beachbrada

My Feedback: (17)

Has anybody got this product? [link]http://www.nitroplanes.com/wosmlora24gh.html[/link] If you have whats your take on it? Is it any good?

rebel623

yea I would kinda like to know about this too. Seems like a good cheap way to learn about it and start. Which is what Im looking for. Im not wanting huge 100% quality or anything just wanna know how well it works.. Does it look like that video on the nitroplanes website?

kwjmdss

I have two of them... I find the receiver needs more power than one 9 volt battery can generate... I am using an inverter connected to a 12 volt battery to power it and the video equipment. I have hooked 3ea 9 volt batteries up in parallel (total 9 volts) to power the transmitter. It seems to do well up to about 1/4 mile away. I am taping the video on the ground. You really need a monitor and tape deck to see what you are doing and get the signal adjusted. You can have up to four cameras working at the same time and use the tuner to switch between them. I find that an airplane moves the camera around too quickly and yaws too much. I am thinking of moving it to my heli for more maneuverability. I had problems with one of my receivers.... the other works much better. I did not buy it from your source, but the equipment is exactly the same.

Is it worth $45 ?? absolutely.... Is it great video?? NO.... but you get what you pay for.

batchelc

My Feedback: (7)

I flew one on 2 different airplanes last weekend. Vibration was an issue so I made a vibration mount for the camera wich solved my vibration issues.

I had the camera and receiver on top of my truck, and I was getting debounce and a fairly bad signal. Next time I'm going to try putting the video cam and receiver 50' from anything metal. Next I will try a better receiver antenna, anyone have any idea's? I've cruised the fourms and seen some good ideas.

I'll try and post some pictures of my "vibration" mount that I made from some plastic coroplast and foam rubber.

Chris

JMSTECH

Installing foam in between the camera mount to plane is good since the the glo engines' vibration does travel up to the cameras' transmitter causing horizontal lines. This camera is a CMOS and like above said... you get what you pay for. If you want to spend your money once then spend a bit more and buy something proven. I did notice that the receiver for this camera has a tuner or a rotating knob o top. In my past experience with these receiver that has no PLL, one is forced to fiddle with the knob to re-adjust the reception when the tx moves off range. This might be a bad thing if you are flying but then again... this unit may be improved.
check out:
Hobby Lobby's Pilotview FPV 2400 (do not need HAM license)
www.intelligentflight.com
www.hobbywireless.com
www.nghobbies.com
www.rc-tech.ch
www.dpcav.com

BJM-Maxx

Reading this thread and seeing the price I jumped on this. I got my order really quickly. I have only tested it in my shop so far but I was quite pleased with the video quality. The picture was jumping every second or so and I realized it was the proximity of my wireless router. I moved it away to about 10 feet and the video was really clear. I brought my 2.4 Ghz radio near it and the jumping started up again.

I plan to try it on my RC truck as a test using a 2.4 GHz radio. How much of a problem will this cause. Will the truck be affected or does the primarily cause problems to the video signal? I want to drive around my house remotely as my first trial.

JMSTECH

If you share 2.4Ghz video gear with 2.4Ghz radio gear, then that will be a bad idea. Although the 2.4Ghz radio gear IS SUPPOSED to do a quick search for an open frequency and lock on, but it is known that this was sometimes not the case. I heard from others I know that the video gear and radio gear crossed and would either cause servo glitching or total loss of video. Not a good thing to share, so the common choice is 2.4Ghz radio gear and 900mhz video gear! A friend did almost 2 miles flying straight in one direction with that combination and was sold on it!

BJM-Maxx

We all trust 2.4 GHz radios to share channels properly. I just do not know if the video systems adhere to strict channel delineations the way radios do. I can understand two transmitters being close together causing problems but that is not normal, the plane will normally be far away from the radio. I see the vendors say they may incompatible but that is like saying 'food may have come in contact with nuts', its easy to say to protect yourself.

Does anyone have actual experience with interference problems?

JMSTECH

ahhhh... just check out RC Groups fpv forum/rc-cam ... much more advanced there and read back on the past threads. There are reports there that FPVers who shared the same freq. crashed their planes. If you don't take the vendors word nor mine, then perhaps prove us wrong and try it out!

BJM-Maxx

I will check it out over there. If its been proven, its proven. I don't need to crash my own plane, just wanted to know for sure.

downunderdog

The trouble is, that the video TX is ON THE AIRPLANE and the control RX is ON THE AIRPLANE, so the transmitted video signal overwhelms the RX, even though they're supposed to be smart enough for that to not happen.

I've never tried wireless video, but I've been reading up on it and that seems to be the consensus... don't go 2.4 Gig video if you have a 2.4 Gig control system. 900 MHz is theoretically better for longer range than 2.4 gig, anyway (longer wavelength).

BJM-Maxx

That was another concern. I figure I will play with this cheap camera for now on my truck and boat. I will want a more serious system for a plane when I get to that point.

bkdavy

My Feedback: (1)

I have a similar system that i purchased about 3 years ago. Video quality was poor, dropouts on an airplane were frequent. Distance was limited to about 500 feet effective range, which was totally inadquate for an aerial system.

You get what you pay for.

Brad

JMSTECH

On a car, no problem but on a boat maybe big problems. The water acts like a sponge to 2.4Ghz frequency so it will drown it out and you will get very poor reception. 900Mhz is a favorable frequencies but only one channel is legal (ch1) to the FCC rule.

Neutron3

I bought mine from Raidentech [link]http://www.raidentech.com/24ghzmiwicoc.html[/link] for $39.95. I'm in agreement with the "you get what you pay for" theory. I brought my laptop which has video inputs and recorded the video straight to my laptop. I think the quality is less that favorable. I didn't even waste my time showing off the video because there was way too much picture noise. I would of been too embarrassed to play it for anyone.
I believe the FlyCamOne [link]http://www.hobby-lobby.com/video-camera.htm[/link] is the best deal for light-weight video recording

PENGUINBLASTER!!!

Click on the video in the page and read its comments on youtube. nuff said.