HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Dec 15, 2012, 02:08 AM
Crashomatic
CrashMeUp's Avatar
United States, CA, SF
Joined May 2010
2,035 Posts
kha, your work is appreciated
CrashMeUp is offline Find More Posts by CrashMeUp
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Dec 15, 2012, 02:29 AM
kha
openLRSng haxor
Finland, Espoo
Joined Mar 2011
1,637 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrashMeUp View Post
kha, your work is appreciated
Thanks, I just wish I'd have a little more time to work on this.
kha is online now Find More Posts by kha
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 02:10 AM
Registered User
Germany, Berlin
Joined Dec 2012
29 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboSerg View Post
So anyone did a range check with stock antennas ?
I'm very interested in that also. How far you can fly with this system
a) using stock antennas and 100mW
b) using only 10mW - because that's the allowed max power output at this frequency in Germany

Lioon
Lioon is offline Find More Posts by Lioon
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 04:41 AM
Registered User
RoboSerg's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
478 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lioon View Post

b) using only 10mW - because that's the allowed max power output at this frequency in Germany

Lioon
How will ever anyone notice that you fly with 100 instead of 10mw ? The amateur guys at 433mhz use 5W or so, they wont notice if they turn their radios on. You and your plane will notice it that though

Gre aus D
RoboSerg is offline Find More Posts by RoboSerg
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 05:18 AM
Registered User
Germany, Berlin
Joined Dec 2012
29 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboSerg View Post
How will ever anyone notice that you fly with 100 instead of 10mw ? The amateur guys at 433mhz use 5W or so, they wont notice if they turn their radios on. You and your plane will notice it that though
Depends on the amateur guys. There are some real hardliners and control freaks...

However, let's turn to my question No a) then: range with stock setting.
Lioon is offline Find More Posts by Lioon
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 05:38 AM
Registered User
Joined Dec 2007
538 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboSerg View Post
The amateur guys at 433mhz use 5W or so
10W locally, 25W normal or 500W+ (during contests) would be more correct for the 70cm band. I know since im HB9.

Lioon, no one will ever notice. The amateurs do not use the ism part of the band because its full of noise. Car door openers and such. In germany you could try the PMR band, 446 mhz, it is 500mw max "licence free".
Cesco is offline Find More Posts by Cesco
Last edited by Cesco; Dec 16, 2012 at 08:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 08:24 AM
Registered User
Germany, Berlin
Joined Dec 2012
29 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesco View Post
Lioon, no one will ever notice. The amateurs do not use the ism part of the band because its full of noise. Car door openers and such. In germany you could try the PMR band, 446 mhz, it is 500mw max "licence free".
No, PMR ist for voice only and has some harsh regulations (transmitting time etc).

But let's come back to the technical point: How good ist that transmitter? If you could choose between these two:
* Turnigy 9X + OrangeRx Open LRS 433MHz
* Turnigy 9X + FrSky DJT 2.4Ghz

Which one would you buy?
Lioon is offline Find More Posts by Lioon
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 08:50 AM
Registered User
Joined Dec 2007
538 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lioon View Post
Which one would you buy?
I have both. Frsky in use, 433 in the mail.

For normal usage the frsky works great. The range is more than your eyes can see.
I got 3 tx modules and 10 or more receivers. 100% reliable. Use it with 9x, hitec aurora (bitch to sloder), graupner mx22.

The 433 is for long range, not for normal acro or heli. Long range means more than you can see. More than 1km. Do not use the 433 for everyday trainer. This is for "special things". I believe with a 32cm dipole on both ends you make 5km LOS no problem. Maybe much much more.
Cesco is offline Find More Posts by Cesco
Last edited by Cesco; Dec 16, 2012 at 08:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 09:44 PM
Registered User
Adekamer's Avatar
Russia, Moscow, g. Moskva
Joined Mar 2005
1,402 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kha View Post
I think openLRS defaults to 38400. ThUndeadMod dropped it to 4800 and that is quite low already. On my code I use the same and with 11 byte payload I can send them at around 50ms intervals (20 frames per second) to leave little gap for hopping.

Going lower is certainly possible but will drop the frame rate even more.
Hello!
if some channels transmit discrete?
eg, 1-4 channel transmit with resolution in 2048 points and the other in proportion to 5-9 channels transmit with a resolution of 100 points?
it will reduce the BW and reduce the delay?
Adekamer is offline Find More Posts by Adekamer
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 12:43 AM
kha
openLRSng haxor
Finland, Espoo
Joined Mar 2011
1,637 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adekamer View Post
Hello!
if some channels transmit discrete?
eg, 1-4 channel transmit with resolution in 2048 points and the other in proportion to 5-9 channels transmit with a resolution of 100 points?
it will reduce the BW and reduce the delay?
Well dropping resolution has little effect than you think...

