PDA

View Full Version : The inexperienced pilot thread



Pages : [1] 2

Scotttu
4th October 2013, 06:17 PM
Lately there's been a couple of inexperienced people go out with DJI phantoms or other rotorcraft WITH a profound lack of experience and they crashed into things.

So this thread will be a complaint thread, and if you *are* an inexperienced pilot come in in here and read what you should *NOT* do.

First, don't fly 2.4 ghz in the city on a DJI Phantom from a balcony. Dumb, plain old stupid.
Don't fly a DJI Phantom and claim ot be a "Professional" photographer and then get it stuck on an iconic landmark statue (In the armpit no less).

Todays crash was a guy in Australia that hit the bridge, but they actually had a rule about 30' for aircraft and they have the aircraft so if someone wants it back they will be getting some fines...

Trappy has done some VERY cool things that have benefitted FPV and the hobby.
I think inexperienced pilots should not necessarily try to mimick him, which is difficult enough :D -

So this is *NOT* a bash thread to inexperienced pilots, rather, a place to show what experienced pilots would or would not do.


I had the chance to film an Aircraft Carrier. I chose wisely and did not do this, and thankfully because the 1000 watts of 433 mhz blasting off of it would have been u g ly. There are laws in place about distance so it's not like I can scream my zephyr over the flight deck (I am working on getting a captains permission though!)...

I don't fly near military bases, especially one local ot me as they have a 1.3, 2.4, and a 5.8 jammer going out, you get within a mile of that and your video goes bye-bye (My buddy lives within half a mile and absolutely cannot get video until he's out of the area).....


So ust post what you have avoided, based on experience.

WildWill
4th October 2013, 06:30 PM
Great thread Scott!

Hopefully people are taking note of where things go when things go wrong.

We hear lots of stories about guys crashing their drones into stuff but never hear about fines faced, other than Trappy's. And even that business, what a huge pain in the neck that has to be, even if he wins it. How about this guy in New York, are they going to nail him up? Will we hear about the outcome?

Hey, it's risk and reward, just like everything in this world. Mitigate risk with knowledge and good judgement.

Reliku
5th October 2013, 04:12 PM
I don't claim to be 'experienced' in any way, but I'd like to add some words of wisdom regardless:

The obvious one: don't fly over people and definitely don't do so if you're not familiar with the bahaviour of your aircraft: Murphy's law states that it WILL go wrong and you will crash into someone.

Another obvious one: don't be a showoff. It's always cool to show people the amazing hobby we have, but don't do things that are dangerous or that you haven't done before. It takes but one mistake to gain a lot of negative publicity.

Check for errors while flying, and FIX THEM. Don't be like "oh that loose wire will probably be fine". The wire flew into my prop in my case :rolleyes:

Ah well, there's a lot you can do wrong, but everyone makes mistakes. Just make sure that you don't screw up in public. It's OK to do risky things, such as flying over populated areas, but make sure you know what you're doing and that you've done the same thing ten times over without mistakes in an unpopulated area ;)

Seems like an useful thread! I didn't know that one about jammers on military bases :o

Snoopy
5th October 2013, 04:24 PM
My .02, don't bring friends or family out to watch your FPV maiden. That will only lead to performance anxiety and undue pressure. Give your nerves the gift of time and patience and not feel you have to get it right and right now. At most, bring a spotter.

I brought friends to my LOS maiden and I got so anxious I forgot to bring my wing spar after carefully packing everything. Still didn't notice when I put it together in the field! LOL Flew it and kept saying "the wind must be crazy, look at the wings. It barely wants to turn!" LOL So lucky to have landed it. For some reason only when I disassembled the wings I instantly remembered there was an important piece missing. Live and learn, fortunately.

spiked3
5th October 2013, 06:04 PM
The first thing you do is again, put down 2.4 control as if there is something special about it being worse than others.

I've questioned you before, and heard no response, and again I will ask;

What is it about 2.4 that makes it especially bad in the circumstance you mentioned?

Would it not serve the purpose of the thread more to say "do not fly ANY frequency for control or video, around buildings, until you understand the consequences" ?

DJI phantoms, and Blade 350s are sold to casual hobby town customers who came in to buy a train set. They have no idea what they are buying, only what cool things they saw it do on a youtube video on the web. Oh, and look at all the OTHER cool things people do on youtube with their quads AND airplanes. Is there ANY question why inexperienced people are doing what they are doing? It is because hobby town (used generically) chose to make a profit rather than encourage responsible participation in the hobby. And from some of the advice I've gotten from hobby town, that actually may be the better outcome.

No, what we don't need is another unseen thread. What we need is people willing to reach out and mentor novices, via your local AMA field for starters. And IF a pilot chooses to progress beyond AMA, that is all well and dandy. But starting novices out on long range FPV is just plain as stupid as selling GoPro toting toys with no training what so ever.

powdermnky007
5th October 2013, 06:33 PM
I think dji should let manual be the only mode it can fly in for the first 20 hours. That would teach people how to fly and also to be scared of crashing and that crashes happen! People do dumb stuff and always will. I love watching "the worlds dumbest..." On tv. I don't think they'll ever have a shortage of episodes.

WildWill
5th October 2013, 07:27 PM
Todays crash was a guy in Australia that hit the bridge, but they actually had a rule about 30' for aircraft and they have the aircraft so if someone wants it back they will be getting some fines...

Any aircraft?

http://www.megahobby.com/productimages/gui/GUI55.jpg

Carbon
5th October 2013, 07:48 PM
Inexperienced pilots you say?

There was a story a while back on the Lab about a guy crashing his plane into a cow..who was that? :P

WildWill
5th October 2013, 08:44 PM
Inexperienced pilots you say?

There was a story a while back on the Lab about a guy crashing his plane into a cow..who was that? :P

Or that kid that had his plane stuck in a tree for a month?

BravoGolf
5th October 2013, 11:57 PM
Or that kid that had his plane stuck in a tree for a month?

^nice

Carbon
6th October 2013, 01:23 AM
Hey, I'm not claiming to be an expert..

Scotttu
6th October 2013, 01:40 AM
I've questioned you before, and heard no response, and again I will ask;

What is it about 2.4 that makes it especially bad in the circumstance you mentioned?



2.4 ghz is the garbage frequency of America.
Cordless phones, Microwaves, Wireless routers, you name it, it's on 2.4

That said my specific gripe is to the multi-pathing inability I've PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED in 2.4, I've watched people after people fly over chain link fences and aircraft fall from the sky.
To test that phenomenon I flew over a baseball park and each time I got over the chain link fence or parallel to it I've watched my signal go apeshit.
Perhaps because the links are almost exactly the bandwidth for 2.4, perhaps because it's just chainlink fencing and maybe 72mhz would do it too, although PREVIOUS to FPV my 72mhz never had an issue over those same chain link fences.

Second, 2.4ghz is EXTREMELY limited in Range, Ask AirtruksRus, I think he's got the record at 1.5 miles at Mt Si.

I've seen it go half a mile BEAUTIFULLY and I've seen it go 300 yards and failsafe.
LAST WEEKEND I watched guys flying and a plane just did it's own thing, he was able to recover it though.

I NEVER EXPERINECED THIS WITH 72MHZ IN 20 YEARS!!!!!!!!!! (Except once when I broke my antenna and made it about 100 yards before corkscrewing in.)

IMHO and experiences over the past 10-15 yeas that 2.4 has been out I can't say I would ever fly with it.

Not to mention when I'm flying FPV and someone turns on their radio without asking or checking, it causes all sorts of issues, *IF* they are standing in front of my antenna or in "The beam".
Personal experience twice now.

Scotttu
6th October 2013, 01:47 AM
Inexperienced pilots you say?

There was a story a while back on the Lab about a guy crashing his plane into a cow..who was that? :P

Yep, but not into people, not into a building and the cow was just fine.

You forgot about me landing on the water too, again, NO PEOPLE IN SIGHT :)
I learned a *LOT* from that experience, such as when your 2.4 Lawmate begins blinking out- REPLACE IT, and I've heard 2 or 3 other guys say theirs start blinking, REPLACE IT NOW!!!!!
Next time I had a Lawmate blink out, I brought the TechPod in and immediate replaced it, blinking stopped - saved a plane.

I learned!!!!!!!!!! Positive spin! And that is what this thread is about......

Which is *WHY* I do my testing over fields, or the bay I can't help it if the cow just happened to be standing in the dead center of the field! :D


But I also remember a kid flying a plane into himself, which is fine......

You actually have to laugh about the cows, this was taken moments before I flew the Zeph, and look where the zeph went down.

http://www.tngbbs.com/photo/rc/Cows.jpg


http://www.tngbbs.com/photo/rc/carbon-ouch.jpg

spiked3
6th October 2013, 03:29 AM
A couple of weeks ago, I also tested chain link fences, directly in response to that assertion. Someone did reply in that thread and mentioned the same experience on other frequencies as well.

At taylor park. Spektrum 2G4, 1G3 video. Chain link fences, solid dirt barriers, trees, I never had a single radio glitch. I lost video through the dirt, but did not lose R/C on 2G4. I'm not arguing physics here, obviously 1G3 can go through (in an RF way) solid objects better than 2G4, but I will say Spektrum 2G4 handled it better, by more power, or more antennas, or smarter recovery I do not know which, but in reality, it did.

I know you have had some bad experiences with others on your frequency. But seriously, it is R/C and if you fly around others you have got to expect 2G4 radios to be turned on. 2G4 is the hobbies answer to not having to reserve frequencies. If you chose to fly 2G4 video, do it by yourself.

All of that being said, I am in no way questioning your experiences. Believe me, I've had my share of unique experiences. But I recognize that they do not define the norm.

I'll end it by saying, at the recent jets over whidbey, the guys with the checkbooks, and probably the educations, ALL flew 2G4. And they were all Futaba or JR. I don't think I saw 1 spektrum. They had no need for long range capabilities, but within range, there was certainly no issues with 2G4.

edit: interesting related read; http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2004972

WildWill
6th October 2013, 11:43 AM
Thinking back about things, I had a close call once at the La Push meet. I was flying and everything was fine, I was making a low pass over a sparsely populated beach. My video all of the sudden went to pure black, no static. I cut throttle and pulled up. That slowed the plane and put it into a stall. It speared into the beach, and could have come down blasting some unsuspecting beach goer. I was lucky in that it landed in an open space.

Cause of the blackout: Power distribution/video splitter box had terrible solder joint inside and the main power feed had decided to pop loose. I was going to destroy it and get a new one but the thought occurred, what if the new one has the same issues. I decided to open it up and fix all the bad solder joints.

We had a similar close save a while back when a friend video cable for he goggle decided to stop working mid flight, luckily I was standing there tuned into his flight and was able to hand him my goggles.

Hobby grade stuff.......it breaks from time to time. If you think it doesn't, you've got trouble coming your way.

Carbon
6th October 2013, 12:06 PM
Does anyone produce anything BUT hobby grade stuff? The closest we get to professional grade FPV equipment is IRC and TBS gear I guess..

Scotttu
6th October 2013, 12:08 PM
I know you have had some bad experiences with others on your frequency. But seriously, it is R/C and if you fly around others you have got to expect 2G4 radios to be turned on. 2G4 is the hobbies answer to not having to reserve frequencies. If you chose to fly 2G4 video, do it by yourself.

All of that being said, I am in no way questioning your experiences. Believe me, I've had my share of unique experiences. But I recognize that they do not define the norm.




I'm not saying other people haven't had success with 2.4 but I can say watching from 4 different flying fields the amazement when one's plane just falls or corkscrews in, the look on their face.

I am talking physics here, chain link fences and 2.4 do not get along. You might get lucky once or twice, or 16 times. Not every single plane that flew over them crashed but about once a week someone corkscrewed in right over the fences.

72mhz didn't have that problem, not in my experience, but 72mhz is limited to one person per channel.
2.4 counters that with spread spectrum. But when I'm at an FPV meet and someone just powers on their 2.4 without asking if anyone is a mile out on 2.4 video - that rather sucks.
But I hated 2.4 before that. It's a cheap way to reliably fly on a flying field.
You take your plane into your own hands if you push behind half a mile.

2.4 is also FAR cheaper to manufacture than 72mhz is now.
You can defend it all you want, have seen good things done with it, like the rescue of my EZStar.

But, that said I would never fly it, period. UHF is far more reliable.

And yes, I am very irritated that people just powered their 2.4 on without checking/asking at the last FPV meet that I was at. This is why you don't see me at FPV meets anymore.
This is also why we have informally created a UHF-Only meet, although this summer was about getting custody of my daughter and flying and visiting was limited.

