• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Any thoughts on this equipment?

#2
its a little bit bigger than what we use; but it will work ... the only problem will be using together with 2.4ghz im not sure but it interferes with harmonics waves.
 
#5
physical size ... but not by that much ! its perfectly usable. You will need to make a custom cable from the camera to the Tx .. and its not a big deal .... the cable that comes with it its on the heavy side ...
 

earthsciteach

Moderator
Moderator
#6
I'm just shopping around and seeing how cheaply I could put something together. The power would definitely require me to get an amateur radio operator license.
 

lobstermash

Propaganda machine
Mentor
#7
Hobbyking does the 900Mhz version of this (the one featured on many Flitetest episodes), which uses the same vrx. A low pass filter will take out the interference, but not the harmonics with 2.4, whereas 900Mhz doesn't harmonic (but does interfere without a low pass filter) with 2.4. The linked system is also really expensive compared to HK's and doesn't come with a camera or a wiring loom, and is monstrously big...

Here's the link to the HK one: http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/...mW_Tx_Rx_1_3_inch_CCD_Camera_NTSC_520TVL.html
 

lobstermash

Propaganda machine
Mentor
#11
Is there a reason you're keen on 1.2 by the way? Each frequency has its advantages and disadvantages that should be carefully weighed to what you're wanting to do. By the way, great that you seem to be looking into this seriously...
 

earthsciteach

Moderator
Moderator
#13
Watching IBCrazy's videos, he states that 1.2-1.3 GHz is the most empty band. I like the idea of lower frequencies to punch through obstacles.

I have a couple of small LCD screens that make up a DVD player for vehicles. I figure I'll use one of them to start and move up to goggles later, maybe.
 

lobstermash

Propaganda machine
Mentor
#14
There are a few channels to choose from. I find I don't get much/any interference from towers here, but then Australia's probably about 5 generations behind the US on technology... Only the 910 channel is in cell tower frequency. There are three above it that aren't.
 

lobstermash

Propaganda machine
Mentor
#16
On 5.8 you wouldn't interfere with each other if you were on different channels. That's one big up for 5.8. Plus there's really good, cheap antennas readily available, and they're tiny.
 

earthsciteach

Moderator
Moderator
#17
OH... That does make a difference. At the moment, I'm not looking to fly great distances on fpv, mostly because I am afraid of losing radio contact. So, I guess 5.8 would be fine. I've heard that power output is not necessarily a concern as long as a good antenna is used. Would a 100 mW, 5.8 GHz system give me a reliable signal if I use skew planar and cloverleaf antennas? My Turnigy 9x says it can reach out to 1.5 km.
 

PaulT

New member
Mentor
#18
Hey teach....go to my blog...
I use the 5.8 from Hk and the most expensive bits are the antennas from Alex.
I was out to 2 km this summer with good signal lock all the way.
The rubber ducky antennas only allowed me to get around 400 meters.
My disclaimer is that it was still LOS in the open country.
I would guess my total cost was under $200.00.
 

lobstermash

Propaganda machine
Mentor
#20
Also check out the V2 Predator RTF package on HK, which has your goggles (built in vrx), 250mW vtx, lc filter and camera. You can get SpiroNET antennas from there too, giving you more video range than your stock 9x has.

Having the whole ground station in your head set is lovely. Plug in and fly. Mine's so quick to set up that I'm often left waiting for the gps lock before I can fly. With the upgraded antennas, your whole system is set up with goggles for a shade over $300...

But then I wouldn't (though some would) fly more than 500-600m without an OSD unless you've got some very clear landmarks to follow. As Alex says, it's a different world up there and it's easy to get lost!