SMALL - espritmodel.com SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio

Boscam Thunderbolt 2000mW 5.8GHz Transmitter

Thatís right 2000mW!!!

Splash

A whopping 2 watts of transmitting power

Just when you thought the trend of overpowered video transmitters was on the decline, Hobbyking announces a 5.8GHz transmitter that outputs a head spinning 2000mW of power. Equipped with a metal case and cooling fan to dissipate all that heat, the Boscam Thunderbolt FPV transmitter is perfect for those wanting to fight back against 5.8GHz's range and penetration limitations with raw power! Although actual output power tends to be inflated in the FPV advertising game, we're sure this little hotbox will still give you a nosebleed if you stand too close...

Taken from Hobbyking's website: Thatís right 2000mW!!! If youíre the type that goes big or goes home (not compensating for other shortcomings of course) then this is the end all when it comes to video transmitting POWER!

Boscam arguably makes some of the best FPV gear, and now they have the nicest and most powerful 5.8GHz transmitter we have ever seen. The Thunderbolt has a precision machined housing that plays double duty to keep the transmitter cool with integrated heat sink and internal fan. A clear LCD for channel selection and SMA-RP style antenna connection. The Thunderbolt comes with a ready to use 5 pin cable for power, video and audio connections, and clear instructions with a Duck style Omni antenna. If you have an application that need a bit more range, Boscam quality and reputation are an easy choice.

For best range and video link stability we recommend using the Boscam 5.8GHz Cloud Spirit circular-polarized Antenna Set (SMA-RP) available below in the accessories tab

Specs:

  • Frequencies: 8 channels from 5.645 to 5.945 GHz
  • Channels: CH1 5705 CH2 5685 CH3 5665 CH4 5645 CH5 5885 CH6 5905 CH7 5925 CH8 5945
  • Power: 2000mW (33dB +-1dB) of certified output power
  • Input Voltage: 7-24V DC, 2-6 cells battery
  • Cooling System: whole body heat sink and cooling fan
  • Channel Switching: channel button and channel display
  • Antenna: RP-SMA female 50 ohm connector
  • Size: 62mm x 42mm x 20mm
  • Weight: 37g

Included:

  • TS5833 Thunderbolt transmitter
  • Original Omni antenna x 1
  • Multi-function 5pin cable x 1

Link to product

Discussion

Reply
Thread Tools
Old Sep 25, 2013, 11:07 AM
fly by night
BCSaltchucker's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
5,689 Posts
sigh ... already discussed on here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1999735
BCSaltchucker is offline Find More Posts by BCSaltchucker
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 12:08 PM
RCGroups Editor
Matt Gunn's Avatar
United States, OH, Parma
Joined Jul 2009
5,068 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCSaltchucker View Post
Assuming your <sigh> is directed at the article and not the product:

There's many instances where I've posted a news article that has previously been discussed. By creating the article, it gets homepage exposure and is featured on the FPV channel homepage as well, opening it up to members that don't usually browse the fpv channel.

Matt
Matt Gunn is online now Find More Posts by Matt Gunn
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: Bill Hempel Xtreme Decathlon
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 03:01 PM
Project Tormentor is flying!
United States, WA, White Salmon
Joined Nov 2005
2,052 Posts
So said members (that don't usually browse the FPV channel, and are therefore likely to not be very knowledgable about RF in this applicationl) can blindly go buy WAY more transmitted power than they need or even likely should be using, with the misguided perception that more power=better FPV flights?
philthyy is offline Find More Posts by philthyy
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 03:06 PM
RCGroups Editor
Matt Gunn's Avatar
United States, OH, Parma
Joined Jul 2009
5,068 Posts
I made it pretty clear that 2 watts is a "tad" excessive...
But just to set the record straight, rookies have been overpowering their FPV rigs for years. This article wont start a revolution...it's already in full swing.
Matt Gunn is online now Find More Posts by Matt Gunn
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by Matt Gunn; Sep 25, 2013 at 03:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 03:50 PM
Registered User
typicalaimster's Avatar
United States, CA, San Diego
Joined Jan 2005
5,335 Posts
I rather we direct the rookies to products that work and isn't a waste of time or money. Yes rookies have been overpowering rigs for years, but that was before they were educated as to why you don't need that much power. It's no different than sending rookies to the $30 wireless eBay camera. Unless RCG is taking a monetary adjustment (to put it kindly)... Why can't we send people to the right equipment to help them get started on the FPV channel?
typicalaimster is online now Find More Posts by typicalaimster
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: I was bored
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 04:22 PM
RCGroups Editor
Matt Gunn's Avatar
United States, OH, Parma
Joined Jul 2009
5,068 Posts
No monetary adjustment at all. All news articles are the result of me searching for new (and/or) exciting products related to first-person view flying. There's no caveat that prevents me from posting a product, solely based on perceived value of said product to the fpv community.

