted as far as you can throw them. iPad has its problems with heat, etc., so I'm not sure there is a $500+ reliability difference between an iPad and a cheap android. I think it'll be interesting when users start posting their results.
 
I started playing with this a week or so ago.

Today - with an updated version of the Avare ADSB app - it's "working."

I can see traffic on the app and Avare's maps. But, there is no support for weather data at this time.

Compared to the current state of Stratux, this solution is a no-go for me.

I want the weather too.
And I want it in Naviator as I absolutely loathe the Avare UI and chart display quality. Stratux easily provides this.
(Plus, useable AHRS is on the horizon.)

Still, the potential for an OTG solution is compelling and I'll continue to keep my eye on the developments.
 
Another degradation of safety. But it is cheap so that is all that matters to many.
 
PA28Flyer said:
The referenced app "HIZ ADS-B" hasn't been updated since July and even though the blog post references UAT, it seems like it does only 1090ES like all the other ADS-B decoders (PiAware etc). What gives?
Click to expand...

It's coming. I've been running the beta and it does give you the option of 978 or 1090.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
How so?



How much does it have to cost to be considered safe?
Click to expand...

Enough to support a team of professionals that fix, SUPPORT, and IMPROVE
the product.

No I do not work for ForeFlight.
:D
 
JoeSelch said:
I started playing with this a week or so ago.

Today - with an updated version of the Avare ADSB app - it's "working."

I can see traffic on the app and Avare's maps. But, there is no support for weather data at this time.

Compared to the current state of Stratux, this solution is a no-go for me.

I want the weather too.
And I want it in Naviator as I absolutely loathe the Avare UI and chart display quality. Stratux easily provides this.
(Plus, useable AHRS is on the horizon.)

Still, the potential for an OTG solution is compelling and I'll continue to keep my eye on the developments.
Click to expand...

Yep, I've got an XGPS170 so I didn't go with the Stratux solution but the AHRS is interesting. I'll wait for the OTG/Dongle solution to get some refinement/acceptance. I too prefer Naviator and if enough of us show an interest in the OTG/Dongle, I think Naviator will want to add the feature. This could be a great selling point for any app writer, be it Android or iOS based.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
There's a lot to be said for that. Foreflight might cost some money, but with good reason.
Click to expand...
My XGPS170 cost $500, sure.

But I get wireless. I get "it just works" functionality. I get a design that was purposely engineered to withstand the high heat of the summer sun beating onto a glareshield. I get long battery life. I get fluid compatibility with iFly. And the list goes on.
 
KA550 said:
Another degradation of safety. But it is cheap so that is all that matters to many.
Click to expand...

If you were using a Stratus or other portable as a primary source of data then I'd argue safety was already degraded.
 
asicer said:
If you were using a Stratus or other portable as a primary source of data then I'd argue safety was already degraded.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That is why the initial post said 'another' degradation.
 
KA550 said:
Agreed. That is why the initial post said 'another' degradation.
Click to expand...

Well, the flip side is that as a secondary source one is not any worse off with such a unit. Properly employed, it's arguably a safety enhancement.
 
How is this development a bad thing in any way? People are working to bring down ADS-B In equipment costs. Even if you don't agree that they work for you, there are lots of capable people in aviation that are willing to put in effort to make improvements and drive forward progress.

GA is generally stuck in the 1960s when it comes to technology, maybe a jolt into the future is bit much for some people to handle.

Competition drives innovation - I'm excited to see what talented individuals can bring to GA.
 
PA28Flyer said:
How is this development a bad thing in any way? People are working to bring down ADS-B In equipment costs. Even if you don't agree that they work for you, there are lots of capable people in aviation that are willing to put in effort to make improvements and drive forward progress.

GA is generally stuck in the 1960s when it comes to technology, maybe a jolt into the future is bit much for some people to handle.

Competition drives innovation - I'm excited to see what talented individuals can bring to GA.
Click to expand...

I agree and didn't expect this much pushback for posting this. I suspect some are threatened by anything that might lower the cost of, or barriers to aviation.
 
PA28Flyer said:
How is this development a bad thing in any way? People are working to bring down ADS-B In equipment costs. Even if you don't agree that they work for you, there are lots of capable people in aviation that are willing to put in effort to make improvements and drive forward progress.

GA is generally stuck in the 1960s when it comes to technology, maybe a jolt into the future is bit much for some people to handle.

Competition drives innovation - I'm excited to see what talented individuals can bring to GA.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I find it odd how pilots are anti-technology, especially when it comes to simple solutions. Just because Garmin makes something and charges an arm+leg for something doesn't make it the best solution out there.
 
UngaWunga said:
Exactly. I find it odd how pilots are anti-technology, especially when it comes to simple solutions. Just because Garmin makes something and charges an arm+leg for something doesn't make it the best solution out there.
Click to expand...

