FPV in IRL

[Happy Days]

Nice Video Ron. (Shame about the sound track! :lol: )

No, seriously, that Quad 3 seems a very stable platform. People actually pay good money to have aerial photographs of their houses. You could make a little cash ‘on the side’ with that set up.

Excuse my ignorance but is the camera operation radio controlled, or a kind of “Light the blue touch paper and retire to a safe distance” sort of thing? :roll:

It looked very calm conditions, how would it perform with a breeze blowing?

K

[Ron]

The Nex-5 looks good.

Yes the quad has gyro stabilisers, couldn't fly without them.
But I found a snag with the 2.4GHz radio.
The antenna is vertical on the quad, and when I go straight up, directly over head, it's end on to me with the Tx. And the Tx antenna is end on to the quad as well. In the first crash I think it lost signal just as I'd started to descend, so it went unstable.
I don't think it liked descending so quickly either.
Also, if you watch carefully, the gyros do start to stabilise it just before it hits the bushes.
That has happened to me twice now, and always it's happened when directly overhead.
So a change in the antenna layout is called for, and also to keep the Tx antenna horizontal so the quad gets more signal.

My pilot sklls could do with sharpening a bit too    
Used to fixed wing that's the trouble.

Ron

[Ron]

Hi Keith,

Yes it's a bit dodgy stability-wise at the mo.
But I'm planning to make it bigger with longer arms that should improve the stability.
And I'm planning on learning to fly it too :cry:

At the mo it's just start the video cam and take off.
Stop it when landed and dump it to the computer to see what it got.
It's not steerable on it's own, just pointing forward, but in theory you can turn the quad on the spot, so that shouldn't be a problem.
As long as the pilot gets the idea on how to point it the right direction.

I did rig a small(ish) still camera with a servo to press the shutter release, but it was all a bit heavy for the quad which struggled a bit, as did the pilot. :roll:

Yes it was very calm.
They can fly in wind, but that comes in lesson two…..

Not sure about making money.
Have to get the flying skills sorted first.
Good idea though. :clap:

Ron

[Happy Days]

From the images that I saw it looked pretty good. :clap:
 
Okay, it crashed a couple of times but that seemed to be just a case of student pilot syndrome, (for that type of aeroplane I mean.) You’ll soon get the knack of it I’m sure.

Re: Loss of Signal. Most 2.4 rx’s have two antennas specifically to stop L.o.S. as you appeared to have experienced. Bit of a nuisence if you only have one. :!:
If you place the rx antenna horizontal you’ll risk L.o.S. as the machine lands.

I think I’d go for a rx antenna at 45degrees from vertical. With the Tx antenna vertical, (or horizontal) the rx will experience a 3dB signal reduction but you’re not likely to be flying the model too far away from you so I’d have thought the signal strength would still be strong enough to able the rx to function properly.

Have to say, it’s all very interesting.

K.

[Ron]

Yes I'm still very unsure of the signal loss.
It just seems the most likely thing due to both antennas being vertical and end on at the time.
The Rx one does have a 90 degree bend in the middle of the actual active bit at the end, but then at the time it was effectively shielded by the base plate of the quad.
Hmmmm.

Since then I've got a better Rx with two antennas and two parallel receivers, so that might cure it, even though the new Rx was/is destined for the Squall (which hasn't even flown yet :oops: )

Rxs could do with 'S' meters on them  :lol:

But maybe it was just a crap pilot.
These multi propellor wrong-way-up whizzy things don't behave like proper aircraft y'know  :roll:
But... it's early days yet.

Ron

[liutas009]

i cant give you an advice, don't fly over your head, or if you do that, change position of your antenna in the control. But best thing is, to keep it in front of you, than you will never loose control, unless something else will happen.

[Ron]

You are absolutely right about not flying overhead.
It can be confusing with a fixed wing, but with a heli you tend to lose all orientation as well as with 2.4GHz losing the signal.  

I'm going to try keeping the Tx antenna horizontal across the front of the Tx and keep facing the model.

[Happy Days]

Ron,
Didn’t you say, somewhere on this forum, that your 2.4 equipment was a modular system and that you could operate on 35Mhz?

You shouldn’t have any LoS problems on that QRG.

I was thinking last night. :?:  (I do that sometimes you know,………..Think :roll: )
If you are losing signal with your 2.4 gear, the rx will probably take a second or two to re-boot at Acquisition of Signal, which would only add to the “out -of-controlness” of the model for those brief moments.

Dilemma isn’t it. :!:  Loss of signal? or Lack of Pilot skill?
 
They do say “A bad workman always blames his tools" :lol:. (I'm always going that. It's so much easier than admitting I'm wrong!)

K.

[Ron]

Yes you are right Keith (well sometimes anyway  :twisted: )
I've got a 35MHz Cockpit SX with a 'stick on' (literally) 2.4 module that plugs into the 'tutor' and charging socket, so you can switch between the two.
There is a snag though (there would be...)
The ESCs say they are not suitable for operation with 35MHz RXs.
You tell me???
Does that mean they chuck out so much interference at 35MHz?
I would have thought EMC regulations would have said you don't get EC mark approval if that was the case.
Maybe the ESCs haven't got EC approval, though they have got the EC mark on them. Not that that's anything to go by.

And Rx re-booting. Good point.
And in this case the gyro/controller thingy probably has to 'acquire' the Rx signal input too.

ron

[Happy Days]

Yea’ It could be that the ESC throws out interference, particularly if it has a ‘switching’ BEC. (As distinct from a ‘linear’ BEC, which is basically a Voltage Regulator)
As far as I’m aware the ESC doesn’t radiate the interference so much as allowing it to run up the positive wire straight into the rx!

This can be overcome by cutting the positive wire from the ESC and using a separate battery to operate the rx and servos………but that adds more weight. (Or, more complexly, with tunes circuits and ferrite rings. )

OH BOTTOM! :!:
Don’t know what to suggest for the best Ron. :?:

What ever you decide upon you could always test the system with the model secured to the ground. Can’t get damaged then!

K.

[Ron]

Yes, it's a bit of a pain in the BOTTOM.

I was thinking of testing the 35MHz Rx with the quad just to see what happens. A large weight is called for with huge ropes and lashings.
Ah yes, a couple of ballast pigs from the boat should do it. :lol:
Or just a couple of pigs?

In fact, only one BEC from one ESC has the job of powering the Rx, so ferrite rings and things might just do it.
Testing needed.

After we come back from Lidl's this morning  :!:

Ron

[photoflight.ie]

hi to all liutas I look forward to see your work.
ron    camera fuji exr  200 gr.liutas was near  :clap:

[liutas009]

As i did promice to make a video, so here it is
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/v/PcM6Co-lI2o[/youtube]

[IceWind]

Great video, thanks for sharing.

Do you mind sharing the specs/gear that you're using?
Thanks.

[liutas009]

i got Plane from Lithuanian. It was made special for Photo and video Flights.

You can order similar one from Lithuanian shop
I have full FPV video sistem on it with FY20a Stabiliser
OSD: EZOSD WITH CURRENT SENSOR AND GPS
Video: 850 mW 1,3 Ghz Video System