Topic: Options for VP2 Data Logging to the Internet

[freelance]

I'm new to all of this and trying to select an equipment configuration for data logging to the internet (primarily Weather Underground and CWOP). Reading these forums and vendor sites, I see 6 or more options to interface a Davis VP2 weather station (probably a 6152 and 7747 daytime fan) to the internet. Six options are discussed below (and deliberately left out Vantage Connect, Meteohub, and Meteoplug options). If any of this is wrong, please advise, or if there are other viable options.

For my purposes, I want to see weather data even if the internet connection is down (which mostly eliminates options without a Console), and don’t want to require a PC to be available all the time. That makes options 2 (WeatherlinkIP) and 3 (USB data logger & Meteobridge) the best options and they seem to be about the same cost. I'm leaning towards #2 to stay with a single vendor solution, ie, simplicity as it seems to require less tinkering. Does anyone know if the Meteobridge outperforms the WeatherlinkIP in any way? If so, in what ways?

Options. I use the ">" symbol to indicate a hardwired connection unless it specifically states wireless. 

Option 1:
VP2>wireless>6312 Console>6510 USB data logger>PC>Router>Internet
Pros: Lowest cost. Cons: A PC must be running all of the time.

Option 2.
VP2>wireless>6312 Console>6555 WeatherlinkIP>Router>Internet (and PC)
Pros: Seems to be simple to setup (can anyone verify that?). Cons: The Console is tethered to the Router by a cable (but presumably can be disconnected for short periods and will continue to log data, though that would disable real-time updates).

Option 3.
VP2>wireless>6312 Console>6510 USB data logger>USB 2.0 hub> Meteobridge (aka Weatherbridge)>wireless>Router>Internet (and PC)
Pros: Has an "untethered" Console. Comparable cost to WeatherlinkIP option #2 (need to buy 6510, hub, flashable router, firmware). Cons: The untethered Console is still connected to a data logger, hub, and Meteobridge somewhat limiting portability. Not a single vendor solution, seems to require much tinkering based on numerous forum posts.

Options 4a, 4b, 4c.
VP2>wireless>6316 Envoy>… [Envoy replaces Console in options 1, 2, or 3]
Pros: Lower costs than options 1, 2, or 3. Cons: no Console so requires PC or tablet/phone with internet connection to see weather data. Or the cost of an Envoy and a Console.

Option 5.
VP2>wireless> Meteostick (aka Airbridge)> Meteobridge> wireless>Router>Internet (and PC)
Pros: No Console required. Cons: Requires PC or tablet/phone with internet connection to see weather data. Barometer reading may not be as accurate as Console.

Option 6.
VP2>wireless> Meteobridge Pro(red)> wireless>Router>Internet (and PC)
Pros: No Console required. Cons: Requires PC or tablet/phone with internet connection to see weather data. Costly.

[Jáchym]

"Does anyone know if the Meteobridge outperforms the WeatherlinkIP in any way? If so, in what ways? "

AFAIK  WL is pretty much a closed environment only letting you upload data to WL.com (a very old looking site with limited info, and not cheap) and WU

Meteobridge on the other hand is actively developed, allows sending data to dozens of networks, including WU, your own server (if you ever want to have your own page), works over wifi, is small, negligible energy consumption, quiet (Ive been using it myself for 6 years now). It can be controlled remotely.

I personally would not hesitate a minute.

[johnd]

WeatherlinkIP is certainly the simplest, closest to turnkey, solution. It will upload only to the Davis weatherlink.com platform, but data forwarding to eg  Weather Underground is readily possible if that appeals. It's also quite likely that the features and data presentations of the weatherlink.com platform will evolve materially in the next year or two.

Meteobridge is a good solution too - needs more user input and familiarity but that's no problem if you're happy around software. Flexibility is much better than WLIP, though you'll need to make decisions about which server software to upload to and how to host that - there are pros and cons to each of the options and - IMO of course - the world is still waiting for a class-leading option.

[Devonian]

I'm using pretty much your 'option 1' and my 'PC' is a Raspberry Pi running weeWX.
The R-Pi only draws a couple of watts and runs 24/7 in headless mode (no monitor/keyboard etc).
Web site is integrated and available on your local network and over the internet if you want to open some port on your router.
Can be configured to send data to WU, CWOP etc.

weeWX is Linux, open source and free
http://www.weewx.com/

Good support forum
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/weewx-user

[freelance]

I'm using pretty much your 'option 1' and my 'PC' is a Raspberry Pi running weeWX.
The R-Pi only draws a couple of watts and runs 24/7 in headless mode (no monitor/keyboard etc).

I ended up going with this path (missed weeWX in my initial research). Took more tweaking and configuration than I had hoped, but there is a wealth of on-line support and install packages, etc. And the R-Pi can be used elsewhere if I later go another path.
 
weeWX has been running continuous for almost 14 days, reporting every 10 minutes to CWOP and Weather Underground.
 
I ended up choosing the 6153 Vantage Pro 2 because of another ongoing thread about the benefits of 24-hour FARS. I mounted on a 25' Tele-Pole Superior 2. Through CWOP I've received good MADIS quality ratings: green checkmark and two thumbs up on: baromoter (0.4 milliBars avg error), temperature (0.3 °F avg err) and dew point (-1.8 °F avg err); and two thumbs up on wind speed. On the third day after installation it measured a 52 MPH wind gust. My wind measurements have generally been a bit higher than MADIS predictions.
 
Below is a picture of the mounted weather station, facing West. The water in the background is 170 ft below the base of the pole.
 

[Devonian]

Good choice and good result.

Nice location BTW 

Nigel.

[davefr]

Biggest Con with option #6 is that the VP2 direct to Meteobridge wireless range is crippled from 1000' to a mere 300'.  (probably more like 100' in real life) 

Might as well go with a cheaper station if range isn't important.

[Aardvark]

should you have a Mac (shudder and I have it), Weathercat is probably an option.  If you were lucky to download a copy of Weatherdisplay for Mac, you could do it there as well.

The important part of choosing software is sure you want to post it, but you also have a record of the conditions down the road. You might want to compare  conditions next year and you have it.

Wdisplay for Pc  generates a lot of information, retains it.  You can  go into the various logs and gather just about everything and process it.

I access via Weatherlink IP. that way I can use my computer for other things and not worry about it.   I also have an envoy with a USB logger and that I download data with weatherlink for Mac (which sucks big time),  Weathercat and Weathersnoop.