8 channels with 1024 (10bit) resolution == 80 bits = 10 bytes
4 @ 2048 + 4 @ 128 == 44 + 28 == 72 bits = 9bytes
8 channels with 256 (8bit) resolution == 64 bits == 8 bytes
etc.

Also the RF packet contains other stuff (preample;4 byte magic;length;data;crc) so the effect is even smaller.

I'm currently using 10bits for range of 988us - 2012us but as sometimes the 'over values' are usefull (like for failsafe detection) I'm going to add nonlinear scaling to the internal data i.e.
800-1000us 0-11 (17us resultion)
1000-2000us 12-1011 (1us resolution)
2000-2200us 1012-1023 (17us resolution)
kha is online now Find More Posts by kha
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 03:52 AM
Registered User
Sardinia, Italy
Joined May 2009
74 Posts
Sorry guys, but I think that continuing this thread it's a bit offensive for the OpenLRS's owner and developers. Never mind about unauthorized hardware copy or where ever you buy your hardware; this is another question between Melih and HK, just we have to keep respect about Flytron's ideas, work and effort.
These are the right places to discuss about OpenLRS:

http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7
or:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...ghlight=openlr

I'm really sorry about this matter. We risk of losing all the free contributions in this community.

bests, sandro
Frazz is offline Find More Posts by Frazz
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 06:23 AM
Registered User
Joined Dec 2007
538 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frazz View Post
I think that continuing this thread it's a bit offensive for the OpenLRS's owner and developers
I think the developers should be proud that their work will reach a bigger audience. If they were no willing to share they would not have choosen a gpl type licence.
Cesco is offline Find More Posts by Cesco
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 06:30 AM
Registered User
United States, NV, Verdi-Mogul
Joined Mar 2012
19 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesco View Post
I think the developers should be proud that their work will reach a bigger audience. If they were no willing to share they would not have choosen a gpl type licence.
Absolutely. If you want closed-control of a project then it needs a closed license. If you release the project under open source licensing then you have no grounds to whine when someone picks it up and takes it to a bigger audience.

I really appreciate the work that the developers put into this, but I also believe that it'll be better for all with a larger audience.

The flytron forum hasn't had a single post in two months, it's hardly a hotbed of activity
henkster is offline Find More Posts by henkster
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 07:00 AM
Registered User
Sardinia, Italy
Joined May 2009
74 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by henkster View Post
Absolutely. If you want closed-control of a project then it needs a closed license. If you release the project under open source licensing then you have no grounds to whine when someone picks it up and takes it to a bigger audience.

I really appreciate the work that the developers put into this, but I also believe that it'll be better for all with a larger audience.

The flytron forum hasn't had a single post in two months, it's hardly a hotbed of activity
Yes, this is the point.
For now it seems that we need HK and their "few bucks dreams" to follow and to credit one of the most interesting project in the last years.
Please, don't misunderstand my words, I'm really happy for new contributors and project development.
I quote an old post between Melih and me just to underline Flytron's attitude with community, their business and DIY contributors:
me:
"After a few hours of work I made this super simple motion based r/c controller compatibile with futaba modules and based on Flytron's Lay-Z open source project.
I do not have much money this time to support Melih and Bora buying their hardware..so I build it with some junk and an arduino nano.."
Melih:
"Please dont worry about supporting us, you are already supporting us with good ideas. We are feeling better for this kind of usages than money support "

"open" does not means nothing without the respect and a fair way to make business.
cheers, sandro
Frazz is offline Find More Posts by Frazz
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2012, 11:34 AM
Registered User
Joined Dec 2007
538 Posts
I got my orange 433 today, and it works. I could not resist to install the openlrsNG firmware on it, and that works too. Quite happy so far.

The modules have the arduino bootloader and a custom version of openlrs installed. The ftdi serial programmer SHOULD be the 3.3V type not the usual 5V type. I did use the 5V type, but you should not since the rf module will fry sooner or later.

Range test not done yet. The original antenna doesent look convincing.

I did have a manufacturing fault on the TX module. Hope this is an isolated event. The connector was not properly soldered, and the ppm pin did not make frim contact. Luckily after some wiggling i did see it.
Cesco is offline Find More Posts by Cesco
Last edited by Cesco; Dec 17, 2012 at 12:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted Anyone got a good 433mhz UHF RX Antenna? wamdue FPV Equipment (FS/W) 3 Feb 24, 2014 02:19 PM
Question 'Sander' 1/4 wave monopole - correct length for 433MHz UHF? Kahnx FPV Equipment 11 Dec 23, 2013 09:19 AM
For Sale Chainlink UHF system + few matching Rx's i3dm FPV Equipment (FS/W) 0 Apr 22, 2012 06:58 AM
Discussion stiff antenna for 433Mhz UHF Rx ? i3dm FPV Talk 14 Feb 17, 2012 01:25 PM
Sold HK "Orange" Satellite for HK "Orange" Rx rikybob Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 1 Jan 29, 2011 03:19 PM