James M. Knox wrote:

I haven't had a chance yet to put an ATD-300 through it's paces, nor to
compare it to the latest new crop that have come out in the last few
months. I do have an ATD-200 in my plane and find it somewhere between
useful and toy. Toy, because it probably only identifies about 30% of
the traffic in a useful fashion (has a habit of not lighting up until
the traffic has passed G). Useful, because it sometimes does alert me
to look for traffic out in the boonies, when there hasn't been another
aircraft within 100 nm for the last 2 hours (hard to keep a good scan
going under those conditions). A large percentage of the time it gives
false alarms.

Are you using the included antenna or an external one?

I like the fact that the new model allows you to check your own
equipments ouputted signals...

None of these are going to give you anything more than a very loose idea
of range. Any appearance of good range information is a lie -- a big
smoothing algorithm that makes it look like good data, but still may be
grossly inaccurate.

The older units did NOT do a real decode on altitude and hence might
trigger on a jet 30,000 feet above you, and fail to detect a '172 flying
200 feet below. The newer ones are supposed to pick up the transponder
altitude, but probably have trouble keeping it matched to the
appropriate target. [I develop algorithms for the military to track
airborne threat targets and it can get complicated.] Does it vary the
altitude substantially when you are pretty sure there is only one threat
nearby?

I'm sure the plane itself will always act as a shield, depending on
where the target aircraft might be located...