Jump to 2:20, I can reproduce this every single day flying parallel to chain link fences, every day.
The interference is the cell tower about 65 degrees to my left.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaC7_FBOkM4

Reliku
6th October 2013, 12:19 PM
I fly on 2.4 on my quad, but that's all short range. 5.8 video also. But if I do fly in town, I have to know where I can and can't fly. And if I mess that up, I'm pretty ****ed, because you just lose all control.

35mhz (or 72 where you guys live) is probably best, since it's reserved for rc flying. No wifi routers or other crap disturbing your link.

In fact, this makes me wonder. Why does UHF get a better range than 72mhz (on the same power output)?

WildWill
6th October 2013, 12:22 PM
Does anyone produce anything BUT hobby grade stuff? The closest we get to professional grade FPV equipment is IRC and TBS gear I guess..

Some of the problems can be mitigated by:

Making your own cables for everything. Why? So you know for sure it's built for the task.

Taking apart components and doing the QC inspections yourself. I thought my solder joints were bad, hell mine look awesome compared to theirs.

EDIT: Not sure of this one, I'm sure one of you guys knows. What props are the least likely to break on a quad. This is NOT about performance but about durability. If you CAN'T have a prop break during the flight, how could one go about insuring that?

spiked3
6th October 2013, 12:52 PM
Does anyone produce anything BUT hobby grade stuff? The closest we get to professional grade FPV equipment is IRC and TBS gear I guess..

Lol. That was hilarious. you were trying to be funny, right?

c5galaxy engineer
6th October 2013, 01:49 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaC7_FBOkM4

OKAY! okay! Scott.......you just answered a nagging and frustrating question that I have been struggling with. I could NOT for the life of me figure out where my video interference was coming from. This video you posted is pretty much exactly what I have been getting at my house when I fly. Wouldn't you know it there is a large chain link fence separating my lot and a shop next door. I also am flying around concrete building and some metal buildings and thought that was my problem but that video is eerily familiar and it has to be it. The fence is only about 30' from my CGS where I set it up and I am flying parallel to it a lot........duh!!

I have NEVER heard about the Chain Link phenomena with 2.4 but it would make sense in my case. When I take the CGS out to my flying area I usually get crystal clear vid. I even tore my EZOSD off last night in an attempt to trouble shoot my problem.

Reliku
6th October 2013, 01:50 PM
Ah, I found an answer. UHF will be able to bounce around more than VHF (72/35 mhz). VHF has better penetrating capabilities, but UHF makes up for that by being more able to go around obstacles. If it has to go through, VHF is better, but UHF is more capable of not having to go through :)

criccio
6th October 2013, 10:24 PM
Don't do stupid crap like this, no matter how experienced you are. (These guys just posted this today, btw)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNRoBmgfbMc

WildWill
7th October 2013, 12:32 AM
Don't do stupid crap like this, no matter how experienced you are. (These guys just posted this today, btw)

For a second I thought that was a repost of Sentry''s flight

Hucker
7th October 2013, 02:25 AM
Scotttu: Are you on LP or CP when you get that interfernece? 60 acres is surrounded by chain link and I have made a lot of high speed passes at 6 to 20ft along that fence (parallel and perpendicular) and never noticed interference of any kind. That is 500mW LM + CrossHair on 2G4. It is my guess this is a polarization issue rather than a frequency issue since our gear is very similar. If you like I can post the video.

As for 2G4 control being 'bad' I really have to point out that the number 4 range flight at FPVlab was done on FRsky at a range of 80+km...50 miles! How did they do it? The same way UHF guys increase range, better antennas, better wiring and more tx power. There is truth that guys screw up on spektrum (or 2G4 control) all the time but that doesn't mean 2G4 for control can't be reliable, it just means that beginners can get in trouble.

I believe there is a strong Sentry, Sander, Trappy bias at FPV lab skewed towards long(er) range FPV. For long range 2G4-control is work compared to UHF and because of the complications in getting it to work for long range it was rejected as a solution. I suspect that vast majority of FPV is done on 5G8+2G4+under-500m range. THis combination is VERY economical to fly.

Byro
7th October 2013, 02:55 AM
I fly in the large local parks but as soon as too many people arrive, I land and leave. It is not worth the risk to them or myself.

I prefer to fly in the country, but my main field there is four hours away. I also only fly quads in the park, no planes.

Rexnoobs247
7th October 2013, 09:10 AM
I remember a time when I forgot to put my wing spar in my sky surfer. I took off and my buddy (who knows literally nothing about rc planes) says "man those wings are really bent up, is it supposed to be that way? It was then I noticed I had no banking authority. I'll never do that again

Rexnoobs247
7th October 2013, 09:14 AM
Scotttu:
As for 2G4 control being 'bad' I really have to point out that the number 3 range flight at FPVlab was done on FRsky at a range of 80+km...50 miles! How did they do it? The same way UHF guys increase range, better antennas, better wiring and more tx power. There is truth that guys screw up on spektrum (or 2G4 control) all the time but that doesn't mean 2G4 for control can't be reliable, it just means that beginners can get in trouble.

I think that flight was done with 2 Rx's on the plane, each with a slightly directional antenna to the front or back respectively, and a patch antenna with booster on the Tx if I'm not mistaken. Furthest, I've ever gotten on 2.4 control was about 300 meters before I failsafed. But then again I wasn't trying to make it a long range system either.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 09:30 AM
Hucker, that video was made with linear. I haven't re-flown it to test the CP.
You are correct on 2.4.
But if the average guy goes to the store and buys a transmitter and tries to FPV with it he's going to get in trouble. Great park fliers.

Hucker
7th October 2013, 10:23 AM
Rexnoobs: My point exactly, if you don't know what you are doing you can get a few hundred meters...and if you do study you can get 50 miles (which is equivalent to maybe 200! miles on UHF BTW). I'm a technical person and once there is a counter example to a rule, the rule needs to be examined regardless of how great the rulemaker was. Physics does not say 2G4 is bad for control, people do. I'm not saying every 2G4 control can go far or is suitable, just that it can be done and I've seen local guys get out to a mile safely on many occasions. For many users this is WAY more than enough range.

That said the easiest way to go far is to slap a UHF system on your plane and be done with it.

Rexnoobs247
7th October 2013, 10:40 AM
Completely agree. Mine was just a cheap stock 2.4 that came with my sky surfer years ago when I first got into FPV. I'm always impressed when people go long range on anything but UHF. Going long range on UHF is easy as long as your video link is solid. The challenge comes when you start using "Non long range" freqs for control. Then it becomes impressive.

Great, now I want to see how far I can push 2.4... Thanks a lot ;)

Hucker
7th October 2013, 10:49 AM
Scotttu: the average guy will not have any success with FPV certainly if he's buying anything by "walking into a store". Let's talk about guys that do their homework and are willing to abide by limitations like antenna gain, RSSI, fresnel zones, avoiding 'bad' gear etc. I've watched people fly 2G4 safely to a mile and modified flight parameters while watching their RSSI. I am listening to guys like spiked explain what they and their group are doing and having success with. It is pretty clear to me that while UHF kicks ass, it is not needed if you are willing spend modest effort to learn the rules. It seems that new 2G4 controllers are pretty good inside of 500 or 1000m (and following all of the component separation rules 'we' follow).

I'm not trying to be a jerk but those of you calling out all forms of 2G4 control who have not given it a solid effort (recently) should be atleast tempering your "it can't be done" attitude when there are many having success out there that refutes at least some (if not most) of what you are claiming.

Like the many guys out there having success flying GoPro and using RTH the 2G4 control guys I'm sure feel apprehension telling people they are having success for fear of the "I can't recommend 2G4 for FPV" response they are sure to get should they post their setups.

btown2
7th October 2013, 11:52 AM
2.4 control is just fine. Like any other frequency it has advantages and disadvantages. My Futaba system far exceeds the range of my 250 mw 5.8 video so for the moment I have no real reason to upgrade it.

When I first started fpv I wanted to test my T8FG for range. So I found the longest road near me and left the plane with a buddy at one end. the road gave nice los for 1.2 miles. At 1.2 miles I had full control from INSIDE my car with the null end of the antenna pointing at the plane. I have been unable to find the max range for my system because I cant find any longer straight los roads to use and my video is only good for 3/4 of a mile.

http://fpvlab.com/forums/showthread.php?324-2.5-miles-(4KM)-range-with-stock-Futaba-FASST-2.4GHz!!

Once I save up for 1.3 video I will try to replicate these results.

spiked3
7th October 2013, 12:38 PM
Well back to thread topic, my advice to inexperienced is do not go into a store and buy a 2.4 radio and expect to do long range FPV. However an inexperienced person should not be attempting long range FPV in the first place.

There is plenty of learning to fly, and short range FPV first, and that can be done without problem, using a spektrum or any other quality 2.4 R/C. I think the current recommendation is 2.4 R/C with 5.8 video to keep it simple in the beginning. The argument might be "buy the best, for the eventual final purpose." I did that. My personal experience was I wasted the first 3 months trying to get it to work. Finally came back to it, almost a year later after doing what I said, short range first, and still haven't flown further than my 2.4 radio's range.

Someone smart once told me, you build up confidence for long range a little at a time. Probably still the best advice I've gotten in FPV.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 12:44 PM
Well back to topic, someone mentioned flying with the GoPro, who does it?

I watched a local guy do it, plugged my goggles in and rode around as he flew. I was astonished at how nice it was.

I've heard a lot of war stories about GoPro's shutting down so I never wanted to take that chance.

Hucker
7th October 2013, 12:55 PM
CaliDave flies GoPro. I've encouraged him to make it more known that is what he does but he is tired of very vocal people ragging on him. IMO CaliDave is the most accomplished all around FPV pilot at the lab. (He flies eagle tree to BTW)

+1 on 5G8+2G4. I hated 72MHz.

MASHTON1138
7th October 2013, 01:06 PM
Well back to topic, someone mentioned flying with the GoPro, who does it?

I watched a local guy do it, plugged my goggles in and rode around as he flew. I was astonished at how nice it was.

I've heard a lot of war stories about GoPro's shutting down so I never wanted to take that chance.

I flew the gopro video out on my tri-copter. It was a nice picture in the goggles. I only did this to save a little bit of weight but it did just fine for me, so no reason to say it is a total no go IMO. It's risk v. reward I think and on the tri I wasn't going to be flying for more than 12 minutes so I wasn't worried about it shutting down on me. The shut down issues are supposedly fixed on the Hero 2 and 3, but I still personally feel safer running a CCD for my flight cam and the GP is solely for recording that HD footage.

Rexnoobs247
7th October 2013, 01:07 PM
AbsoluteAltitudes flies with a gopro for all his multis for the most part. He's had his share of mid air shut downs, but the video is really nice through the goggles. Note to new guys: its not HD in the goggles.

MASHTON1138
7th October 2013, 01:14 PM
CaliDave flies GoPro. I've encouraged him to make it more known that is what he does but he is tired of very vocal people ragging on him. IMO CaliDave is the most accomplished all around FPV pilot at the lab. (He flies eagle tree to BTW)

+1 on 5G8+2G4. I hated 72MHz.

I agree on 5G8+2G4 for starting. I personally LOVE 72MHz and fly my 72MHz controlled planes more than my 2.4 controlled planes.

I am leaning more to the answers to the "noob" questions are becoming more and more grey area than black and white. I mean we all know that what works for me may not work for you, so no sense in saying you have to do something one way and that is all there is to it.

I do agree that Dave is very knowledgeable and should be sharing his success with the GP as flight cam. But there is a caveat to that. He needs to show what he is doing to be successful so there is a base line to start from when doing that.

airtruksrus
7th October 2013, 01:47 PM
What Scott brought up about 2g4 having shortened range is true in areas where the cell towers and wifi creates overlapping interference which is most likely the culprit that brought down my plane last year. Only by having 1 watt being pushed out at the tx was I able to learn that it only extends the range a small amount vice where someone who lives in a region that is relatively free of all the overlapping 2g4 noise and with all the precautions taken, long distances are possible. I learned the hard way 2g4 is not the way to go for this area as with finding the entire 2g4 band is useless for video and found 2.3 has a vast improvement as a fairly unused frequency over here.

All the pilots flying at the "Jets over Whidbey" event using 2g4 should be fine since they are flying LOS and even my first gen Spektrum radio is reliable up to 3/4 mile until you fly through visible moisture. 72 MHz is almost wide open and a very small chance of getting shot down from another pilot.

