FlightAware Discussions

Outdoor antenna recommendations?

Yeah, I’m glad that I don’t have to deal with corrosion and salty seas. Ice can be bad once you get it in the wrong place, but the salt in the air makes it it’s task to destroy as much as possible :upside_down_face:

Considering the stats of the site (yes, I’m a tad bit envy :wink: ) it’s safe to assume that the antenna is not among the worst you can buy.
For how long have you had it up?

I’m so glad I record dates on web sites :wink:
It went up on the 19th April 2019.

Found a reliable IP67 outdoor antenna from the German company Wittenberg. It the modell WB16 and rúns around 40 Euro. Very tiny and i got excellent results. Comes with 5 meter cable with sma connectors.
Sold on amazon.de (prime)

the wittenberg WB16 is sold as an LTE/UMTS Antenna. Are you sure about giving you excellent results? It’s a different frequency range

Hi foxhunter, the WB16 is covering the frequency range. I was in touch with the manufacterer. They told me they don’t made a note for 1090 mhz because normally this is not used much. It’s a broad band antenna for sure.

Lothar Rieck out of Germany

Sure, but i think a narrower band coming from antenna will reduce the possible noise captured by the antenna and routed to the receiver/stick

So i have some doubts if you really get the max performance out of it compared to a dedicated 1090MHz antenna

Wittenberg Antennas WB 16 wall antenna

Highlights & Details

  • LTE wall/tower antenna 2G/3G/4G 5 mtr. Cable
  • LTE omnidirectional antenna for wall or mast mounting
  • The antenna is suitable for M2M applications
  • In the installed state, the antenna is IP 67 protection

Facts

  • Frequency range: 2G/3G/4G 698-960/1710 2700 Mhz
  • Gain: 4 dBi
  • Connection cable: 5 mtr.
  • Connection plug: SMA connector (M)
  • Height: 82 mm.

This antenna will not provide excellent results for ADS-B.

1 Like

It will pickup Cell/mobile signals very strongly as it is designed/tuned for cell/mobile frequencies.

2 Likes

“Tiny” and “Excellent” are two words that rarely go together when describing antennas.

For the price, you could have had a purpose built antenna that will perform much better.
As above, broad-band offers no advantage and is likely to cause problems by picking up a lot of signals you are not interested in.
On the plus side, it’s low gain and waterproof, so at least you can get it up high.

Wouldn’t an optimal quarter wave antenna for 1090 be about 69 mm in length? Seems relatively tiny and others have documented their homemade antennas on this sort of scale delivering very good results.

Before i got the Jetvision, i was using a 29 Euro Antenna i got from a guy at ebay which was built and adjusted individually. This is still operating my indoor receiver and doesn’t have a visible performance gap. So the price should not be an issue

Following the DIY antenna threads there are lots of these with that length working pretty good

This aerial will be garbage for 1090 MHz. Here’s a direct link to it, it’s designed for cellular use and very broadband so at best it’s a compromise and at worst, it’s resonant on cellular frequencies which won’t help for 1090MHz

And this is what makes it so useless for our purposes

My dummy load could be described as the best broad band antenna in the world with an SWR of 1:1 from 0 to 3GHz but if I put that up outside, it won’t work very well.

@1dallas1 I do appreciate you posting but you can do so much better than the aerial you’ve linked. I wouldn’t recommend that WB16 to anyone who wants to receive ADS-B.

2 Likes

That would describe an “Acceptable” antenna, not an “Excellent” antenna.
For that antenna to be as broad as it claims, it won’t (can’t) be as good as 1/4λ groundplane

@keithma

How can you judge without having your system on air with that aerial??

I connected the device and got 100 % more planes on the spot

grafik.png

Therefore you can claim that the WB16 is garbage. I think good garbage for a reasonable price. I’m happy with the result.

Have a great time

Lothar

Looks like Lothar is finished with that topic. No space for arguments, even if there are a lot.

1 Like

I started typing a long reply but your post popped up while I was doing it.

You’re right. I’m not wasting my breath any more on this one, I’ve deleted what I was going to post.

5 Likes

Well then you had a really really bad antenna before.
Doesn’t mean the WB16 is particularly suitable.

3 Likes

Ok Wiedehopf. May i have to get me “suitable” antenna to compare. Which one can you recommend?

I’m not weidehopf, so sorry for replying. - But you won’t go wrong with AirNav/Radarbox or FlightAware/Jetvision… Since your German, Jetvision would be easist i guess :slight_smile:

FA offers an antenna.

But you could also compare with a self made quick spider if you want:
QUICK SPIDER - No Soldering, No Connector

Also you might want to look at your terrain limits if you’re curious:
https://github.com/wiedehopf/tar1090#heywhatsthatcom-range-outline

Obviously buildings will also obstruct your view so it’s complex.

Lastly please don’t misunderstand, i didn’t mean that you should get a new antenna, your terrain might not allow better reception.

But you were defending an antenna with an unknown previous antenna.
The DVB-T whips that are often described as 1090 MHz (mag base) are just terrible, so lots of antennas will be better than those.