With that said, I enjoy a healthy debate and I fully understand your argument. However, its going to be difficult to convince me that this is a bad product based solely on its advertised output power. Have any of us actually used a 5.8GHz transmitter at this power level? If so, what was the outcome? We all know that the lower freqs adversely affect the surrounding electronics as the output power is raised (the analogy about listening to classical music in one ear while a police siren screams in your other ear comes to mind...), but how many of us have actually tested 5.8GHz at above 1 watt and reported on the results?

Perhaps the point of diminishing returns has not been met at that power output on the 5800MHz band?
Matt Gunn is online now Find More Posts by Matt Gunn
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by Matt Gunn; Sep 25, 2013 at 04:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 05:37 PM
Registered User
Joined Aug 2012
1,475 Posts
It's not a matter of diminishing returns, it's matter of trying to get enough seperation on a multirotor
It's hard enough with 200mw 5.8, no way I'll be putting a 2w one on, I'd never get a satelite fix

It would be far more sensible and safer to go 1280 before using one of these on a multi, you might get away with it on a large plane with GPS on one wingtip and VTX on the other

No I don't need to test one just like I've never had the need to stick my head in our multi fuel stove whilst it's on to find out if it really is as bad as people say
Dogdude is online now Find More Posts by Dogdude
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 06:33 PM
RCGroups Editor
Matt Gunn's Avatar
United States, OH, Parma
Joined Jul 2009
5,068 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogdude View Post
It's not a matter of diminishing returns, it's matter of trying to get enough seperation on a multirotor
It's hard enough with 200mw 5.8, no way I'll be putting a 2w one on, I'd never get a satelite fix

It would be far more sensible and safer to go 1280 before using one of these on a multi, you might get away with it on a large plane with GPS on one wingtip and VTX on the other
You just offered a solution to your own argument Dogdude; it is a poor vtx for a multi, no doubting you there; anything over 200mw could be considered poor. But there are other markets out there, other platforms to fly from, and in countries that don't allow 1.2GHz usage. Outside the USA, many countries ban all but 5.8GHz for FPV. If you are flying, lets say, a Senior Telemaster or a 90" Ritewing with more than enough room for separation, 2000mw can get you pretty far on 5.8GHz... legally.

Its not for every platform, but don't be so quick to label it as poor without exploring its possible uses, or even testing it.
Im resting my case on this one.

Matt
Matt Gunn is online now Find More Posts by Matt Gunn
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by Matt Gunn; Sep 25, 2013 at 06:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 06:41 PM
Project Tormentor is flying!
United States, WA, White Salmon
Joined Nov 2005
2,052 Posts
I actually can see a potential use for this on a ground vehicle. Weight and excessive battery consumption are not nearly as much of a concern as anything that flies. BUT 5.8ghz has so little penetration that I doubt more power will help you drive behind anything.

If you're operating a ground vehicle with pretty much a clear LOS then this may work good.
philthyy is offline Find More Posts by philthyy
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 06:51 PM
Registered User
typicalaimster's Avatar
United States, CA, San Diego
Joined Jan 2005
5,335 Posts
I rather see them use the available 'bandwidth' in the 5.8ghz spectrum for higher quality video. When you look at the new TS832 and RC832 that just came out we're talking 32 channels. I want to know who's going to be the first to MUX a few channels together and pull off HD.