If things keep going the way they are, more inexperienced fliers are going to create possible incidents unless we are able to interdict if given the opportunity. Great way to set them off in the right direction.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 01:49 PM
The only thing I hate about 72mhz is the antenna length :D

Scott - It was actually amazing to see you get 1.xx miles at Mt Si from 2.4, at the time I thought you were on UHF.

I'm not against people flying GoPro, it's risky, but if you have reliable RTH then so be it....

For me it's just about known reliability. I've heard some GoPro's have never done it and others have.

CaliDave is definitely well rounded, I wonder if he has any shutdowns or how he mitigates that.

airtruksrus
7th October 2013, 02:04 PM
Yup, wasn't able to get the UHF before then and was pushing 2.4 FrSky in the wrong area, huge lesson learned. Been really impressed with the reliability of the Ezuhf lite receivers. Just can't fly 2.4 video around Whidbey, getting strong wifi in almost every direction, similar to 1.28 down in the Imperial valley in California. 2.3 might just be the ticket for a short while till another service starts occupying part of that band.

airtruksrus
7th October 2013, 02:06 PM
If I use the GoPro for any video, it'll be paired up with another camera on a video switch for the possible shut down.

Carbon
7th October 2013, 02:12 PM
2.4 and 5.8 is an awesome combo. However the only 2.4ghz system I would trust in FrSky or Futaba FASST. I took my wing out to about 3/4 of a mile on 2.4ghz FrSky with a 7dbi patch and I'm sure that (judging by range testing) I could make it out to about 1.5 miles before a failsafe. 1.5 miles is waaaaayy farther than I fly day to day.
It all comes down to installation and the system you are using. I'm looking at you Spektrum!

BacklashRC
7th October 2013, 02:49 PM
"Chain link fence, wire mesh with 1 - 1 1/2" spacing acts as a 1/2" wave that blocks a 2.4 GHz signal."

I found the above quote on Cisco's web page dedicated to troubleshooting RF communication problems for their hardware.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk722/tk809/technologies_tech_note09186a00800948cb.shtml

I am sure there is more info out there. It was just a quick Google search.

With that said I still fly multirotors with 2.4 ;). I will switch to UHF when I finally put a plank into the air.

ssassen
7th October 2013, 03:35 PM
CaliDave flies GoPro. I've encouraged him to make it more known that is what he does but he is tired of very vocal people ragging on him. IMO CaliDave is the most accomplished all around FPV pilot at the lab. (He flies eagle tree to BTW)

+1 on 5G8+2G4. I hated 72MHz.

Eagletree, GoPro for piloting, does he use dual batteries too? If so the guy is an accident waiting to happen I'm sure, but I love him, he's good people.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 03:55 PM
Dual batteries - ? One for video the other for FPV or just two in parallel? I heard you mention that somewhere else....

I use the one battery system, albeit with two batteries in my wings...

spiked3
7th October 2013, 03:55 PM
Actually it's around 1.23" at 1/4 wave length

http://www.csgnetwork.com/freqwavelengthcalc.html

And quite common for a fence to be around 1.25"

http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/parts/title07/07.018.0003.htm

So certainly very very possible.

The CISCO trouble shooting guide references line of sight blockage of 2.4. I am guessing what we are talking (R/C control wise) about is a chain link fence being a good reflection surface for other 2.4 interference, which is completely plausible. It depends on the robustness of the frequency hopping and it's ability to deal with it. The other thing I will remind everyone is that this stuff is software based. Everyone, and I mean everyone, comes out with a crappy revision at some point or another on every frequency on every device ever made. To make a decision based on a 'bad hair day' is foolish.

The general R/C community has adopted and embraced 2.4 wholeheartedly. Is it perfect? heck no. Do 'bermuda triangles' exist at some AMA R/C fields? Absolutely. Should everyone avoid 2.4? That would be foolish for an inexperienced pilot.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 03:59 PM
To make a decision based on a 'bad hair day' is foolish.

The general R/C community has adopted and embraced 2.4 wholeheartedly. Is it perfect? heck no. Do 'bermuda triangles' exist at some AMA R/C fields? Absolutely. Should everyone avoid 2.4? That would be foolish for an inexperienced pilot.
EDIT: So don't take any offense, this is a technical discussion.

In my 30 years experience in electronics my decision is based on my experience and witnessing other incidents.

That said, you keep referring to a single incident. In 10+ years fl ying there I literally saw about a dozen aircraft go down in that same spot.
There are no bermuda triangles, there is always an explanation, and the VERY cool evidentiary part of that, they removed the chain link fence and created a big maggot hole over there.
Strangely enough Dave tells me that crashes are now almost all confined to pilot error.

I know the RC community uses it, and 1.23 and 1.25 is pretty close.

Want my RF opinion, it's a multipathing/backscatter type of issue :)

I was not saying everyone who flies wlil have this issue as so on as they hit a chain link fence, BUT YOUR RISK IS THERE.

that's all I was saying. Now I fly UHF so I don't have *THOSE* concerns, I have other concerns, like living 8 miles from a 10,000w 459mhz repeater....and I can make a generalization if I have no other explanation.

However I've flown over chain lnik enough to validate it's more than just one bad hair day, it's like EVERY Day is a bad hair day (Concerning video that is).

Luckily 2.4 Control is spread spectrum so it's technically 2.4001, 2.4005 etc etc and it changes, which is a safety measure in a way.

But again, it's everyone's choice. I felt that a $2500 aircraft s uch as the QAV540 deserved to remove THAT risk, and mitigate the UHF risk.

BackLashRC has a Hex worth twice or three times the value of the 540 and he flies it with 2.4, he has experience with it and trusts him and it's never let him down, except the hex in the tree and the QAV500 crash, and the other quad in the tree but those are all separate incidents and likely flight controller or video issues. :D I flip him crap all the time but seriouisly, IT DOES WORK!

So just because I don't like it and refuse to fly, shouldn't be a reason for anyone else NOT to.

For park FPV'ing it's perfect, if you run 1.3 or 5.8 video and would allow you to fly with the park LOS fliers..

Physics and MFG'ing are physics though, a FACTORY setup likely will not take you beyond 1 mile, safely.

I guess I will have to take the quad out and do a validation test, been meaning to go fly that direction again, now that the Osprey are gone.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 04:17 PM
This was the "Bermuda triangle", until they took the c hain link out.

4:57


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=M3QTpglcbOs

spiked3
7th October 2013, 04:27 PM
No offense, you and I have agreed we speak our minds in the past.

I have only one issue;

"if you *are* an inexperienced pilot come in in here and read what you should *NOT* do.
First, don't fly 2.4 ghz in the city on a DJI Phantom from a balcony. Dumb, plain old stupid."

The use of 2.4 in that context is false and misleading. Take 2.4 out and I whole heartily agree with the rest.

And carbon's welcome to a new member with the first comment being "get rid of the spektrum" Again, false, but he admits so many time he has no idea what he is talking about I let him slide.

I'll agree spektrum may not be the best, but it is like a 99.98 vs. 99.99 thing. Carbon, I never heard of FrySky until I got into FPV, wonder why that is?

My 'bad hair day' example was specifically aimed at some bad spektrum firmware in the past, and some recent uhf firmware problems that were quickly researched, acknowledged and fixed. It happens. We shouldn't go warning new people to avoid UHF because of it.

I am not referring to a single incident, I intentionally mentioned 'bermuda triangles'. There is a spot at marymoor were a different 2.4 plane goes down every week (spektrum, futaba, whatever), not over a chain link fence. And I have seen that at about every field I have flown at for 30 years, including long before 2.4 R/C even came out.

And finally FPV, needs a context. I shouldn't assume all FPV is short range, you shouldn't assume all FPV is long range. FPV has nothing to do with range.

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 04:41 PM
I have only one issue;

"if you *are* an inexperienced pilot come in in here and read what you should *NOT* do.
First, don't fly 2.4 ghz in the city on a DJI Phantom from a balcony. Dumb, plain old stupid."

The use of 2.4 in that context is false and misleading. Take 2.4 out and I whole heartily agree with the rest.


OK So I will rephrase that:

Once you have used a spectrum analyzer and validated that each point in the city has no interference or any multipathing, THEN go ahead and fly the DJI Phantom from your balcony in the city, :D
Here is where I ask'

WWSD? - What Would Sentry Do?
WWTD?

Seriously? 2.4 in the city with stock antenna's? I wouldn't even run 2.4 video with linear, I'd go CP. There are 15,000 items there that can cause multi-pathing as well as the unknowns about microwave beams (They do tend to go over the city).

I have a spot I am drooling to fly, a simple walk around revealed a microwave repeater and about 15 different RF antenna's. Made me sad, one of the best hilltops in Bremerton and I won't even RISK that one.

It is a bad idea as an inexperienced pilot. Even with UHF I'd still take a spectrum analyzer out and get some readings.

Some people come in the lab and want to do long range, I was one of them! (I still want to but finding the appropriate aircraft has been difficult for my tastes).
For those people I will always recommend UHF.

Inexpensive FPV setup for inexperienced pilots COULD include:

2.4 Control
EZStar/Bixler/skysurfer
1.3 or 5.8 vid

No issues there at all.........if you have an RSSI meter, otherwise UHF, 2.4, 72mhz, my s uggestion is still to keep it inside of one mile and only creep out there a hundred yards at a time until the failsafes are known.

Were you there when airTruck tried to do Mt Si on 2.4 with his Nitro plane? Actually impressed me, a bout 1.25 to 1.5 miles before it failsafed..I didn't know he was on 2.4 or would have suggested he didn't do it.

airtruksrus
7th October 2013, 05:02 PM
I'll agree spektrum may not be the best, but it is like a 99.98 vs. 99.99 thing. Carbon, I never heard of FrySky until I got into FPV, wonder why that is?

I also chose FrSky mostly from a cost perspective and they were doing very long range where Rangevideo had posted the vids. Thought it would have worked out fine, just didn't know of how much all the 2.4 interference shortened the range, even more with 1.28 vid gear even with the low pass filter.

Cost me more in the long run.

airtruksrus
7th October 2013, 05:08 PM
Scott, I was so jazzed up watching you and will already buzzing the peak, I thought what the heck, having great luck with the 2.4 FrSky so far. Should have listened to the inner voice saying don't push it past a mile. Sense of adventure got the best of me.

http://vimeo.com/41712393

Scotttu
7th October 2013, 06:32 PM
We were fortunate to find her, a bit of skill, a bit of luck, and a ground station recording all helped!!

Oliver Miami
7th October 2013, 08:03 PM
I'm a complete newbie, flying FPV/TBS Discovery for only 10 days now:

- Control: 2.4 Graupner Mx-12 HoTT radio with Graupner GR12 receiver
- Video: 5.8 TBS Rookie 200mW Vtx with Spironet and TBS Vrx with TBS 5.8 patch antenna

I did 1.2 km LOS, the video was not too bad but the Graupner Radio started screaming (audio signal when the link is getting weak) like crazy and I lost the control at some point so it was time to come back...

So far I like my disco and having a lot of fun with it, I fly in urban area and 80% of the time above the water... (it's Florida folks). I know I will crash someday, I will be pissed but I know it's part of the FPV experience...

Actually it's fun because I really want to fly of my balcony ;) but I won't do it because it would be stupid and dangerous at my inexperienced level.

Anyway, for what it worth coming for a newbie like me, my DO list:
- Build your plane yourself, it's a pain if you are a rookie but it worth it in term of knowledge
- Despite what people say, fly in GPS and Atti mode at the beginning, flying manual for a newbie is a recipe for a crash. After 15-20 flights, I do fly manual during cruise but still come back to GPS or Atti when flying near something or for landing. I'm currently learning to fly fully manual.
I don't agree with the full manual philosophy, GPS and Atti are great but it's true that you should learn to fly manual. First because the flight is way smoother in manual, and also because it may help you the day that your Naza got crazy.
- Do a preflight of your airplane, it takes 2 minutes, check the following: antenna are screwed all the way in ? battery secured ?, cables in place ? ESC plugged ?, servo in ? props are attached and not loose ? etc. I saved my disco with that when i noticed one of the prop was almost detached before take off...

All the best

swillhide
7th October 2013, 08:10 PM
Wait! I fly via Gopro and have for a long time. Only 2 card full issues but those were fixed with new FW revs, it must be the nice weather here in Cali that lets us get away with it. :)

Carbon
7th October 2013, 08:14 PM
Despite what people say, fly in GPS and Atti mode at the beginning, flying manual for a newbie is a recipe for a crash.

I agree with everything but this. Learn manual before you fly anything else. It may cause you a crash or two (it didn't for me, guess I learn quick when money is involved) but it will be safer in the long run when GPS or Atti mode fail.

WildWill
7th October 2013, 09:13 PM
You're just a badass Carbon.

Carbon
7th October 2013, 09:15 PM
That's probably it...

Not to brag or anything but I haven't had one crash on this quadcopter I got a few weeks ago. And if you could see some of the hairy situations I've got into with it you would probably be amazed :D
I'm going to be selling it and getting a 400-Q though, I may even sell my wing. I find myself flying my quads more and more..

criccio
7th October 2013, 09:25 PM
I agree with everything but this. Learn manual before you fly anything else. It may cause you a crash or two (it didn't for me, guess I learn quick when money is involved) but it will be safer in the long run when GPS or Atti mode fail.

Agreed. Crap like the Naza is going to kill multicopters for the rest of us, i'm convinced.

WildWill
7th October 2013, 09:28 PM
Dual batteries - ? One for video the other for FPV or just two in parallel? I heard you mention that somewhere else....

I use the one battery system, albeit with two batteries in my wings...

He's talking about how I fly. One battery to power the plane and one to power the FPV. It's a recipe for disaster, or so they keep telling me.

I could see where someone that's not paying attention or flies with crappy batteries or what not could get into trouble with that setup, but really....that person is going to be in trouble with what ever setup they're flying.

DiscoTuna
7th October 2013, 09:59 PM
GoPro - (aside from reported shutdowns and I have had it stop recording for me randomly numerous times - not sure if it stops transmitting at that point), the issue for me is that the dynamic range on them suck. On the Disco Pro I am always checking this out switching between the two cameras in flight and you can really tell the difference. Fly into the sun and I can't see much on the GoPro - flick back to the FPV camera and its night and day (pun intended). So, for anyone new I would advise don't use GoPro for FPV till you have more experience and realise the shortcomings.

Carbon
7th October 2013, 10:08 PM
And NEVER use a GoPro hero 3 for FPV. EVER.

Byro
8th October 2013, 12:11 AM
Am I doing it wrong? I've only ever flown in manual. I haven't even set up my CC3D for Atti mode, damn Turnigy 9x and its customizable switches.

Same with my airplanes.

criccio
8th October 2013, 12:13 AM
Am I doing it wrong? I've only ever flown in manual. I haven't even set up my CC3D for Atti mode, damn Turnigy 9x and its customizable switches.

Same with my airplanes.

You're an accomplished pilot. No need for anything else. Those modes are just dumbing everyone else down.

ssassen
8th October 2013, 12:16 AM
You're an accomplished pilot. No need for anything else. Those modes are just dumbing everyone else down.

+1, hear hear!

Oliver Miami
8th October 2013, 12:24 AM
I don't understand what is wrong with GPS and Atti mode.
Why so much hate ? Is that a matter of having "the right stuff' ?
I understand all the benefits of manual flights: more accurate, smoother footage, last resort in case of GPS and atti failure but "assisted" modes allowed me to get familiar with handling my disco and I would probably have crashed without it. Actually I'm getting more and more into manual and I like it better but GPS/Atti mode were good to learn how to fly.

WildWill
8th October 2013, 12:42 AM
I don't understand what is wrong with GPS and Atti mode.
Why so much hate ? Is that a matter of having "the right stuff' ?
I understand all the benefits of manual flights: more accurate, smoother footage, last resort in case of GPS and atti failure but "assisted" modes allowed me to get familiar with handling my disco and I would probably have crashed without it. Actually I'm getting more and more into manual and I like it better but GPS/Atti mode were good to learn how to fly.

It's age old.

RC?!?! You need to master the control line kiddo, forget about that RC crap!

Listen, there's my way and there's the wrong way..... period.

BacklashRC
8th October 2013, 12:52 AM
It's age old.

RC?!?! You need to master the control line kiddo, forget about that RC crap!

Listen, there's my way and there's the wrong way..... period.

Real multirotor pilots don't even use KK or CC3D. They simply hook the four control stick outputs straight to the speed controls ;)

faber
8th October 2013, 12:56 AM
I fly mine at the end of my arm. I will move to control lines once i get used to flying at the end of my arm. The only problem is i get dizzy so easy from all that spinning around, and the hiking and climbing required for mountain range videos is quite exhausting.

Learn to fly your rig line of sight with no assistance from any flight controllers. Get proficient flying that way. And practice it even after you go fpv. It will save your rig some day.

Learn to fly blind without freaking out also. Simulate the worst case scenarios and you will not lose your aircraft unless the cards are stacked entirely the wrong way. You can do this with an ultra micro parkflyer rig on an itty bitty 5.8 rig and not only improve your chops but have a hell of a lot of fun in the process! Fligbt controllers are amazing, but they shouldn't be crutches or training wheels. Same with RTL imho. Test it, make sure it is functioning, and use it only when you absolutely need it.

Line of sight skills, in manual mode should be honed before fpv if you want to be safe about it and save cash. Simulators work great for this too.

c5galaxy engineer
8th October 2013, 10:56 AM
OMG!......you guys are going to shame me into mastering Manual! And I was just having so much fun riding around FPV in my quad.

Last flying session I told myself I HAD to fly in manual mode for one entire battery pack before I flew with auto level. I have flown manual mode LOS but NEVER in FPV......that would be insane.......but now I am going to get this manual thing down if it is the last thing I do. When I took off for the first time the first thing I saw was the ground wizzing by me a a high rate of speed before I could even think about correcting with a little back pressure, then all I saw was a nice puffy cloud just sitting there against a bright blue back ground.......no apparent movement to it, just floating.......SMACK!!.....I flew backwards into the ground. GEEEEEZUS thats a hand full. I will get it though........after I switched to low rates it was easier. At least I could keep the horizon in the picture most of the time, but now I am so busy with leval I forget about yaw.........crap!

criccio
8th October 2013, 11:08 AM
I have flown manual mode LOS but NEVER in FPV......that would be insane.......but now I am going to get this manual thing down if it is the last thing I do.

See now that I don't get. I can't fly in rate mode for shit when LOS, I almost instantly crash. But get up high in FPV and full manual just feels natural since you don't have to worry about orientation which is the killer when LOS.

Sicarius
8th October 2013, 11:28 AM
And NEVER use a GoPro hero 3 for FPV. EVER.

Do you have any information to back that up?
I don't like when someone says "don't use ... " and not provide a reason, you've been doing that throughout this thread, but it's a newbie thread and people are going to follow the guidance of experienced posters like you (over 3k posts)
More established lab'ers know that you're full of shit ;)

WildWill
8th October 2013, 11:30 AM
@Sicarius Haha, I just about spit my coffee out!

Carbon
8th October 2013, 12:27 PM
It's a lie. They still lock up on the firmware. Also the Wifi mode just turns on randomly and won't shut off.

Sicarius
8th October 2013, 12:45 PM
Carbon, do you own one? Because i don't experience these issues, i have upgraded the firmware as soon as i got it. For the record, i have the Black.
They can be run off of external power, but you need a modified USB cable for hooking it up to your VTx since it requires a special mini usb cable with a few extra pins.
I don't run FPV off this one because extra cables are extra points of failure, but i have had a Gopro 2 for a year and ran FPV off it for 8 months, have NEVER had a lockup or turn-off unless i forgot to hit record.
I do like the sony cam's settings and sensitivity more than the gopro's, but that's a clear personal preference rather than a "gut feeling"

Carbon
8th October 2013, 12:47 PM
Yup, GoPro hero 3 Black edition. Firmware loaded correctly but still has issues. I've never had those issues with my Hero 2..

Sicarius
8th October 2013, 01:02 PM
I think you need to return it then, because mine doesn't do any of that (AFAIK)

criccio
8th October 2013, 01:26 PM
The issue with the GoPro as an FPV camera isn't about it shutting off (although I'm sure that would suck!), its because its CMOS sensor cannot deal with lighting changes and you end up blind if you look into the sun or if it's too dark out. When I built my Discovery I though hell, why spend all that money on another camera when I have this shiny GoPro, that should work fine right? NO. CCD based board cameras are infinitely better for live video out.

Carbon
8th October 2013, 01:46 PM
No I haven't been reading to much. My GoPro's WiFi turns on almost every time I turn it on and I can't turn it off. Its pissig me off.

Scotttu
8th October 2013, 02:39 PM
No I haven't been reading to much. My GoPro's WiFi turns on almost every time I turn it on and I can't turn it off. Its pissig me off.

There is a setting to turn it off. If it is ON it will come on each time you power it on.

The tiny b utton on the side of the GoPro will turn it off, until you power it off and back on.

Go to the wrench icon and turn it off. If it doesn't stay off re-flash your GP and if that doesn't fix it send it back.

Carbon
8th October 2013, 02:41 PM
It is off Scott. And it still randomly turns on. And then I press and hold the bottom on the side and it turns off. Then a couple of minutes later it will turn back on..

Carbon
8th October 2013, 03:59 PM
Probably too late.. I've had it for three or four months now..

c5galaxy engineer
8th October 2013, 04:19 PM
See now that I don't get. I can't fly in rate mode for shit when LOS, I almost instantly crash. But get up high in FPV and full manual just feels natural since you don't have to worry about orientation which is the killer when LOS.

well said. Your absolutely right. Ive just been nervous about doing it for some reason. Up high you can pour the coals to it and have plenty of room for adjustments to the flight or switch on the self leveling to save it. I am going to try this.

BacklashRC
8th October 2013, 04:27 PM
I fly from my GoPro 2 on my hex. I also have a standard camera wired for backup in case the GoPro fails. The video switching is handled through DJI's iOSD Mark II. I would not fly with just the GoPro.

Sicarius
8th October 2013, 04:31 PM
Probably too late.. I've had it for three or four months now..

In Europe, companies are supposed to give 2 years factory warranty, not sure about how it works in the US, but i'm pretty sure they're breaking some law if they don't accept it as a factory flaw..

Snoopy
8th October 2013, 05:40 PM
Warranty is whatever the manufacturer says it is. The free market dictates whether that's enough to get customers to buy your product. Though when your economy is 70% consumption, things break a week after the warranty expires.

DiscoTuna
8th October 2013, 09:58 PM
Warranty is whatever the manufacturer says it is. .....

In the land of the free, perhaps. EU though its what the government says it is and its 2 years minimum. Thats why apple got into so much crap for trying to flog extended warranties covering 2 years on top of a first year. As the powers-at-be pointed out to them, the punter already gets the second year so you can't try and make them pay for it.

sailingeric
9th October 2013, 03:00 PM
I don't understand what is wrong with GPS and Atti mode.
Why so much hate ? Is that a matter of having "the right stuff' ?
I understand all the benefits of manual flights: more accurate, smoother footage, last resort in case of GPS and atti failure but "assisted" modes allowed me to get familiar with handling my disco and I would probably have crashed without it. Actually I'm getting more and more into manual and I like it better but GPS/Atti mode were good to learn how to fly.

I have to disagree also, NAZA in manual is like a wild tiger, or like a gal I used to date....

I personally think dual rates should be involved with manual. I've flown my tricopter with no issues, have flown in manual but it's crazy..

I fly mostly in GPS mode.. I have been flying some in manual mode as of late with some expo thrown in. I think it does not matter what mode you fly in as long as you are enjoying it and not crashing.

Hucker
9th October 2013, 03:38 PM
I fly mostly in GPS mode.. I have been flying some in manual mode as of late with some expo thrown in. I think it does not matter what mode you fly in as long as you are enjoying it and not crashing.

Could not agree more. Not everybody is trying to be a 'real pilot', whatever that is. If you are having fun and being safe (and not complaining about limits you place on yourself) go for it!

faber
9th October 2013, 03:40 PM
I fly mostly in GPS mode.. I have been flying some in manual mode as of late with some expo thrown in. I think it does not matter what mode you fly in as long as you are enjoying it and not crashing.
It definitely is about having fun and not crashing, but what about when your quad freaks out in gps or atti mode? If you have the skills built up to confidently handle your aircraft in manual mode then you cane save it from crashing and causing injury or damage. I have heard plenty of stories of new pilots watching as their quad flew away and were powerless since they had no manual mode skill. All it takes is practice and the guts to flip the switch. Get it off the ground however you want, get some altitude, and learn to fly manual. Just keep the atti mode switch handh in case you bite off a bit more than you can chew.

criccio
9th October 2013, 03:47 PM
Relying on the Naza to keep you out of trouble is considered "being safe". Holy crap...

In this hobby that's about the scariest scenario I can think of.

