Clearview 2.0 Racer Ground Station

Check out the new ground station from Clearview in this post from user Rfriedman...


ClearView 2.0 Racer


I'd like to start a thread for the new ClearView 2.0 Racer. It is a 5.8GHz FPV video receiver that improves ClearView's digital enhancement.

Having just received my receiver a few days ago, I have created a few videos showing both overviews and some flight footage (see below).

In short, compared to the original ClearView ground station, the ClearView 2.0 has the following features:

  • 7dB more sensitivity
  • Smaller Form Factor
  • OLED display
  • Scroll Wheel = no more 1 button interface!!!
  • In-goggle menu system at full NTSC/PAL resolution
  • Greater image stability and brightness compensation at low signal
  • 2s-6s input
  • BLE bluetooth module support on the way for remote configuration

So far, I'd say Iftron nailed it with this receiver. Everything has been working great and the image stability is spot on. For the next month I plan to do lots of testing of the video receiver, so please let me know what you would like to see.

Software version I run = 1.14



Cleaview 2.0 Review (6 min 9 sec)

Flight Test 1 - Parking Garage

Clearview 2.0 Test #1 - Parking Garage Multipath Torture Test (9 min 53 sec)

Please try to keep this thread respectful and related to the CV2.0 to be useful as a resource for other potential purchases or existing owners. Debates about analog vs digital or other products belong in other threads. While I enjoy the debate, it is off-topic for the purposes of this thread. Start a new thread and invite me!

As always, I will try to answer questions you have about ClearView tech here, but if you need more in-depth support, please email me at [email protected]. Please note I do not work at Iftron and cannot provide order/shipping/refund/stock info, I just use that email for iftron product related stuff. I prefer email for communication over RCG private message, Facebook, or my personal phone.

Last edited by Rfriedman; Jul 09, 2019 at 02:33 AM..
Thread Tools
Jul 07, 2019, 07:08 PM
ClearView Rocks!
Quacker's Avatar

7dBm More? Seriously?

Is 7dBm more sensitivity even possible?
Jul 08, 2019, 08:24 AM
g0t rabb1t?
ABLomas's Avatar
Need side-by-side comparison from someone unrelated to iftron, then we will see if this is good or bad ;-)
Now with several alternatives available (which reconstruct analog image from several sources) CV should offer something really innovative for this price or this will go again into recycle bin together with google module....
Jul 08, 2019, 12:02 PM
Registered User
Originally Posted by ABLomas
Now with several alternatives available (which reconstruct analog image from several sources)

Could you elaborate more on these options??? I am very interested in post-reception image enhancement, basically a RCA feed to some unit which would try to reduce the noise/interference by digita filtering... Probably the same thing that Iftron is doing...

What I feel is that post-reception image processing can indeed enhance the "feel" of the video link and make it appear as having much higher sensitivity. In fact, what we do here is equivalent to reducing the bandwidth significantly (since the images are more or less static, in practical terms averaging four frames to filter out noise would not affect the total video information: only if you have extreme turn rates where the camera would sweep more than 40-60 per those 2-4 frames which we try to average out... Now reducing bandwidth can indeed increase the range, and net gains of several dbm's is indeed possible...
Jul 08, 2019, 02:01 PM
PetruSoroaga's Avatar
I don't get it, 300 USD?
For that price you can do a HD sistem and don't need to worry about noise.
Is this price so high just because racing guys care about latency? Because I don't see regular fpv people spending 300 usd for an analog receiver in this day and age.
Am I missing something?
Jul 08, 2019, 02:07 PM
g0t rabb1t?
ABLomas's Avatar
Originally Posted by PetruSoroaga
I don't get it, 300 USD?
Pfff, this is cheap compared to previous products

Originally Posted by chileflora
Could you elaborate more on these options???
Rapidfire, truedx, ....
Jul 08, 2019, 03:30 PM
Are we not men? We are DEVO!
xanuser's Avatar
Originally Posted by PetruSoroaga
Am I missing something?
minimal weight and size when compared to a HD system.
Jul 08, 2019, 04:36 PM
Registered User
I personally do not care about latency. And in fact averaging frames will always introduce latency. In fact, the whole process is not v ery easy one and the hardware is not simple and cheap... I was trying to see if it could be done with Raspberry pi, but without extensive external hardware it is not possible.

What you have to do here is convert analogue signal into digital stream. Then, a powerful processor has to process frames and do the averaging. In itself, the process is not very complicated, but it must be quick. And the latency would be the sum of the conversion A->D, waiting for the number of frames (2-3-4), and then processing, my hunch would be:
A->D : 50 mS
2 - 4 frames: 80 mS - 160 mS
processing and generating final frame: 50 mS

So we would be looking into a latency of 180 - 250 mS. I would be quite happy with such values,
Jul 08, 2019, 06:28 PM
g0t rabb1t?
ABLomas's Avatar
Originally Posted by chileflora
I personally do not care about latency. And in fact averaging frames will always introduce latency.
Nah, there is no need to average frames.
Just pick lines from two RX'es between hsync pulses, compare them and keep just one with better quality.
Almost zero latency introduced ("almost" - ~ 1/500 of frame latency, prob. noticeable only on scope) and quality improved. At least this is what rapidfire and older CV is doing, maybe not exactly this way, but very close.
And if you introduce latency - then what's the point in going analog at all? OpenHD TX system (including full HD cam, TX...) is starting at 12g (maybe less with completely depinned components), so only reason to stay with analog is latency.

