SoftRF version mb202

[Moshe Braner]

This has been in a development branch for a while.  Now merged into "master".  Versions mb200+ switched from the old radio-chip libraries to using RadioLib.  This allows use of the new LR1110 radio chip.

Now my version of SoftRF also supports the Seeed Sensecap T1000-E and the Elecrow Thinknode M3.  The T1000-E can record flight logs, the M3 cannot since it does not have SPI flash storage.  Thus the T1000-E is "better" - but be aware that on a new T1000-E you must downgrade the bootlogger before installing SoftRF.  See the documentation.  If you do want to use the M3, be sure to get the Meshtastic version, the LoraWAN version will not work!

Theoretically this new version also supports the T-Echo Plus and the Thinknode M1, but I don't have them on hand to test.  Reportedly there are still some issues on the M1, involving the buzzer and LEDs.

And of course this version of SoftRF still supports the T-Beam (not the T-Beam Supreme!) and the T-Echo, although there are few (intentional) changes in functionality from version mb179/mb180.  Please report any issues.

The RSSIs reported by RadioLib differ from those reported by the old libraries.  It is best to delete the range.txt file and start collecting new range data.

Version mb200+ also abandoned the old PilotAware radio protocol in favor of the new ADS-L-based PilotAware radio protocol.  Commercial PilotAware devices still automatically accomodate old-protocol devices, but this version of SoftRF does not.

[Alan Hall]

I did a hack of 1.80 to receive both old and new Pilotaware (transmit on the old protocol only as this will be received on old or new units). I have been using it to observe passing aircaft at my home and the vast majority are still on the old protocol so I assume they are not yet upgraded. Pilotaware are, as usual, silent on their plans. For that reason I would not want to go to Pilotaware ADS-L only at this stage.

Alan

[Moshe Braner]

OK. I thought they are currently transitioning, so not worth implementing "dynamic" protocol selection.  I could easily add reception of the old protocol, since the outer packet structure is the same.  Is that worth doing?  Or, can use my version 1.80 for a while yet - or your hacked version.

[Alan Hall]

Well they are certainly transitioning but somewhat secretly and with no published timescale! I'd wait a bit and see what PAW do, they will have to make an update announcement eventually. I would not bother with full dual-mode functionality at this stage and ideally I'd probably revert 2-02 to the old protocol for the time being, but your suggestion of sticking with 1-80 is a sensible compromise. The main thing is people should realise that adopting 2-02 right now for no other good reason will significantly reduce mutual visibility. 

[FrankT]

https://www.pilotaware.com/post/pilotaware-adopts-adsl-iconspicuity

Op maandag 18 mei 2026 om 19:50:37 UTC+2 schreef Alan Hall: