Snyperx

My Feedback: (11)

Can anyone recommend a good first wireless video setup? Spylinker? Blackwidow? How much power? 200mW? 500mW? I am looking at installing the equipment into a Goldberg Piper Cub. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

eurekahobby

My Feedback: (37)

Hi I'm flying a Cub with video installed.

My rig can be seen on my web

eurekahobby.com

W4UAV

Blackwidow AV would be my choice. If I could give advice and the budget were
moderate (2 steps above CHEAP) I would get the 5 volt 600mw transmitter he has and the
5 volt KX121 Superwide lens camera and run it on the biggest 5 volt battery (a big receiver pack)
I could find because its still gonna weigh less than a 12 volt pack! On the ground Id use
a DV camcorder (I got my Canon ZR60 for less than $400) that has analog inputs. Plug it into your receiver,
off you go!

The transmitter:
http://www.blackwidowav.com/bwav240600components.html
The camera:
http://www.blackwidowav.com/KX121-115.html

Oh, and definitely get the patch antenna onto the receiver, works Great!
The patch antenna:
http://www.blackwidowav.com/patchantenna1.html

I dont work for Bill, I just really like his products![8D]

Fubar-One

My Feedback: (1)

What he said.

forfun42us

Eureka, I look at your web and could not find your rig?

eurekahobby

My Feedback: (37)

It's on the NOSTALGIA page.. Will send you more pictures if you want.

I now mount the camera above the wing on a servo so that it can be swiveled in flight

PlaneKrazee

My Feedback: (14)

I would go with Blackwidow also. He has years of experience. I wish I had purchased a system from him, I probably will be in the near future.

Brian

Fubar-One

My Feedback: (1)

I just bought one of the 5v 200mw systems. I have hooked it up to see if it works but havent had a chance to do much more than that as yet. I did notice that the signal locked down perfectly, even in my garage which has one side made of corogated steel. Plays havoc with the Spylinker systems but the Blackwidow system didnt even notice it even when I was walking back and forth betwen the tx and the rx.
Cant wait to test it out with the standard antenna and the patch antenna.
FINALLY got my truck engine re-assembled and actually got it to fire today so maybe I can soon get back to flying. These vehicle problems have been sucking the life outta me. Ridesharing aint been no picnic either...[:-]

SkyDude

I like that setup, but would like a narrower lens to cut down on the fishbowl effect. Are the lenses easy to change, and does blackwidow sell this camera with a narrower lens?

I'm looking to add video to my SoarStar. I'm thinking I could setup a pan/tilt config on the nose.

Thanks much!

stevennh

Let me know how this works for you. I am looking to get the same system. I started with one of the notorious 1.2GHz cameras and want to go legal (2.4GHz HAM Frequencies). I currently have 50mw on 1.2 and the range is OK with a patch antenna and the camera on my Aerobird. I wanted to try the 200mw system since I think I could probably still power it from the flight battery with a regulator (5v). I think the 200mv BlackWidowAV system with a camera will still be flyable on my Aerobird as long as I can use the flight battery for video tx power.

Here is a sample video from my current system done shortly after new-years. Note, this is 700Kb/s (broadband only...)

[link=http://www.s93421871.onlinehome.us/video.wmv]Aerobird Video Sample[/link]

mr.rc-cam

One of my systems is the LawMate 50mW unit (same as BW's 50mW) and it works great on parkflyers. Keep in mind that these are "real" 50mW (the actual RF power driven into a 50 ohm load), not the inflated numbers posted by many eBay sellers (they cheat and use power consumption of Tx). For example, it has as much RF power as a 200mW to 400mW eBay unit (per bench measurements).

The 50mW system is very low weight. But if you need audio then the 200mW BW system would be a more convenient pick. Both are good performers.

I was not able to get decent operation from a shared battery unless I added substantial amounts of filtering (due to motor current spikes). In the end, a 4-cell AAA camera power source took better care of me (same weight as the Vreg/filter I was using). However, your Aerobird may be a better candidate -- you will not know until you try.

stevennh

The 50mw printed on the camera might be somewhat realistic. The input current is around 210ma. The video posted above is with the flight battery on a filter. I used a series diode with a 2200uf cap and a couple of ferrite beads on the supply lines. The interference seen in the video is due to remaining voltage drop. The diode got rid of most of the spikes since the cap was able to hold up the voltage. As the current increases, this will be a problem (more tx power, the 200mw transmitter shows a current of 450ma from the source). I would probably put a 5v regulator at the output of the filter cap for the new system (the 5v supply voltage would give me more to work with from the 8.4v source). Even with another filter cap, or a larger one, I will be better off weight wise with a filter.

mr.rc-cam

That current sounds reasonable to me for a 50mW device (it actually sounds a bit high if it is a 8VDC-12VDC design). To mimic a common eBay power method, the current value measured must be the Tx's RF PA amp only, not Tx amp AND camera current. If this is what you found then it could very well be a 50mW or higher Tx (an RF power meter is very helpful for these sort of exercises).

So, it sounds like a authentic 200mW Tx is in order if you want more range. With any given freq, a 200mW Tx will gain you 2X distance over a comparable 50mW system (assuming the Rx performance is the same). But going from 1.2Ghz to 2.4Ghz will introduce some range loss. But I have a feeling that you can make up that with a good patch on the Rx and careful Tx antenna placement.


That is basically what I used (schottky diode, low ESR high uF caps, some chokes, and 5V LDO Vreg). However, with my 380 powered model it took additional filtering to get rid of the last remaining motor noise (looked like the tiny lines I see in your video). In the end I decided a small second 4-cell pack would take care of me with less weight and effort, which it did. If you find the same issue in your model, and want to clean up the little lines, then keep in mind that a 4-cell 2/3 AAA 370mAH NiMH pack weighs about 30 grams and should offer more than 30 mins of operation.

stevennh

I was measuring current of the camera and tx, so you are correct, I could be a bit off there. I assumed the power draw of the CMOS camera would be much less than the TX. I was amazed at the voltage drop right at the flight battery when the motor is running. Those pulse-power controllers really grab some current in a hurry. I put my scope right on the battery and was seeing a 2-3v sawtooth below the operating voltage (8.4v). My camera/tx runs at 8v, so I am below the low end on input voltage with the diode drop. I figured the lines were the due to the small amount of ripple left on the input voltage (~50-100mv or so). I figured a 5V system would make more sense, a to-220 type regulator at the output of my current filter might do it. I had a hard time flying with a duracell 9V powering the camera no matter where I put the battery. Just too much additional weight. I am not sure how much it added but so far, the filter is way less. Thanks for your input. I think I will end up with the 200mw 2.4GHz package from BlackWidowAV, then I will experiment with power. Another quick question, how do you ID yourself on ATV in these applications (callsign)?

mr.rc-cam

They are typically about 35mA to 70mA.

Even with a 5VDC LDO (I used an LM2940T-5.0) in mine, my little 5V system's video quality still suffered from the motor noise. I just chalked it up to the linear Vreg's ripple rejection spec, which peters out after a few KHz (there are noise components in the motor spikes that can exceed several KHz, often hitting Mhz).

The rules are very flexible. You can merely speak your sign into the mic, hold a flash card in front of the camera, or automate it all using an OSD board or other means. An automated method that works well and is low cost is shown on the RC-CAM web site's special projects area: [link=http://www.rc-cam.com/hamcam.htm]HamCam-ID'er.[/link]

yb2normal

Hi SkyDude,

I bet you've been looking at my videos shot from the 115 degree lense. I agree with you about the fishbowl effect, it really does a number on the horizon.

This is actually just one of the cameras I offer for my video systems. The 'regular' lense has a 53 degree view and does not suffer from the fishbowl effect. Take a look at some of the videos posted on the website below. The videos were all shot with one of two different lenses, either the 53 degree standard lense, or an 80 degree lense that I picked up from www.rock2000.com

http://blackwidowav.tripod.com

Regarding the idea of sharing the main battery, I will say that the 50mw units seem more prone to noise than the 200mw units when trying to tap off the main battery. On the 200mw units the only filtering I use is a 5v LDO regulator with manufacturer recommended caps, and the signal stays nice and clean.

Regards,
Bill
Black Widow A/V

mr.rc-cam

Keep in mind that my efforts were with the 50mW system. It sounds like the 200mW unit is the way to go.

yb2normal

Yup, that's what I heard

Bill