Has anyone used dump1090-hptoa and should I consider it?

Hello! I´m interested in putting up a second reciever to work more as a test-bench. Through OpenSky Project I found dump1090-hptoa on GitHub. It seems to have been reworked a bit compared to dump1090-mutability. Before I give it a go, I would like to know if anyone here uses it, has tried or has any comments. Does it work with the feeder for FA (and the other services)? Thanks in advance!

1 Like

Welcome Hans!
I’m not running dump1090-hptoa myself, but I don’t see why it would not work with the FA-stuff.
Even The ADS-B Receiver Project offers it as an option to choose from (next to mutability/dump1090 and flightaware/dump1090).

UPDATE I just come across this comment: dump1090-hptoa not autostart · Issue #502 · jprochazka/adsb-receiver · GitHub

Thanks for the reply hbokh! An interesting comment but I am prepared to do a bit complicated installation. Most interesting is to see if there is any difference in the output of the dump1090 due to the calculations performed.

I think they left the demodulation the same.

Only change is to the timestamps. And as they shouldn’t be less accurate i don’t see any problem with using it.

Anyway the FA MLAT is pretty smart and will boot you out if it detects your clock not being good.
With other people not using hptoa though it might not make a lot of difference though.
Also using the default timing is usually good enough for MLAT.

Note that you should consider a 5.2 V power supply and maybe a fan for the pi because the added computation will use power and make it run quite a bit hotter.


Even with a pair of GPS-synchronized receivers that are providing arrival times with around 15ns precision, mlat synchronization via a reference ADS-B aircraft doesn’t see much improvement (it’s still around a few hundred ns, which is similar to the precision of regular dump1090’s arrival times), so the hptoa changes won’t really help here.


Ok, thanks for all answers. I then think I will stick with the dump1090-fa for now!

1 Like