Carbon
9th October 2013, 03:50 PM
Then again, the thing to remember is that in any mode the flight controller is still doing a decent amount of flying for you. However in manual mode you have the most control.

sailingeric
9th October 2013, 04:03 PM
Relying on the Naza to keep you out of trouble is considered "being safe". Holy crap...

In this hobby that's about the scariest scenario I can think of.

You are so right, like said before, I am going to set up radio so I can control each motor independently for true manual flying

faber
9th October 2013, 04:11 PM
Relying on the Naza to keep you out of trouble is considered "being safe". Holy crap...

In this hobby that's about the scariest scenario I can think of.

I only fly my quad by throwing it up in the air and catching it. Carbon's mom taught me..

Dust
9th October 2013, 04:34 PM
some peole like vanilla, others like chocolate.
its a prefence thing. I personally would not use a gopro for live out. No way. but thats just me. Its a comfort thing, and im not comfortable with the odds of success using it like that.

Carbon
9th October 2013, 04:50 PM
No. Everyone likes chocolate. If they like anything else they are shunned.

Oliver Miami
9th October 2013, 05:07 PM
To come back to the initial topic of this thread ;) I just passed my HAM technician license yesterday and I really recommend to every newbie to do the same.
No only this will open the door of more powerful transmitter plus news frequency such as UHF/433Mhz but the official training book (http://www.amazon.com/Ham-Radio-License-Manual-Arrl/dp/0872590976/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1381349131&sr=8-7&keywords=Technician+Class+License) is very well written and you will learn a lot in term of electronics and radio frequency (why some frequencies are "better" than other, modulation, frequency polarization, type of antenna, common interference issue and way to solve it, etc.)
In USA the HAM is self regulated by the community and you can find exam center anywhere (http://www.arrl.org/find-an-amateur-radio-license-exam-session) on a regular basis. It costs only $15 and the license is given for 10 years. My only regret is to have waited until now to pass this exam, I should have done just before starting FPV, I would have saved a lot of time.

spiked3
9th October 2013, 06:48 PM
No. Everyone likes chocolate. If they like anything else they are shunned.

There is a big difference between telling people you prefer chocolate, and telling people vanilla is poisonous. The fear mongers should be shunned, as they are spewing bull cr4p.

Carbon
9th October 2013, 06:50 PM
Vanilla is poisonous though...

WildWill
9th October 2013, 10:20 PM
Vanilla is poisonous though...

Shun Shun... ah shit, I'm no good at this.

Sicarius
10th October 2013, 09:33 AM
Vanilla is poisonous though...

Check a few posts back, my statement has been made valid! ;)

lucky72
10th October 2013, 09:53 AM
The threads I read reported that Gopro 3's have a habit of locking up but have been improved with the firmware update.

That said, I wouldn't do it just because it has a separate battery...if it could be hard wired to the power supply to never run down it might be fun to have a very colorful view.

But for me I just don't do it, TVL camera's work fine for me...

Used Gopro on the bikes for years and never had a lock up or problem, buuuutttt I would fly it as an FPV cam, the info at the top of the screen overlays my OSD. Flown a gizziliion LOS flights and a handful of FPV with Spektrum 2.4 and never had an issue...I must live right lol

Sicarius
10th October 2013, 10:05 AM
Used Gopro on the bikes for years and never had a lock up or problem, buuuutttt I would fly it as an FPV cam, the info at the top of the screen overlays my OSD. Flown a gizziliion LOS flights and a handful of FPV with Spektrum 2.4 and never had an issue...I must live right lol

Not saying you should use it as flight cam, but uh you can turn that gopro OSD off :P

Reliku
10th October 2013, 10:21 AM
Call it a variation of Murphy's law, but relying on technology and never having problems means you're bound to get into some big shit someday. It's always good to be able to do everything yourself and have a safety switch "in case that ..."

It is unlikely two systems will fail (your manual piloting skills AND the gps hold mode). Relying solely on ONE though (such as only flying in stabilized mode or not having a stabilizer) will cause trouble if the system you are relying on fails.

One of the important aspects of fpv is flying responsibly and taking precautions. That's what makes fpv'ers stand out from idiots buying a DJI phantom and crashing into buildings above Manhattan. Take these precautions and backup plans seriously. Most of the time you won't need them, but you'll be so damn happy you have them when you DO need them.

Again, nothing wrong with stabilized flight mode, but learn to fly manual as a back up just in case.

Reliku
10th October 2013, 11:25 AM
True, manual is still stabilized as well ;)
But manual has less technology to rely on. It's OK, good actually to rely on technlogy, but you should have a backup plan. After all, rc is all technology. And it can always fail. The thing is, what will you do if it fails?

If you're flying gps, and your gps antenna stops working, you're ****ed, unless you still have manual. If the board stops working altogether, you're ****ed nonetheless, but it's good to minimize risks. Having a back up plan.

Water is a good example. Normally you won't end up in it. But what's your plan if you do? You have the inflatable devices that serve as a backup. And yes, that may fail as well, but that'd mean BOTH systems have to fail in order for it to be a really big problem. And the likelihood of two systems failing simultaneously is much smaller than the likelihood of just one failing. That's the difference ;)

Scotttu
10th October 2013, 12:02 PM
As I mentioned the inflatable devices are already failed in that they do not inflate to the proper size to be of any use, so technology WOULD have failed twice.

2 litre coke bottles do not fail, they hold 90PSI before rupture and I'll be nowhere near even 9lbs let al one 90 :)

c5galaxy engineer
10th October 2013, 04:46 PM
Hey Scott.......if you don't mind ''ugly'' a couple of pool noodles or pipe insulation is great stuff and it is lite. It also acts as a wonderfully effective shock absorber. I have two short sections simply zip tied to the bottom pontoon style. I think the pipe insulation with the hole through the middle acts as the best shock absorber but not as buoyant of course for the size/diameter but that is really moot due to the fantastic buoyancy of the foam........which wont fill with water like a pop bottle could......lol. You know......for flying around the pond!!

Hucker
10th October 2013, 08:25 PM
True, manual is still stabilized as well ;)
But manual has less technology to rely on. It's OK, good actually to rely on technlogy, but you should have a backup plan. After all, rc is all technology. And it can always fail. The thing is, what will you do if it fails?

If you're flying gps, and your gps antenna stops working, you're ****ed, unless you still have manual. If the board stops working altogether, you're ****ed nonetheless, but it's good to minimize risks. Having a back up plan.

Water is a good example. Normally you won't end up in it. But what's your plan if you do? You have the inflatable devices that serve as a backup. And yes, that may fail as well, but that'd mean BOTH systems have to fail in order for it to be a really big problem. And the likelihood of two systems failing simultaneously is much smaller than the likelihood of just one failing. That's the difference ;)

Reliku: what if I told you my backup plan to a 1-in-50 chance of crashing while flying in manual mode was to fly in autolevel or GPS mode so I turn that into 1-in-100 chance of crashing. And what if I think your backup plan for flying manual mode only removes a 1-in-1000 chance of saving the failure mode you talk about but doubles the chance of pilot error crashes? It all depends on how you assign probabilities and since nobody really knows the probabilities it is tough to says who's intuition is correct. My intuition says that after the tuning phase a lot more quads crash due to pilot error than GPS failure.

I think people tend to think reliability = safety. In a system you need to look at the reliability/safety of the whole system rather than just the components. Here's an example. I'm making up numbers to show a point:


LOS Pilot: hardware failures/100 flights = 5 Pilot Error/100 flights = 5 Total crashes/100 flights = 10
FPV Pilot: hardware failures/100 flights = 7 Pilot Error/100 flights = 1 Total crashes/100 flights = 8
By adding video feedback I introduced a less reliable system (more hardware = more chance of failure) BUT that hardware all but eliminated loss of orientation crashes so I net out in the positive. (AMA probably doesn't agree with my numbers). Could it be possible that GPS/assist on multi's works like this? Does anybody have data or compelling evidence?


For the record I basically agree with the concept of learning in manual mode, but I don't think the safety argument holds water. I'm learning to fly my quad in manual mode and accepting the fact that I'll crash more because I want to get more performance out of the me and the gear.

Scotttu
10th October 2013, 08:33 PM
The irony of it is that your flight controller is still controlling you in manual mode.
I believe everybody should configure their quad with the dual rates so that they can flight in manual mode if the shit hits the fan, but then I also believe everybody should learn to drive a stick shift before they drive an automatic

spiked3
10th October 2013, 09:17 PM
The irony of it is that your flight controller is still controlling you in manual mode.
I believe everybody should configure their quad with the dual rates so that they can flight in manual mode if the shit hits the fan, but then I also believe everybody should learn to drive a stick shift before they drive an automatic

What's your opinion on a flannel shirt with plaid pants?

c5galaxy engineer
10th October 2013, 09:30 PM
Hucker's point really makes sense.......for me learning in manual is simply for the enjoyment of the challenge. I think, if anything, it WILL increase the danger of me losing control and crashing because there is no hand of God leveling out the machine. Its why I started flying airplanes, helicopters, and quads in the first place.........Its challenging.......that's it, the only reason, none other just that. If I felt it DIDNT increase the chance of me trying to slip it under the sod then I wouldn't bother trying to master it. What would the fun be. I agree that when I do master it (and I don't mean just at low rates but full rates with aerobatics) then I will be a much more rounded pilot......Of course. Or if I don't want the challenge and I just want a relaxing flight then I will put it into auto.......
Aint no big deal.

airtruksrus
10th October 2013, 09:49 PM
I have seen both sides of trying to fly in manual mode with the heli's and crashing many times due to stupid pilot errors, the manual mode (only mode) on those have really sharpened up the skills so when going to manual mode on the quad, it wasn't so unusual and flew it around with hardly any thought of putting in the ground. This quad has cost me the least amount in terms of replacement parts, it'll keep me flying much longer. Thank god I got the UHF to work on it or it would have gone out of range on the Spektrum radio.

BacklashRC
11th October 2013, 12:38 AM
The difference between Manual mode and Attitude mode is, in all likelihood, in the software. I am not sure why the software going nuts in Attitude mode wouldn't also render Manual mode useless... You just can't know what that likelihood is without having written the firmware.

I am a technology geek. I can fly in Manual mode (I have a microquad with the KK v2) but spend most of my time in Attitude or GPS mode.

I use RTH, and now I have started to play with the waypoint mission editor.

I'd say that if you are a proficient pilot in whatever mode you fly in, your doing fine.

Hucker
11th October 2013, 01:03 AM
See post:

http://fpvlab.com/forums/showthread.php?20812-The-inexperienced-pilot-thread&p=354310&viewfull=1#post354310

Comment was made that knowing manual mode was important know so you could recover from a GPS failure.

Carbon
11th October 2013, 01:09 AM
Hey guys, I don't know much about the Naza but what actually fails? I mean, how much can really go wrong? Why do people get flyaways in the first place? Is it just a firmware bug that DJI refuses to fix?

Carbon
11th October 2013, 01:46 AM
Hucker's point really makes sense.......for me learning in manual is simply for the enjoyment of the challenge. I think, if anything, it WILL increase the danger of me losing control and crashing because there is no hand of God leveling out the machine. Its why I started flying airplanes, helicopters, and quads in the first place.........Its challenging.......that's it, the only reason, none other just that. If I felt it DIDNT increase the chance of me trying to slip it under the sod then I wouldn't bother trying to master it. What would the fun be. I agree that when I do master it (and I don't mean just at low rates but full rates with aerobatics) then I will be a much more rounded pilot......Of course. Or if I don't want the challenge and I just want a relaxing flight then I will put it into auto.......
Aint no big deal.

I could see it being more relaxing, kind of like using RTH to fly home on a long range flight. Makes sense.
But honestly flying in manual mode becomes second nature after a while. Flying my quad using a KK2 is as relaxing as I make it. Either I just float around and hang out or I go balls to the wall and fly crazy. Maybe the naza is harder to fly in manual mode? That wouldn't make sense..

criccio
11th October 2013, 07:36 AM
Out of the box, it is. Terribly tuned compared to say a Naze32.

Scotttu
11th October 2013, 09:16 AM
See post:

http://fpvlab.com/forums/showthread.php?20812-The-inexperienced-pilot-thread&p=354310&viewfull=1#post354310

Comment was made that knowing manual mode was important know so you could recover from a GPS failure.

