FPV fact sheet
12-21-2006, 04:49 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rain Ramon,
CA
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FPV fact sheet
There doesn't seem to be a comprehensive FPV HOWTO which lays out the best equipment and the technique for FPV. It seems to be word of mouth and a lot of bits of information. So far the bits of information converge on the following:
Flight by video with the most expensive equipment is difficult at best.
You can't really fly by video 100% of the time.
The most expensive systems can be flown purely by video, but landings and takeoffs are still by eye.
Cheaper systems allow momentary flight by video with frequent looks at the model to know where it is.
Expect to lose your model occasionally if you fly by video alone and go beyond visual range.
One guy is flying a helicopter by video alone but spent a hell of a lot of money to do it.
Fixed exposure and high resolution isn't required to fly by video. Some fly with only a horizon line to go on and very little detail above or below it.
The difference between wide angle lenses and normal lenses seems hardly noticable. They all lose the horizon.
Personal experience:
The 1mW 2.4Ghz video transmitter interferes with the 75Mhz receiver.
The 75Mhz transmitter interferes with the 2.4Ghz video receiver.
The 2.4Ghz signal can be jammed by security cameras.
You can't tell how high you are from video alone.
With a normal lens, the slightest cyclic input makes the horizon disappear.
Feel free to share any exceptions to these bits.
Flight by video with the most expensive equipment is difficult at best.
You can't really fly by video 100% of the time.
The most expensive systems can be flown purely by video, but landings and takeoffs are still by eye.
Cheaper systems allow momentary flight by video with frequent looks at the model to know where it is.
Expect to lose your model occasionally if you fly by video alone and go beyond visual range.
One guy is flying a helicopter by video alone but spent a hell of a lot of money to do it.
Fixed exposure and high resolution isn't required to fly by video. Some fly with only a horizon line to go on and very little detail above or below it.
The difference between wide angle lenses and normal lenses seems hardly noticable. They all lose the horizon.
Personal experience:
The 1mW 2.4Ghz video transmitter interferes with the 75Mhz receiver.
The 75Mhz transmitter interferes with the 2.4Ghz video receiver.
The 2.4Ghz signal can be jammed by security cameras.
You can't tell how high you are from video alone.
With a normal lens, the slightest cyclic input makes the horizon disappear.
Feel free to share any exceptions to these bits.
12-23-2006, 12:06 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Temple,
TX
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FPV fact sheet
ORIGINAL: jack crossfire
There doesn't seem to be a comprehensive FPV HOWTO which lays out the best equipment and the technique for FPV. It seems to be word of mouth and a lot of bits of information. So far the bits of information converge on the following:
Flight by video with the most expensive equipment is difficult at best. Not that difficult.
You can't really fly by video 100% of the time.
The most expensive systems can be flown purely by video, but landings and takeoffs are still by eye. I've done many full flights, from takeoff to landing, totally by video.
Cheaper systems allow momentary flight by video with frequent looks at the model to know where it is.
Expect to lose your model occasionally if you fly by video alone and go beyond visual range. Haven't lost one yet.
One guy is flying a helicopter by video alone but spent a hell of a lot of money to do it.
Fixed exposure and high resolution isn't required to fly by video. Some fly with only a horizon line to go on and very little detail above or below it.
The difference between wide angle lenses and normal lenses seems hardly noticable. They all lose the horizon.
Personal experience:
The 1mW 2.4Ghz video transmitter interferes with the 75Mhz receiver.
The 75Mhz transmitter interferes with the 2.4Ghz video receiver.
The 2.4Ghz signal can be jammed by security cameras.
You can't tell how high you are from video alone.
With a normal lens, the slightest cyclic input makes the horizon disappear.
Feel free to share any exceptions to these bits.
There doesn't seem to be a comprehensive FPV HOWTO which lays out the best equipment and the technique for FPV. It seems to be word of mouth and a lot of bits of information. So far the bits of information converge on the following:
Flight by video with the most expensive equipment is difficult at best. Not that difficult.
You can't really fly by video 100% of the time.
The most expensive systems can be flown purely by video, but landings and takeoffs are still by eye. I've done many full flights, from takeoff to landing, totally by video.
Cheaper systems allow momentary flight by video with frequent looks at the model to know where it is.
Expect to lose your model occasionally if you fly by video alone and go beyond visual range. Haven't lost one yet.
One guy is flying a helicopter by video alone but spent a hell of a lot of money to do it.
Fixed exposure and high resolution isn't required to fly by video. Some fly with only a horizon line to go on and very little detail above or below it.
The difference between wide angle lenses and normal lenses seems hardly noticable. They all lose the horizon.
Personal experience:
The 1mW 2.4Ghz video transmitter interferes with the 75Mhz receiver.
The 75Mhz transmitter interferes with the 2.4Ghz video receiver.
The 2.4Ghz signal can be jammed by security cameras.
You can't tell how high you are from video alone.
With a normal lens, the slightest cyclic input makes the horizon disappear.
Feel free to share any exceptions to these bits.
