|Jan 29, 2012, 05:25 AM|
Joined Jul 2009
|Jan 29, 2012, 06:18 AM|
Setting fail safe in the air, i cant see any difference to doing it on the ground once trimmed and landed? Just add throttle as you would if it was in the air.
Unless its something you doe every few minutes to be over safe???
|Jan 29, 2012, 07:11 AM|
Joined Dec 2009
|Jan 29, 2012, 03:11 PM|
|Jan 29, 2012, 11:50 PM|
I think I'm done ground range testing this one.
Best of the night was 30.5 miles (49 km) from an overpass right at the airport (measured with GPS..
Google Earth says a bit longer, but I think it adds in ground distance, up and down hills). Best on
video is 28.something because I obviously couldn't stop on the overpass (contemplated
going to the upper deck of the parking garage, but not worth whatever they'd charge
me to spend 15 minutes there). RL Rx in my Skywalker with all gear powered
was thoroughly tested at 25 miles and seemed ok.
I've got a question for you sid. Does the RL Rx RSSI reflect Rf signal strength, or
is it a measure of packet loss? I ask because even 25 miles away it would indicate
100% RSSI on my display when it was happy (light blinking fast, smooth cycling of
the servos), and it sure seemed like it'd start to stutter a little any time the
RSSI went down. And when it did go down, it'd go down really fast.
If it was Rf signal strength, obviously one would expect to see it go down
progressively with distance.
|Jan 30, 2012, 12:01 AM|
Joined Mar 2011
|Jan 30, 2012, 12:08 AM|
Joined Mar 2011
Hi, Ian, many thanks for your testing report.
yes the rssi = packet rate. rangeOSD can be read the RSSI over uart port.
|Jan 30, 2012, 03:44 AM|
Bit misleading if it is only a packet loss indicator.
Anyways, when will you have stock again?
|Jan 30, 2012, 02:57 PM|
into generic conclusions.
In my specific high Rf noise environment, I can confirm that RL outperforms my TSLRS
system on the ground range test. Keep in mind though, that TSLRS has been
used out 63km by R. Montiel in the air (.5W to 40km, 1W to 50km, and 2W with 6dB
antenna out to 63km) so it's fairly well proven.
I use TSLRS currently mostly because of the variable power switch, but have had some
really inconsistent performance at very close range that is hard to explain. I'll literally fly
5 miles out one day without a glitch, and get failsafes half a mile away the next. However,
the soon to ship TSLRS v6, includes both hardware and software changes that sound
like it may result in significant performance improvements.
I never ground range tested DL to its limit (stopped at 12.6 miles, running out of LoS
on the northern extent of my test route), so for all I know it might go just as far (I think
Mike said he went 25 miles with in the air once). I had various other issues with DL
that prevented me from using it much, and then it just conked out completely so I moved
on to test and fly other systems. My DL system is currently being updated/replaced so
maybe I'll drive straight out to the furthest point of my route above to see how it compares.
For whatever it's worth, I own and have range tested RmileC UHF on the same route
with its original stock antennas, as well as testing it near various Rf noisy components
(like the GoPro I fly with), and based on those results I've never put it in a plane and
likely never will. I think its Achilles heel is high sensitivity Rx combined with extended
frequency range and no input filtering at all, so it gets swamped by external Rfi really easily,
even when it's not in the 433Mhz band.
Note that all this range testing is not because I have any great desire to do
long range flights. It's generally just to see what kind of link budget margin I
have available. From the very beginning, all I've really wanted is 100% reliable control
in the 2-3 mile range while flying aggressively low, or flying near an urban area, etc.
So far, one of my biggest headaches has been some powerful external Rfi from DTV
broadcast towers which broadcast in the 470Mhz and up range. I am hoping that
the fact that the RL Rx has a SAW filter to narrow its view of the band, will help filter
out that nearby Rfi, and prevent it from getting swamped. So far RL system *seems* to
be more noise resistant to noise than the others, but won't know if it really
cures this specific problem until I get it in that airspace. All the other UHF systems I've
flown (TSLRS, DL, ezUHF) all get thrashed by that tower, even flying a couple miles away
|Jan 30, 2012, 03:02 PM|
work at 459Mhz, which got me looking at the UK bandplan. It sure looks like
433-434Mhz band is full of other stuff. While I can't explain difference between CL
and RL, I do wonder if you're just getting completely stepped on by the
primary users of the band.
Was your CL on exactly the same plane with exactly the same components? (no new
cameras, regulators, different ways to power stuff.. etc)
|Jan 30, 2012, 03:09 PM|
|Category||Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Yippee!||DRAGON LINK - New V2, Professional Grade Long Range FPV System, Always in Stock !||JettPilot||FPV Equipment||32264||Today 08:21 AM|
|New Product||ChainLink UHF Long Range System||siim227||FPV Talk||2853||Jul 01, 2013 04:23 PM|
|New Product||ChainLink--The new UHF narrow band long range system||BEVRC||FPV Talk||878||Jun 08, 2013 06:53 PM|
|New Product||UHF Long range JR / Futaba module||Hooks||FPV Talk||18||Aug 13, 2012 05:46 AM|
|Sold||[VDS]LRS thomas scherrer UHF + 2 receivers long range||LTS49||FPV Equipment (FS/W)||8||Jul 22, 2011 03:55 PM|