Has anybody ever had one of these failures?

sailingeric
11th October 2013, 10:40 AM
Has anybody ever had one of these failures?
I often wonder about the Naza failures to the number of units out there. I suspect it is very low and it is mostly hyped as it is a few screaming the loudest and on every Naza hating forum out there or the failure happens not long after they dirt darted the quad or failure to preflight their multirotor to make sure nothing has vibrated loose or wires/ solder joings failing. Now, there does appear to be a spike after firmware upgrades but I also wonder if people did not do a full recalibration and double check all their settings on their radio with the unit plugged into the DJI Assistant. My couple freak out moments have sounded similar to fly aways but keeping a calm head lead me to figure it out, once was I accidently hit the IOC so my countrols were not doing what I was expecting, once I raised my goggles and saw what happened it flew fine and when I got home I turned IOC off on the unit. Another time I had taken my GPS unit off trying to clean up the wiring and when I put it back on I had it pointing backwards. I flew fine for a minute or so and then it when off in opposite direction. I landed it saw my error and figured it was trying to fly the course it was expecting to see based on my radio inputs. Another one I see often is flying above the trees, get a gust of wind and it trys to counter the wind to hold it's position or course. In the goggles you see a big tilt that you did not input and it appears it has gone crazy. First time that happened to me I was freaked but I could see even though I was tilting I was still going where I wanted.

Hucker
11th October 2013, 11:08 AM
Great information sailingeric. Like you I am convinced that many normal problems of RC are interpreted incorrectly by users. When I just was starting FPV I swapped out an RX and an ESC because I was convinced there was lag in somewhere in the system...only to figure out, after a bunch of time redoing stuff... that the lag was the speed of sound. I'd be 500ft out and give some power and the sound took 1/2 a second to get to me, feels dumb now but at the time it made flying feel sketchy and it was easy to blame cheap electronics

c5galaxy engineer
11th October 2013, 11:26 AM
Great information sailingeric. Like you I am convinced that many normal problems of RC are interpreted incorrectly by users. When I just was starting FPV I swapped out an RX and an ESC because I was convinced there was lag in somewhere in the system...only to figure out, after a bunch of time redoing stuff... that the lag was the speed of sound. I'd be 500ft out and give some power and the sound took 1/2 a second to get to me, feels dumb now but at the time it made flying feel sketchy and it was easy to blame cheap electronics

LOL......are you serious??!?!?! Thats a great story and learning example. I did a very similar thing back when I was flying LOS only I swapped out a throttle servo and linkage because I was sure it was binding......LOL To funny!!

sailingeric
11th October 2013, 11:32 AM
Great information sailingeric. Like you I am convinced that many normal problems of RC are interpreted incorrectly by users. When I just was starting FPV I swapped out an RX and an ESC because I was convinced there was lag in somewhere in the system...only to figure out, after a bunch of time redoing stuff... that the lag was the speed of sound. I'd be 500ft out and give some power and the sound took 1/2 a second to get to me, feels dumb now but at the time it made flying feel sketchy and it was easy to blame cheap electronics

I have a buzzer on my quad set up on the flap channel so should it go down I can find it but I also will flip the flap switch and wait for the buzz to do a poorman's guestimate of how far out I am.

c5galaxy engineer
11th October 2013, 11:36 AM
I have a buzzer on my quad set up on the flap channel so should it go down I can find it but I also will flip the flap switch and wait for the buzz to do a poorman's guestimate of how far out I am.

Hahahahaha.......nice!!

Sicarius
11th October 2013, 12:02 PM
I have a buzzer on my quad set up on the flap channel so should it go down I can find it but I also will flip the flap switch and wait for the buzz to do a poorman's guestimate of how far out I am.

That is the best idea i've ever heard!

sailingeric
11th October 2013, 12:13 PM
That is the best idea i've ever heard!

Thanks! Hopefully I can misappropriate enough to spring for an OSD set up soon. Just spend a about $3k in home updates in the last month so I cannot anger the wife unit by spending more on my quad right away.

chatch
11th October 2013, 01:35 PM
so much noob going on in here, i can feel my skills vanishing with every post I read

Reliku
11th October 2013, 01:41 PM
Great discussion :)

The NAZA gps example is kinda exactly what you mean. If you have a backup plan (manual mode) and gps mode screws up, you can get in manual mode and save your quad from crashing/flying away. It is always beneficial to have some procedure or just something in case it goes wrong. If you don't, and it does go wrong, all you can do is watch. If your gps screws up and you switch to manual, you can get it back. If your board screws up altogether, then manual won't help either. But the likelihood of the entire board failing compared to just the gps failing is lower. Look at it this way:
There are two systems:
-flight controller board
-gps unit
If you fly in atti/gps only, then you will have a big problem if just one of them fails: if the gps unit fails your quad flies off, if the board fails you'll simply crash. Either way, you've got a problem. If both fail, well, that's obvious.
Now if you fly in atti/gps but can switch to manual, it's different. if the gps unit fails you can switch to manual, no problem. If the entire board fails, you'll crash anyway. If both fail, again, you'll crash.

There are four situations:
Nothing fails
Gps fails
board fails
both fail
In atti/gps only, you'll crash in 75% of all situations.
In atti/gps mode with manual skills, you'll crash in 50% of all situations.

Of course, this is highly simplified, but this is exactly how it works in the entire system ;)

Scottu, yes, the waterbuoy didn't work in that case. Again, four possibilities:
Both work
waterbuoy fails
you crash in water
you both crash in water and the waterbuoy fails
In the first case, you'll be fine. In the second case, you'll also be fine. In the third case, you'll also be fine (albeit with a wet quad). Only in the fourth case you'll actually lose your quad. That means 25% of all situations make you lose your quad (again, simplified).

Important is however, to keep both systems intact. If the waterbuoy fails, you're back to just operating under the safety of just one system. But you don't crash because the waterbuoy fails ;)

You can rely on two systems seperately, that's the key here. The more systems you need running simultaneously to avoid trouble, the higher your likelihood of getting said trouble. The more systems you have as a backup to any failures, the smaller the likelihood of getting trouble. Get what I mean? :)

The example of the likelihood of technological problems compared to pilot errors while fpv'ing vs los'ing also illustrates this quite well. Although in that example is is an addition of trouble likelihood, instead of a multiplication, since you need BOTH systems to work to keep flying (working tech and no pilot errors ;))

Harry Wang
11th October 2013, 01:42 PM
so much noob going on in here, i can feel my skills vanishing with every post I read

No worries. If your skills vanish, you can just buy a Phantom Vision.

Sicarius
11th October 2013, 01:42 PM
Go away Chatch, we know you love your Phantom

c5galaxy engineer
11th October 2013, 02:34 PM
Thanks! Hopefully I can misappropriate enough to spring for an OSD set up soon. Just spend a about $3k in home updates in the last month so I cannot anger the wife unit by spending more on my quad right away.

First rule of FPV (or any expensive hobby) is that the best way to hide gear is to hide it in the household budget. For example.....when you go to the grocery store use your ATM card and pull out an extra 20 or so and then stop by the LHS and buy the things you need. DO NOT GET THE GROCERY BAGS AND HOBBY STORE BAGS MIXED UP in case the wife helps you unload the car. Example #2....when doing home repairs this is a great opportunity to buy yourself something big because the amount of money being spent is usually alot and more can be withdrawn from the ATM card without being noticed.........The classic noob mistake is telling the wife in the first place that you want to spend money on this hobby.......it just makes her more vigilant of the budget. Now I got to go because I told the wife I would do the grocery shopping today and the hobby store closes early..........

Reliku
11th October 2013, 02:53 PM
The best way is to come to a mutual agreement. That isn't too hard really.

When the wifi considers the hobby to be too expensive, throw in the good ol' shoe argument:

Planes are like shoes. For every occasion you want a different pair.

This won't cause her to accept it, but it will cause her to understand it. In order to be fair to you, she either has to buy less clothes or allow you to buy more planes.

First rule of women:
they won't buy less clothes.

That means you'll be allowed to buy more planes.

Problem solved :)

c5galaxy engineer
11th October 2013, 02:56 PM
If they are buying shoes in PAIRS..........well then we should be able to buy airplanes at the same rate......yes, in pairs. This is a great example except that it forces you into confrontation where my examples avoid it all together.......LMAO!

sailingeric
11th October 2013, 03:01 PM
I dont have to sneak around on my hobbies but I try to keep stuff within my allowance I give myself but come OT or bonus payout, most of that goes to me since I put in the extra work.

Reliku
11th October 2013, 03:10 PM
Yes, you'd cause a confrontation, but it solves the confrontation by default. Either you get to buy planes (in pairs) or you buy neither planes nor clothes for your girl, which means you'll end up with a ridiculous amount of excess money. Which will soon be spent on... Exactly, shoes and planes...

The best case would be no shoes at all. But that's not going to be possible sadly. So the best course of action would be to USE shoes for your own cause. That's the best course of action.

Hucker
11th October 2013, 03:24 PM
Reliku: You are forgetting to multiply by the probability of occurrence. My contention is that pilot error on average happens 20x more often than control/GPS error recoverable my manual mode. Improvements in control that reduce pilot error have 20x the leverage.

It is probably easiest to make the point like this. Given a quad to learn on, how do you configure it in the beginner/intermediate/advanced stages? I get the feeling that you are advocating tight gains, full manual + full throttle + full rates. I'm suggesting it gradually moves from softer gains, less manual, less power, less rates to more as skills improve...each reconfiguration being sort of like graduating along the ez*->skywalker->z1 spectrum. Some people will stop along the way because they like the ez* while others won't be happy until they are high speed, low altitude, tight turning.

WildWill
11th October 2013, 03:33 PM
I'm on a spending FREEZE atm.... :(

I'm at home ransacking through papers and came across notes from all facets of life when I stumbled across this. Old preflight chickenscratch. Someone can't spell throttle.......lol

It's always the little things that kill ya, I figured this'd help keep little things from being forgotten.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-cS4wEMjL6Cc/Ulgp42YAkUI/AAAAAAAABwU/HAKsZhpgnBM/w679-h905-no/IMG_20131011_093803.jpg

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/--E6hn1Af-Ec/Ulgp2eAwMcI/AAAAAAAABwM/hFUaXKF6fzg/w679-h905-no/IMG_20131011_093817.jpg

c5galaxy engineer
11th October 2013, 03:44 PM
Yes, you'd cause a confrontation, but it solves the confrontation by default. Either you get to buy planes (in pairs) or you buy neither planes nor clothes for your girl, which means you'll end up with a ridiculous amount of excess money. Which will soon be spent on... Exactly, shoes and planes...

The best case would be no shoes at all. But that's not going to be possible sadly. So the best course of action would be to USE shoes for your own cause. That's the best course of action.

Sigh.......I guess your right! That makes sense........it would be MORE money. You will do fine young one......the Force is strong in you! You have snatched the first set of pebbles from my hand and now you will move to the next level. But be aware there are many pitfalls to the soft creatures yet unseen even by the Masters.

Carbon
11th October 2013, 07:44 PM
Thanks! Hopefully I can misappropriate enough to spring for an OSD set up soon. Just spend a about $3k in home updates in the last month so I cannot anger the wife unit by spending more on my quad right away.

G-OSD flashed with CL-OSD. $40 you can't beat it!

airtruksrus
11th October 2013, 07:45 PM
My *DAUGHTER* SAID something like "You need to quit buying airplane stuff".

WHAT AIRPLANE STUFF??? - Chris Click SENT me a TW40 free of charge so the last t hing I bought was stuff for the FREE techpod I had. *sigh*

Good daughter, at least she's fiscally respnsible.....

Does it still count if your daughters start calling you a model airplane hoarder, thought they were trying to give me a hint or something. Btw, anyone want to buy some spare planes?

Rexnoobs247
11th October 2013, 08:24 PM
I just do things on the side to make money for myself, like give drum lessons. $30 an hour adds up pretty good with a couple students. Anyways, my bride thinks my planes are pretty awesome, and has even said she would be interested in learning to fly one. Therefore, I'm getting my old skysurfer all fixed up for her

Rexnoobs247
12th October 2013, 04:30 PM
Thats the way to do it man! One hour, BAM! RVOSD Antenna tracker!

Byro
30th October 2013, 01:16 AM
G-OSD flashed with CL-OSD. $40 you can't beat it!
What about the Mini OSD System w/GPS Module (http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__29798__Mini_OSD_System_w_GPS_Module.html) $25 flashed with CL-OSD?

Sicarius
30th October 2013, 04:54 AM
What about the Mini OSD System w/GPS Module (http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__29798__Mini_OSD_System_w_GPS_Module.html) $25 flashed with CL-OSD?

