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

RV JET (FPV flying wing)

fliteadmin

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
#1




The RV JET from RangeVideo.com is an EPO flying wing setup specifically for FPV.



This foam wing features a an advanced gimbal system for GoPro 3 and micro cameras.



There is plenty of cargo storage inside this RC airplane.



The instruction manual for the RV JET is one of the best that David has even seen.



The pan and tilt advanced gimbal system features a clear dome camera covering.



A one-way mirror version is also available.



Unfortunately, we noticed that the mirrored dome cause reflections in the camera in the bright sunlight.



The RV JET arrives in a box that can also be used as a travel case!



This airplane tracks amazing! Even with hands off, the RV JET flew straight.



Not only does this airplane fly great, but this EPO plane looks amazing in the air.





The wings can be customized to be longer or shorter.



The shorter wingspan allows for fast, fun flying that is more responsive in the air.




Compared to the X8 and other FPV wings, we all really liked the RV JET better.



The pan and tilt system along with the dome covering allows for amazing unobstructed FPV flying.









More details about the RV Jet available at RangeVideo.com

 

tramsgar

Senior Member
#2
A very enjoyable episode, thank you! Would have enjoyed a wingcam view on the RV Jet. Didn't quite get the reflex problem, but I guess we missed 30 min of discussion...
 
Last edited:

Tritium

Amateur Extra Class K5TWM
#4
That is a great flying wing.
As I was watching the video I could not help but think of a very sad development in Texas. As of September 1st it is now a misdemeanor to photograph any property other than your own from an unmanned aerial vehicle without permission from all the land owners who's property is photographed and permission from any person photographed or otherwise recorded as video footage. This legislation was pushed through as a privacy bill by a new legislator who had never authored anything but " Good Old Boy" bills. Flite Test could not produce any videos in Texas as a result. Hopefully the madness does not move to their state.

Thurmond
 

Craftydan

Hostage Taker of Quads
Moderator
Mentor
#5
Now is that law photograph or publish photographs?

I know "Crash" Hancock (of The Crash Cast) has been holding back on FPV video footage for that reason, but got the impression He could still record, he just couldn't let us watch it.

Either way, it's getting bad when one of the most independant & libritarian states begins taking the lead on some nanny state laws :(
 

KC2ZPK

Junior Member
#6
I had read that it had to be intentional, youy had to specifically want to record that propertyor person. My undersatnding that incidential recording was ok? Do you have a link to the law?

Rusty
 

Tritium

Amateur Extra Class K5TWM
#7
Now is that law photograph or publish photographs?

I know "Crash" Hancock (of The Crash Cast) has been holding back on FPV video footage for that reason, but got the impression He could still record, he just couldn't let us watch it.

Either way, it's getting bad when one of the most independant & libritarian states begins taking the lead on some nanny state laws :(
Unfortunately "Possession" of an image is a Class C misdemeanor. Publishing or any other use is a class B.

(b)An offense under this section for the possession of an image is a Class C misdemeanor.(c)Each image a person possesses, discloses, displays, distributes, or otherwise uses in violation of this section is a separate offense. An offense under this section for the disclosure, display, distribution, or other use of an image is a Class B misdemeanor.

[TD="colspan: 2"]

[/TD]

 

[TD="width: 615, colspan: 2"]

[/TD]

[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 615, colspan: 2"]

[/TD]

[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 615, colspan: 2"]

[/TD]

[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 615, colspan: 2"]

[/TD]

[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 615, colspan: 2"]

[/TD]

[TD="width: 65"][/TD]
[TD="width: 615, colspan: 2"]

[/TD]



http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/html/HB00912F.htm

Thurmond
 
Last edited:

FlyingMonkey

Stuck in Sunny FL
Staff member
Admin
#8
That is a great flying wing.
As I was watching the video I could not help but think of a very sad development in Texas. As of September 1st it is now a misdemeanor to photograph any property other than your own from an unmanned aerial vehicle without permission from all the land owners who's property is photographed and permission from any person photographed or otherwise recorded as video footage. This legislation was pushed through as a privacy bill by a new legislator who had never authored anything but " Good Old Boy" bills. Flite Test could not produce any videos in Texas as a result. Hopefully the madness does not move to their state.

Thurmond
I think that law can and should be challenged. Does it apply equally to all photography? Can I take images from a full scale aircraft without permission? Can I do it from a ten story building? What about from the top of a hill? A ladder? What if I'm really tall and I stretch my arms out?

What is it about the camera platform that makes one legal, and another illegal?
 

FlyingMonkey

Stuck in Sunny FL
Staff member
Admin
#9
I had read that it had to be intentional, youy had to specifically want to record that propertyor person. My undersatnding that incidential recording was ok? Do you have a link to the law?

Rusty
Another slippery slope. Who determines what intentional is? How can they tell if you meant to fly over that corn field to record it, or you just happened to point that way for a while, during your flight to record your own property?
 

Craftydan

Hostage Taker of Quads
Moderator
Mentor
#10
Unfortunately "Possession" of an image is a Class C misdemeanor. Publishing or any other use is a class B.
hmmm . . . thanks for pulling up the law. still sorta a crummy law, but after reading it, I'm not so sure this hasn't taken on hyperbole.

Just because it's not on the "do" list doesn't put it on the "don't" list. Yes, FPV flight over 8 ft in a public venu is not legal, but unless it is done with the intent of survailance, it's not illegal either.

While the penalties are civil, and fairly heafty ($5k for taking, $10k for publishing, per session), it would require the injured party to prove "survailance", and malace for actual damage. While the level of proof is not as strong for civil law, the burden of proof is still on the accuser.

It would depend on your neighbors ire and your intent. You couldn't use arial photography to bust your neighbor for insurance fraud, but if it's clear the neighbor's mountianside is simply the background (becasue you spend just as much time looking the other way), they shouldn't have a leg to stand on if they dragged you into court.

Of course IANAL (a fact that I thank my Lord for with supprising frequency), and certianly not in Texas, but from reading through the bureaucrateese, it looks a lot milder than it's advertised.
 
#11
The Texas law isn't enforceable, it is a reactionary alternative to destruction of property when someone is annoyed. It has to be taken with the intent of malice and is the burden to proof to the accusing party. For hobby flying you just claim art (publishing scenery on YouTube or the like) or entertainment (FPV flying). Until you use that footage against someone or a business, it cannot not be held up.
 

Craftydan

Hostage Taker of Quads
Moderator
Mentor
#15
The Texas law isn't enforceable, it is a reactionary alternative to destruction of property when someone is annoyed.
Agreed . . . with the exception it's likely meant for -- flying in your neighbor's yard photographing through their 16yo daughter's window.

But even then, there are plenty of laws in place for that already . . .