But still, that claim about increased sensitivity is interesting. Previous ground station topic left so many questions unanswered. Doubt we will see independent testing of this unit, but who knows, i will keep following ;-)
Jul 08, 2019, 07:39 PM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
Racers and freestylers do very much care about latency. I don't fly at anything approaching
an elite level but I start to feel it above about 35-40ms and there are very few digital systems
that can match or beat that.

My biggest issue with digital systems, is how poorly the image degrades and recovers when
the signal is lost and restored. If it has any reasonable compression at all (which is
necessary to make use of any decent DSS transmission protocols), then it's using
periodic keyframes and when you lose a keyframe, all or part of the image will freeze until
the next clean keyframe is received, sometimes seconds later. You also generally
get very minimal warning before the image is lost. It can go from perfect, to completely
unusable in the span of a few frames.

Here's an example of OpenHD being tested non-LoS.
Open.HD Outdoor Non Line Of Sight Test (EZ wifibroadcast Branch) (7 min 29 sec)

It's great.. great, great.. gone.. great.. gone.. gone gone.. etc..

I personally had a similar experience with Connext Prosight. It's enjoyable when the
signal is strong, but terrifying when you have a frozen frame with weird updates
drawing on top of it, and it takes seconds before the next keyframe.
e.g. This is my own flight. Look what happens at 41 seconds.
(2 min 36 sec)

That would not have been a challenging environment for *any* modern 5.8Ghz analog

You might argue that no analog system could match the distance in that first vid in
that environment but at least you generally know when you're approaching the limits
and can turn around, or climb out, instead of just instantly losing the image. In that little
location I was flying Prosight, I would have had some static behind
the bushy parts of the trees and regained a clear image
the *instant* I dropped back low into clear LoS instead of seconds later.

As for CV's competitors, keep in mind that the original CV groundstation is *still* the
benchmark by which most diversity systems can be judged and I've yet to see
any of them truly match or exceed its performance. Yes they compete at a lower pricepoint
and are much more convenient for everyday flying, but CV2.0 is also at a lower pricepoint
and purports to have better performance than the original in several key areas, so
it may be a good value proposition in very challenging environments.

And if we ignore its proven performance in multipathing environment, more folks are
pushing the range limits on sub 250gr aircraft (Nano Goblin and similar) so if that 7dB
sensitivity gain is real, it might be worth it when you're out away from civilization where
the noise floor is low.
Jul 08, 2019, 07:43 PM
Registered User
There are two problems with using two Rxs- I fly long range, you can not really use two Rxs, the antenna I use is dish antenna 60 x90 cm. So this is dead end. You would have to use two dishes?! And what is the point, just use one Rx, one 1.2 m dish antenna, and you would get unlimited range - 180-200 km.

Second, how would you determine which Rx image has better quality (except for using RSSI)?

HD has range limitation and the sudden drop out; a couple of months ago I have seen 30-40 km range as maximum on their thread; not sure if they improved it, but I lost interest in it.

Latency... Do not care at all, 300 mS probably is still good. I fly stabilized mode.

But... If you do image post-processing (averaging frames), you can really improve the video quality, eliminating snow, eliminating dark spots, stuff like this. If done properly, 100 km video could look like 25 km video, crystal clear...
Last edited by chileflora; Jul 09, 2019 at 12:00 AM.
Jul 08, 2019, 08:12 PM
USA: LakeGeorge, New York
Can i use this in wooded areas vs my 1.3 XLR Clearview GS?
I'm using a Big Trxxass Summit Truck Ground FPV'ing in the forest.

which is best since this is the xtreme 5.8 diversity out now?
Latest blog entry: My FAVORITE FPV CockPits'!!!!
Jul 08, 2019, 09:04 PM
Registered User
Originally Posted by rclab1
Can i use this in wooded areas vs my 1.3 XLR Clearview GS?
I'm using a Big Trxxass Summit Truck Ground FPV'ing in the forest.

which is best since this is the xtreme 5.8 diversity out now?
Still way better off with your 1.3 system. 5.8 has very bad penetration no matter how much processing is done.
Jul 08, 2019, 09:36 PM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
Agreed. 1.3Ghz will still kick *any* 5.8Ghz system's butt in terms of penetration
through vegetation, and the XLR Clearview GS is about as good as you can get
in that regard (some other VRX do better with near channel swamping and such).
Jul 08, 2019, 09:44 PM
USA: LakeGeorge, New York
I just ask (hoping) I wouldn't carry big arse 1.3 GS antennas anymore...lolol
Latest blog entry: My FAVORITE FPV CockPits'!!!!

Quick Reply

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help! pb wifi ez-wifiboardcast for make ground station via raspberry pi 0 w and sp racing. martinjulienp Beginner Multirotor Drones 0 Apr 13, 2019 11:07 AM
Cool ROBZTA MOD - HIDDEN SECRET 2 antennas MOD for DJI Ground Station ground end Receiver ROBERT MONTES Multirotor Drone Talk 2 Oct 02, 2017 12:42 AM
Cool ROBZTA MOD - HIDDEN SECRET 2 antennas MOD for DJI Ground Station ground end RX ROBERT MONTES FPV Equipment 3 Oct 27, 2016 10:36 PM
Help! DJI Vision App 1.0.52 Ground Station Crashing MikeDrone7 Multirotor Drone Talk 8 Nov 13, 2015 09:05 PM
Yippee! First public view of Ground Station 1.0 jrohland FPV Talk 3 Sep 14, 2008 08:55 AM