Anyone know what GPS receiver is in there? You can't beat that price even when buying them as components (when you're a consumer that is)

Byro
30th October 2013, 05:02 AM
What about the Mini OSD System w/GPS Module (http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__29798__Mini_OSD_System_w_GPS_Module.html) $25 flashed with CL-OSD?Anyone know what GPS receiver is in there? You can't beat that price even when buying them as components (when you're a consumer that is)
I haven't opened mine yet but, in the reviews someone wrote:

I just received the OSD and GPS yesterday and took a look under "the hood" of the GPS module. 3 pads are connected to its PCB (its worth a look there, just to improve the soldering joints) to 5V, GND and TXA. 4 further pads RXA, REN, TST and BOOT are unused. ___ The GPS module speaks 4800Bd NMEA at the TXA line right out of the box, which is all I wanted. After starting it calls itself: $ Model Name : JNS50_GSV5_448 __//__ $ Product by J communications Co., Ltd __//__ $ Revision by FunnyKim __//__ $ www.jcomco.com (http://www.jcomco.com) __//__ ___ It took a while to get a fix but was stable then. A small button cell is soldered to the side of the PCB, so GPS SAT data seems to be buffered. 2 blue LEDs blinking during fix search and staying solid after fix is found. The GPS patch antenna is sized 25 x 25mm, so its not the smallest one, but still OK for a small plane. OSD not tested yet. Very good value, even for the GPS module alone!And this picture was uploaded too (click to zoom):
34707

helifan
30th October 2013, 12:39 PM
since this is about "inexperirnced piolt thred" i need to get some advice. I've been flying toy/mini quads for couple of years and i finally went all in with a QAV540 RTF purchase...i've had it for 3 weeks now and im loving the crap out of it...however, from time to time i flip the switch to fly manual mode but that scares teh crap out of me -its sooo different than atti mode.

what are peoples advice to someone like me who wants to learn how to fly in manual mode...i think im more scared that im gonna crash it then anything. How do i gradually fly in manual mode?

this is how i currently fly in atti mode, i dont think im that bad...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC4HKWaYNic

thanks

c5galaxy engineer
30th October 2013, 12:54 PM
since this is about "inexperirnced piolt thred" i need to get some advice. I've been flying toy/mini quads for couple of years and i finally went all in with a QAV540 RTF purchase...i've had it for 3 weeks now and im loving the crap out of it...however, from time to time i flip the switch to fly manual mode but that scares teh crap out of me -its sooo different than atti mode.

what are peoples advice to someone like me who wants to learn how to fly in manual mode...i think im more scared that im gonna crash it then anything. How do i gradually fly in manual mode?

this is how i currently fly in atti mode, i dont think im that bad...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC4HKWaYNic

thanks

The advice given to me by folks who I consider to be pro's is to get high and switch to manual mode.........(high being altitude although I suppose the other high will help you not care so much.....lol). I took their advice and it was easy! Fly high in fast forward flight and you will quickly get the hang of it. I was like you.......scared as hell to wreck my baby until I got that advice. when it all goes to hell just switch back to atti mode and recover, land and clean your shorts out. I found it to be easy but I still am having trouble holding a hover but this technique has helped me tons. I encourage you to try it!

helifan
30th October 2013, 03:09 PM
hahaha, i was practicing in manual mode about 5 feet off the ground and i crap my pants every time...but to take it up high and perform manual mode flight would be insane...i would hate to crash my baby cuz she is working soooo smooth and just to my liking...im afraid i will crash and she will never behave the same...

but i will slowly move higher and fly in manual mode...

thanks

Reliku
30th October 2013, 05:45 PM
Hold on Brett, that advice is great, but it applies to fpv flying! LOS flying is a whole lot different. The best way to learn it is by starting during hovering, just like with heli's years and years ago. First you master tail in flying (shouldn't be too hard), then side in, and after that, the trickiest: nose in flying. Now, the QAV doesn't really have a tail, but you get what I mean ;)

Flying manual is much and much easier if flown fpv, because it feels much more natural. When flying LOS, you have to orientate more: "where is the quad?" and "what's the quad's direction?". While flying fpv, the answers are "right from where I'm looking" and "right the direction I'm looking at", but when flying LOS it if often exactly the inverse!

So my advice to you can go two ways:
-start by mastering hovering, then slowly graduating to forward flight
OR
-buy an fpv setup (that has MANY more advantages! :)) and go with the original advice (grab some altitude, flip the switch, have a good time and flip the switch again if all hell breaks loose ;))

Don't worry though! The biggest thing holding you back is often just fear for something that's not going to happen. I would advise you however, to just be careful with your steps, take your own pace and don't do anything you're not comfortable with "yet". Flipping the switch to manual mode and giving full throttle is not a good advice ;)

Good luck!

criccio
30th October 2013, 06:50 PM
^ yup. I can't for the life of me fly LOS in manual mode but in FPV its easy. Left is always left, right is always right....etc.

How guys like warthox fly the way they do LOS is mindblowing to me.

Reliku
30th October 2013, 07:07 PM
It's not impossible, I can (arguably) fly LOS at LEAST as well as I can fly fpv, but it's a lot different and you need to learn yourself different reactions ;)

It's just different :p

helifan
30th October 2013, 08:15 PM
yes, i have purchased a fatshark attitude goggles and im in the process to getting a FPV camera for FPV flights. but again, i wanted to take baby steps before i jump into FPV. i wanted to make sure my LOS flight controls are drilled into my head.

Im actually super excited that you guys are saying manual flight in FPV is easier. i will test this out very soon and let yall know. how it goes

Reliku
31st October 2013, 05:05 AM
If you're looking for a cam, look no further: sony super HAD II CCD from securitycamera2000 is probably the best cam for a great price. Absolutely love mine, and it's like $40. The image is so amazing, you really don't want anything else. Trust me ;)

helifan
31st October 2013, 12:20 PM
i got my dual rate setup right now at 90% on my NAZA when in manual flight mode. havent tought about going down to 50% but i will try that out and see if controls are smoother responsive. My Expo is set just right so, i will mess with the dual rate more.

i noticed that in Atti mode, the climb rate and other control inputs are good for smooth stress free flights..hahahah

manual mode gets my heart pumping!!!!

Sicarius
31st October 2013, 12:49 PM
I haven't opened mine yet but, in the reviews someone wrote:
And this picture was uploaded too (click to zoom):
34707
Thanks brah!

helifan
31st October 2013, 02:01 PM
what is the recommended camera lens? the stock ones im looking to get has a 3.5mm which is 90 FOV...do i need something like a 2.8mm?

Carbon
31st October 2013, 02:15 PM
3.6 for fixed wing, 2.8 for multis

Reliku
31st October 2013, 04:04 PM
Personal preference, I've flown from 3.6 to 2.1, and you really need to get used to them if you want to fly properly. Generally 3.6 for fixed wing and 2.8 for multi's, although I use 2.8 on my fixed wing as well now.

helifan
4th November 2013, 08:16 PM
okay seriously manual mode suck. i dont think i will ever try to fly in this mode...i took it up high and made many attempts but it just flies like crap. Atti Mode, i love you!!!!

criccio
4th November 2013, 08:24 PM
^sigh...

Carbon
4th November 2013, 08:25 PM
okay seriously manual mode suck. i dont think i will ever try to fly in this mode...i took it up high and made many attempts but it just flies like crap. Atti Mode, i love you!!!!

WHAT.

THE.

FCK.

chatch
4th November 2013, 09:07 PM
hahahahaha

BrainDrainDx
4th November 2013, 10:57 PM
My camera came with a 3.6mm lens, I put a 4.0mm lens on it, I like it much better. 2.8 would be crazy wide, am I learning wrong?

I've had my 350qx for a couple weeks now and here is my 8th flight with it. No manual mode. I used Smart mode(GPS) to take off, stability mode(atti) to fly around and return to noob to land. I don't feel any urgent need learn manual, I can fly it FPV/LOS since I fly heli for 8 years now.

I wanted to build a qav/cc3d setup for this, but the QX setup seen here was much cheaper and seems to hall the mail.

My only complaint is low range. 200mw 1.3 on ibcrazy ultras doesn't get me as far as I would like. Would a better ground station mount help?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee1zc8jWNhc

criccio
4th November 2013, 11:01 PM
4.0 lens? Holy crap that must be like looking through a paper towel roll! 2.8 is the sweetspot for me. 2.1 is way too wide.

As for the whole manual mode thing, its all about what you're trying to do. Just hover around and grab great stabilized footage? Great, grab a Naza and have at it. Actually FLY these things and do acrobatics and take REALLY cool footage? Grab a CC3D or Naze32 and be blown away. It's all personal preference.

BrainDrainDx
4th November 2013, 11:09 PM
now that I think about it, I can't see anything but ground using more than 75% throttle on this thing and trying to stay same altitude. I also have the camera pointed up so much so I can barely see the ground hovering level. I guess the wider view would help in that regard. I have a 2.8, I guess I should try it.

The problem I have with manual is my signal is so bad I wouldn't be able to fly out of it easily. Stabilized it is easy to recover and keep going.

Reliku
5th November 2013, 11:06 AM
In stabilized mode your machine is actually fighting your input to keep it level. For photography and hovering that may be great, but for actual flying, most if not all people I consider "pro's" fly manual. Try it sometime. It is just so much smoother and you don't have to worry about what the machine is going to do without you wanting to do it. If you're getting out of range too fast for it there's something SERIOUSLY wrong.

Besides, the video range doesn't have an impact on your control range, so that should not be an issue either. In the worst case scenario you get a bit of static through your screen. If you completely lose signal at close range already then check your equipment because that's not right.

You should be able to do over a km or so even with stock antenna's (in an open field that is) (this applies to your VIDEO link).

As for the lens, 4.0mm! Holy Moses! That's REALLY narrow!

I've flown 2.1 and I consider it pretty wide, 3.6 is small though. I fly 3.6 on fixed wing but I wouldn't want any smaller than that. For multi's & low flying you really want a wider angle lens because you need to be on top of your surroundings. If you can only see ground during fast forward flight, how are you going to make sure you don't slam into an object? Or worse, a person? I consider that pretty dangerous, no offense.

2.5 or 2.8 is pretty decent for multi's/low flying. I currently fly 2.8 on my quad and it's about the sweet spot. 2.5 is nice too but you need to be trained for that. I've flown with 2.1 and although it had a great view, it's hard to guess your distances with it and I wouldn't recommend it. Especially not for starters. But it's definitely flyable and if you're on top of it it's a lot of fun. I know some people who fly with 2.1. I've never met anyone who flies with 1.8 but well that's REALLY wide ;)

But again, 4.0 MAN THAT'S SMALL! Really. Put a 2.8 lens on it, switch into manual and get some space for practice. And be prepared to have a blast ;)

I used to be hesitant about wider angle lenses and going out of atti mode myself. But ever since I flipped the switch and noticed how incredible smooth it is, I don't want anything else.

helifan
5th November 2013, 11:34 AM
^sigh...

hahaha, i know, i know, i know....i will continue to practice at least 1min per each flight. There is no way ima fly atti mode 4ever...

Byro
11th November 2013, 09:00 PM
I've got trouble with my cc3d atti mode. I flip from manual (my favourite) to atti and my quad does a 60 degree anticlockwise spin (yaw) and tilts about 15 degrees to the port side. After correcting this it flies fine and level, until I go back to manual and I have to fight the opposite twist and tilt.

Time to plug in the CC3D to my PC.

Stringer
12th November 2013, 09:48 PM
I've got trouble with my cc3d atti mode. I flip from manual (my favourite) to atti and my quad does a 60 degree anticlockwise spin (yaw) and tilts about 15 degrees to the port side. After correcting this it flies fine and level, until I go back to manual and I have to fight the opposite twist and tilt.

Time to plug in the CC3D to my PC.

My quad and tri used to have this as well, along with an unstable yaw at speed for the quad. Shifting to Acro Naze32 sorted all that.

Reliku
13th November 2013, 04:45 AM
That has to do with inproper calibration. Your quad is under the perception that something else is level, say 15 degrees. Trimming it out will tell it to keep flying in -15 degrees (so the quad is NOT level), but the zero-position is still at 15 degrees. This can be fixed by (re)calibrating.

emjay
13th November 2013, 07:28 AM
I've got trouble with my cc3d atti mode. I flip from manual (my favourite) to atti and my quad does a 60 degree anticlockwise spin (yaw) and tilts about 15 degrees to the port side. After correcting this it flies fine and level, until I go back to manual and I have to fight the opposite twist and tilt.

Time to plug in the CC3D to my PC.