Some of us work in technology and understand the implications of a half assed design.

There are a lot of ways to make terrible "avionics" and some of them are hard to detect.

From the OP, having to pick the frequency is a deal breaker. And ADSB in-only solutions are not anywhere near as functional as you're assuming.
 
MAKG1 said:
Some of us work in technology and understand the implications of a half assed design.

There are a lot of ways to make terrible "avionics" and some of them are hard to detect.

From the OP, having to pick the frequency is a deal breaker. And ADSB in-only solutions are not anywhere near as functional as you're assuming.
Click to expand...

Yes, some of us do work with technology. And some of us see these developments as taking avionics technology in a positive direction.
 
Some of you are confusing "objecting to advances in technology" with "objecting to hardware with questionable functionality/reliability in the cockpit."

And the notion that a one would want the price of admission to remain high, to keep admission low, is the craziest thing I've heard here this week. IF any pilots truly think that, their percentage is so small as to be inconsequential.
 
Datadriver said:
Enough to support a team of professionals that fix, SUPPORT, and IMPROVE
the product.

No I do not work for ForeFlight.
:D
Click to expand...

Even professionals get it wrong, so thats no guarantee
 
asicer said:
Well, the flip side is that as a secondary source one is not any worse off with such a unit. Properly employed, it's arguably a safety enhancement.
Click to expand...

I would argue that Stratux is a better source for traffic than some of the $500+ "professional" designed/supported units, there has been many side by side comparsions where Stratux (with its wires) indicated more traffic than its name sake.

My own experience this that is also true against SkyRadar units.

Only the GPS/AHRS coding is final, Stratux will be a good option.

Good things can come out of peoples garden shed workshops !!!
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
From the OP, having to pick the frequency is a deal breaker. And ADSB in-only solutions are not anywhere near as functional as you're assuming.
Click to expand...

I might not have been clear on this. Under Options, you can choose 1090 or 978. It stays that way till you change it again. My $600 XGPS170 does not give me an option, only 978. Stratus (original and 1S) does not give you an option, only 978, and a year ago, it was a must have, according to many on this forum. Not sure why this would be a deal breaker now, and yes, IN is limited for traffic. But you know, a guy with nothing right now, flying a ratty old 150 and installing $75 worth of hardware and software can now have FIS-B, including TFRs. Why could this possibly be anything but good news? Can he really only improve his lot only with the latest iPad + Foreflight + ADS-B IN and OUT?

I have an iPad and many android devices. I have no dog at all in this fight. Just trying to pass the word.
 
I'm pretty happy with my Stratus. I'm also pretty satisfied with Foreflight/Stratus's decision to not show traffic. Even though we all know that any ADSB-in traffic display would likely show only some of the traffic some of the time, there would be a very human inclination to start thinking that one is seeing "the traffic" and end up relying on that. For now, I'm happy with the weather, my eyeballs, and flight following.
 
qbynewbie said:
I'm pretty happy with my Stratus. I'm also pretty satisfied with Foreflight/Stratus's decision to not show traffic. Even though we all know that any ADSB-in traffic display would likely show only some of the traffic some of the time, there would be a very human inclination to start thinking that one is seeing "the traffic" and end up relying on that. For now, I'm happy with the weather, my eyeballs, and flight following.
Click to expand...

I flew safety pilot for a guy in a 182RG last week that had ADSB traffic.

Honestly, it scared the crap outa me a few times.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
Some of you are confusing "objecting to advances in technology" with "objecting to hardware with questionable functionality/reliability in the cockpit."
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on the questionable functionality and reliability? Do you have failure statistics for iOS vs. Android operating systems, or Apple hardware vs Android based hardware? As far as limited functionality, My Mercedes has a lot more features and toys compared to my old Dodge pickup, but for trips to the hangar, I think the Dodge is fully functional. Each person determines how much functionality they want/need and are willing to pay for.

And I think this probably prompted your next statement:

I suspect some are threatened by anything that might lower the cost of, or barriers to aviation.

fiveoboy01 said:
And the notion that a one would want the price of admission to remain high, to keep admission low, is the craziest thing I've heard here this week. IF any pilots truly think that, their percentage is so small as to be inconsequential.
Click to expand...

Apple sets high prices as a strategy - they want to own the "High End" market. Once you understand why, you won't find my statement so crazy.
 
qbynewbie said:
I'm pretty happy with my Stratus. I'm also pretty satisfied with Foreflight/Stratus's decision to not show traffic. .
Click to expand...

You happy that you can set the traffic layer off or their initial decision not to support traffic until the market place drove their change in direction ?