I personally started 5.8ghz in the 10mw days when Airwave came out with their first modules. Yellow Jacket was the 'cool' video equipment back then! I think we're starting to come full circle with some of this 5.8ghz stuff and the industry is starting to throw spaghetti at the ceiling.
typicalaimster is online now Find More Posts by typicalaimster
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: I was bored
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2013, 10:32 PM
BEOWULF
North vancouver, B.C. Canada
Joined Apr 2008
18,599 Posts
What would high powered 5.8 video tx do to interfer with on board planes or copters or cars fpv. Experience do ?

Does it cause uhf rx to fail?

Does it cause gps to fail?

Other than getting further and more battery use?

Why this want to use low power video tx arguement?
David22 is online now Find More Posts by David22
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2013, 12:08 AM
Kiwi in Germany
whakahere's Avatar
Germany
Joined Jun 2010
2,284 Posts
because you can put it on a plane david. This thing is awful and I told them at the time when I was testing it.

I have tested this and it gets so hot it burns. It has air vents on the top and side which get extremely hot. Don't put that near foam. the base also gets hot so mounting it becomes a challenge to say the least.
whakahere is online now Find More Posts by whakahere
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2013, 03:54 AM
Registered User
Joined Aug 2012
1,475 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by webdr View Post
2000mw can get you pretty far on 5.8GHz... legally.

Matt
No Matt it's not legal, there are both restrictions on the exact frequencies allowed (many countries do not allow the freq range that this unit uses) and also (this is a big one) the power output is limited to far below 2000mw, in fact in the UK it is 25mw

So firstly I did not solve my own problem in my post above, that's a ruddy useless solution to someone who flies multis and not planes
Secondly if you're going to use an illegal device like this (and I'm not against that by the way) then you may as well go for an illegal 1.2/1.3 system and have lower power and less hassle

Fact is that this unit would be far better off left on the shelf and the user adopt 1.2/1.3 or stay with lower power 5.8, if you want to video somewhere further away just drive closer first
Dogdude is online now Find More Posts by Dogdude
Last edited by Dogdude; Sep 26, 2013 at 01:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2013, 10:21 AM
Kiwi in Germany
whakahere's Avatar
Germany
Joined Jun 2010
2,284 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogdude View Post
No Matt it's not legal, there are both restrictions on the exact frequencies allowed (many countries do not allow the freq range that this unit uses) and also (this is a big one) the power output is limited to far below 2000mw, in fact in the UK it is 25mw

So firstly I did not solve my own problem in my post above, that's a ruddy useless solution to someone who flies multis and not planes
Secondly if you're going to use an illegal device like this (and I'm not against that by the way) then you may as well go for an illegal 1.2/1.3 system and have lower power and less hassle

Fact is that this unit would be far better off left on the shelf and the user adopt 1.2/1.3 or stay with lower power 5.8, if you want to ideo somewhere further away just drive closer first
I am with you on this. 2000mw is just pointless. if we can hit 10km easy enough on 200mw with good antennas why the hell do we need more power? It runs hot, blows out everything around it and it is heavy. If you want safe range then go for 2.4ghz or 1.3ghz transmitters. 5.8ghz is for close range park style flying. It is not built for range.
whakahere is online now Find More Posts by whakahere
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale Boscam 5.8G 2W 2000mW 12Ch FPV Wireless Audio Video Transmitter AV + RC305 Receiver uuustore1 FPV Equipment (FS/W) 3 May 20, 2014 07:15 AM
For Sale BOSCAM 5.8G 2W 2000mw 12Ch Wireless Audio Video Transmitter AV Tx uuustore1 FPV Equipment (FS/W) 5 Aug 31, 2013 12:41 AM
For Sale BOSCAME FPV 5.8G 1W 1000MW Video Audio Transmitter TX 5KM for 5.8GHz Rx Receiver uuustore1 FPV Equipment (FS/W) 5 Aug 16, 2013 11:48 AM
For Sale BOSCAM 5.8G 2W 2000mw 12Ch Wireless Audio Video Transmitter AV Tx uuustore1 FPV Equipment (FS/W) 7 Aug 04, 2013 10:11 AM
Sold Boscam 5.8GHz 200mW Transmitters Mr.RC-CAM FPV Equipment (FS/W) 4 Jul 24, 2013 11:07 PM