$800+ for weather... Sounds expensive.
 
qbynewbie said:
I'm pretty happy with my Stratus. I'm also pretty satisfied with Foreflight/Stratus's decision to not show traffic. Even though we all know that any ADSB-in traffic display would likely show only some of the traffic some of the time, there would be a very human inclination to start thinking that one is seeing "the traffic" and end up relying on that. For now, I'm happy with the weather, my eyeballs, and flight following.
Click to expand...



What decision was that? Stratus/ForeFlight show traffic plenty fine.
 
The title of this thread is "Cheapest and the Most Stable".

Prove it. Are there enough users who have compared both the subscription plans and this glommed-together frankenstein to be able to say "oh, yeah it is more stable".

I'm only advocating for better thread titles. "Cheap Alternative to Subscription EFBs" would have been more accurate given current metrics.:goofy:
 
Datadriver said:
The title of this thread is "Cheapest and the Most Stable".

Prove it. Are there enough users who have compared both the subscription plans and this glommed-together frankenstein to be able to say "oh, yeah it is more stable".

I'm only advocating for better thread titles. "Cheap Alternative to Subscription EFBs" would have been more accurate given current metrics.:goofy:
Click to expand...

Point taken! (I'd change it if I could :dunno:)
 
JohnAJohnson said:
Can you elaborate on the questionable functionality and reliability? Do you have failure statistics for iOS vs. Android operating systems, or Apple hardware vs Android based hardware? As far as limited functionality, My Mercedes has a lot more features and toys compared to my old Dodge pickup, but for trips to the hangar, I think the Dodge is fully functional. Each person determines how much functionality they want/need and are willing to pay for.

And I think this probably prompted your next statement:

I suspect some are threatened by anything that might lower the cost of, or barriers to aviation.



Apple sets high prices as a strategy - they want to own the "High End" market. Once you understand why, you won't find my statement so crazy.
Click to expand...


Eh, this is an argument not worth engaging in - wouldn't bother. Some people are early adopters/leaders, others are followers. I'm going to continue using my stratux and eventually it will become more and more accepted. Just like iPads were, ADS-B receivers were, etc.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
Some of you are confusing "objecting to advances in technology" with "objecting to hardware with questionable functionality/reliability in the cockpit."

And the notion that a one would want the price of admission to remain high, to keep admission low, is the craziest thing I've heard here this week. IF any pilots truly think that, their percentage is so small as to be inconsequential.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Since I already had a Nexus 7 I gambled $15 on this Avare/HIZ system. This morning I paid the exorbitant sum of (IIRC) $2.50 for the 'pro' version of the HIZ adsb receiver software.

I put the stuff together and : It. just. works.

As soon as I connected the hardware together and took the stuff outside I was seeing airliners

I installed the current release version of the HIZ, which supports only 1090. So you see lots of airliners. The Avare software is a perfectly usable navigation package.

I signed up for the beta, and just now got the link to the pre-release version that supports 978, I'll try that tomorrow and report back.

Pluses and minuses:

Avare shows traffic as a dot with a velocity vector and altitude on it's map display. I'm pretty sure it will color code targets for you, based on a helicopter that flew nearby, but I'm not sure about that. It doesn't tell you anything about the airplane generating the target.

If you want to know more about a target you call up the HIZ software and it will show you everything it knows about all the targets it is seeing.

The 'good to go' cable would not charge my Nexus 7.

I'd want to dig the magnet out of the little antenna before having near the mag compass on an airplane.

So far my reaction is that if you don't have $500 for a Stratus 1 or similar, nor do you have $200 for a Stratux, then Avare/HIZ will be a real bargain once 978 support is implemented.
 
JimNtexas said:
Since I already had a Nexus 7 I gambled $15 on this Avare/HIZ system. This morning I paid the exorbitant sum of (IIRC) $2.50 for the 'pro' version of the HIZ adsb receiver software.

I put the stuff together and : It. just. works.

As soon as I connected the hardware together and took the stuff outside I was seeing airliners

I installed the current release version of the HIZ, which supports only 1090. So you see lots of airliners. The Avare software is a perfectly usable navigation package.

I signed up for the beta, and just now got the link to the pre-release version that supports 978, I'll try that tomorrow and report back.

Pluses and minuses:

Avare shows traffic as a dot with a velocity vector and altitude on it's map display. I'm pretty sure it will color code targets for you, based on a helicopter that flew nearby, but I'm not sure about that. It doesn't tell you anything about the airplane generating the target.

If you want to know more about a target you call up the HIZ software and it will show you everything it knows about all the targets it is seeing.

The 'good to go' cable would not charge my Nexus 7.

I'd want to dig the magnet out of the little antenna before having near the mag compass on an airplane.

So far my reaction is that if you don't have $500 for a Stratus 1 or similar, nor do you have $200 for a Stratux, then Avare/HIZ will be a real bargain once 978 support is implemented.
Click to expand...


Stratux is more like $105 shipped for a comparable setup. Let us know how it actually works, haven't seen any real flight tests with this solution yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top