Hey Byro - yeah something not cool there. Plenty of us OPers in Melb if you need some assistance with set up.
Firstly - don't fly a multi in manual (as per flight mode settings) - is possible that you use the word 'manual' as per use with other FCs.
Make sure the board is truly level (i.e. with a bubble level) on the deck or FC case during the 'level' calibration in the vehicle setup wizard.
You can orient the board forwards, backwards and some say inside out (hmmm maybe not) and and adjust the forward angle within the GCS to correct for any mounting preference you have.

MJ

crashy
13th November 2013, 03:02 PM
^ yup. I can't for the life of me fly LOS in manual mode but in FPV its easy. Left is always left, right is always right....etc.

How guys like warthox fly the way they do LOS is mindblowing to me.

I started out flying (planes) last year, strictly LOS. The left/right business - going away, coming towards, upright, inverted - really screwed with me for a long while. I crashed many, many planes because of it... luckily, most of those were foam scratchbuilds. I'm much better now, and I think the main reason was a change in perspective that came when I started experimenting with FPV

- When flying LOS, always put yourself in the mindset that you are in the plane. -

Don't think of the plane as being north of your position, flying west, inverted, and wanting to head south and go upright. Think of yourself being in the plane. Bank right and pull up.

Believe it or not, flying FPV (or a simulator in cockpit view) should help you cement the "be in the plane" (or "be the plane") perspective in your head. Now when you're flying LOS, you just have to force your brain into that mode.

criccio
13th November 2013, 03:36 PM
Good advice ^^

I think it's just going to be a "seat time" thing, so to speak. I'm not too worried and I'm sure i'll get better with time. Thanks!

Reliku
13th November 2013, 03:40 PM
Once you're used to it it's really amazing how people can mess up right and left when flying towards themselves. But it's just lots and lots of practice ;)

crashy
13th November 2013, 04:01 PM
Once you're used to it it's really amazing how people can mess up right and left when flying towards themselves. But it's just lots and lots of practice ;)

LOL, up and down when inverted too. I don't know how many times I've been flying peacefully with my goggles on and then heard a whine-crunch noise followed by one of my LOS-flying buddies yelling "CRAP! I wanted to go UP!!!"

Reliku
13th November 2013, 04:12 PM
I've had to drag the transmitter out of people's hands so many times because they messed it up and they're spiralling down, only making the situation worse LOL :p

crashy
13th November 2013, 05:01 PM
Something else for inexperienced FPV pilots.

At first, keep it simple and stay close.

Don't rush to build a hugely complicated system, either on the vehicle or on the ground station. Don't immediately try to start flying long distances or at high altitudes; just fly around your location. Keep it simple and get used to setting up, flying, fixing, and maintaining your FPV platform. Keep it simple on the vehicle: camera and video transmitter. Keep it simple on the ground: video receiver and goggles (or screen).

The more gear you have, the more stuff you can mess up (from inexperience), the more stuff you have to carry around with you, the more time you have to spend debugging the whole system. Keep it simple... and fly. Don't let an overly complex system keep you from flying!

helifan
13th November 2013, 07:02 PM
i will be flying my first FPV flight today as soon as i get off from work...this is gonna be EPIC...just not sure if its epic fail or win

crashy
14th November 2013, 02:28 PM
i will be flying my first FPV flight today as soon as i get off from work...this is gonna be EPIC...just not sure if its epic fail or win

So... Win? Fail? Something in between? :D

squishy
14th November 2013, 02:34 PM
do or do not, there is no try...

oh and when you crash, don't be all cry baby and stuff, suck it up, learn from it and drive on!!

helifan
14th November 2013, 05:08 PM
one word...DIZZY!!!!! hahahaha and the fogging of the goggles? WTH...but overall, this fatshark thing is pretty dope...

i flew on the 3.5 lense gonna try the 2.8...i dont think the 3.5 is the lens for me

crashy
14th November 2013, 07:53 PM
Well, you did better than I just did. Plane is gone, gone, gone.

Oh well.

This must be the universe sending me a message. I just received my LRS in the mail, and I have new antennas and a more powerful video transmitter coming in the next few days. And EagleTree just announced their new FPV/OSD system. And I just started building a new plane.

Edit: And to keep this on-topic, another tip for inexperienced pilots... don't fly beyond line-of-sight, FPV or otherwise, if losing a plane -and all the gear on it- is going to be a big problem for you, financially or emotionally.

Reliku
15th November 2013, 03:53 AM
^ don't fly what you're not prepared to lose is the general rule, but long range amplifies it

Wearyman
15th November 2013, 10:00 AM
^ don't fly what you're not prepared to lose is the general rule, but long range amplifies it

Absolutely. If you aren't prepared to lose a plane then you aren't prepared to fly FPV, let alone long range FPV. And you WILL lose a plane. We all do. The trick is to lose a cheap or cheap-ish plane, and not your super-expensive rig with the fancy gopro.

helifan
15th November 2013, 09:37 PM
Okay seriuosly...wtf is up with manual mode...I take it up high and give forward input and the thing just points straight down....is this the behavior of manual mode...damn I have already mastered atti mode but this manual flight is an epic step above atti mode...

criccio
15th November 2013, 09:54 PM
Its how all flying vehicles actually operate and have for a hundred years. Push the stick forward and you begin to pitch forward until you center the stick again. Once you do, you keep that attitude until you correct it with reverse pitch.

"attitude mode" on some flight controllers use an accelerometer to measure what is "level" and fights smooth flight to keep you level. Once you've realized how much better actually flying is instead of just hovering around it's quite a realization.

Reliku
16th November 2013, 07:31 AM
If you keep giving forward input you will flip eventually. If you keep giving forward input there you will flip again eventually. That's the way manual mode works. Any stick input determines a CHANGE in current flight position. Play with it for a while, it'll feel much smoother than atti once you're used to it :)

Rexnoobs247
20th November 2013, 07:25 PM
I fly a KK2.0 and have no desire to do anything else. It's all manual mode and I love it. I can put it into an auto level mode but I need to hold the stick forward to go forward and when I let off it goes back into a hover. How boring. Feels like a bad arcade game. Real men fly manual ;)

criccio
20th November 2013, 07:42 PM
Well said, lol...

helifan
20th November 2013, 09:29 PM
no seriously tho, the problem with understanding manual should be simple but its weird....if i give forward input it should start to glide forward not look staright down into the ground. for some reason, rather than moving forward, it starts to look straight down...this is the point where i flip the switch to loser mode and cry to mama....

but im trying...

Rexnoobs247
20th November 2013, 10:38 PM
How fast is it rotating forward? As mentioned before, you push forward until you start moving forward then let off, you may even need to pull back a bit to maintain that forward flight attitude without continuing to pitch further forward. If you're holding the stick forward during flight, there's your problem.

If you pitch forward and it rotates forward very quickly, either a) don't jam the stick forward or b) try reducing your rates or adjust expos so it doesn't pitch forward so quickly.

helifan
20th November 2013, 10:47 PM
It literally just takes a nose dive and does not make forward progress....it almost pivots from its CG point and points downward. My dual rate and expos are set to rookie settings

criccio
20th November 2013, 11:00 PM
If you push the stick all the way forward then let go, it will no doubt point straight down if you have flyable rates and expos setup. It's a feeling thing, you get it or you don't. I don't think we can explain it any more clearly.

helifan
20th November 2013, 11:06 PM
Yeah....I just have to somehow figure it out....but damn I'm running out of pink panties

Byro
21st November 2013, 01:44 AM
You only want to touch the forward control, hardly any input at all. If this works you know your expos are still too high. What happens in manual if you don't press anything else?

Reliku
21st November 2013, 03:03 AM
Sounds like way too high rates or way too enthusiastic stick input. You don't fly by jamming the stick all the way forward, you move it just a few degrees. You never really use full rates unless doing really crazy stuff.

Go easy on the sticks man ;)

chatch
21st November 2013, 03:07 AM
i think he's used to going full stick because atti mode hahaha

Reliku
21st November 2013, 05:02 AM
That's exactly what's happening. Imagine: at FULL stick forward you still fly only slightly forward.

The main advantage of manual mode is the disappearance of any tilt limit though. You can make much smaller turns, faster breaks and quicker descends. And it's much smoother. But I suppose I can somewhat imagine what's it's like to be used to atti mode, and I fully understand his problem. He just needs to get used to it.

And be gentle on the sticks! ;)

Channel 1
21st November 2013, 08:17 AM
The interference is the cell tower about 65 degrees to my left.

How does a cell tower cause that type of interference?

Wayne

Wearyman
21st November 2013, 10:39 AM
That's exactly what's happening. Imagine: at FULL stick forward you still fly only slightly forward.

The main advantage of manual mode is the disappearance of any tilt limit though. You can make much smaller turns, faster breaks and quicker descends. And it's much smoother. But I suppose I can somewhat imagine what's it's like to be used to atti mode, and I fully understand his problem. He just needs to get used to it.

And be gentle on the sticks! ;)

Yeah, sounds like he needs to dial in a shedload of expo into his controls if he's just flipping it right off.

Honestly, I now dial at least 25% expo into everything I fly or drive. I have horrible "hamhanditis" and if I don't have a pile of expo I am all over the place. I can't imagine switching from ATT to manual mode on a multi without first dialing in a HUGE amount of expo. I don't have a multi, but when I do get around to building one, I think I'll be flying in manual mode with at least 50% expo and some rate limiting when I try to fly it for the first time.

Scotttu
21st November 2013, 10:49 AM
How are you using expo (Exponential control) without d ialing in dual rates?

Reduce the rates to a bout 35% and try again - do that on the TX ....had to do that for my tricopter, think it's at 35%, when I want to get crazy I flip the switch to put it back to 100.

I've never used expo, ever, things go too crazy if you push too far on the stick....I li ke linear movement.

Reliku
21st November 2013, 10:52 AM
Same here, no expo, just gentle handling.

I do understand not everyone has accurate fingers though.

jgullo53
21st November 2013, 10:54 AM
i honestly have no fun flying unless i have at least some expo, but again that is just me, everyone is different!!!

c5galaxy engineer
21st November 2013, 10:58 AM
Not only is Grasshopper right, but he has the hands of a surgeon and the steel nerves of a fighter pilot.

crashy
21st November 2013, 11:09 AM
Hmm... I fly my planes with about 70% to 80% expo. Any less than that and my flying becomes very twitchy, even on something like a Bixler. With that setting, I effectively have a slight deadband in the center, followed by a wide range of fine control, and then a narrow outer band that is essentially full deflection. I also use slightly slower servos and set up the mechanical linkages and radio programming for the finest resolution and longest transit time I can get for just the right max deflection. (It usually takes me several flights to get a plane dialed in the way I want.)

And before you ask, the answer to your question is: No, I don't have Parkinson's.

Wearyman
21st November 2013, 11:16 AM
How are you using expo (Exponential control) without d ialing in dual rates?

Reduce the rates to a bout 35% and try again - do that on the TX ....had to do that for my tricopter, think it's at 35%, when I want to get crazy I flip the switch to put it back to 100.

I've never used expo, ever, things go too crazy if you push too far on the stick....I like linear movement.

I don't. I use a dual-rate setup like pretty much everyone else does. I just always leave the expo rates on. I flew at 100% for a long time, but my hamhandedness resulted in really shaky flying and more than a few unintended maneuvers. I started putting in expo, and now run around 25% on everything, including the steering on my FPV truck. I could flip it to 100% if I wanted, but I have a hard time controlling it then.

Rexnoobs247
21st November 2013, 11:56 AM
I haven't really been a fan of dual rates and I only use a little expo on my wing. On my hex I just have my rates dialed down a smidge to keep it from being overly responsive

helifan
21st November 2013, 01:11 PM
negative, i dont jam the stick input at all...too scared to do that in manual mode. I know this sounds weird and maybe i need lower my dual rate down even further (@50% now) but when i give slight forward input it will start to move but point downward faster than progessing forward...its freaken retarded...ima film it and show you guys what i mean...

Reliku
21st November 2013, 01:29 PM
Expo = exponential. The increase of travel/movement stick is small at small stick input and large at large stick inputs.

It acts like low rates on small stick movement (fine control) and acts like high rate at full stick movement (so you still have full throws).

I don't like it though. You need to get used to it and it's easy to oversteer at larger steering. No expo is nice and linear and easy to predict. No mistakes.

You do need steady hands for it though, that's why many people prefer expo.

Rexnoobs247
21st November 2013, 01:42 PM
I'm with you, I prefer linear myself.

squishy
21st November 2013, 01:53 PM
How do you guys get this far in the hobby without any understanding of expo?

Scotttu
21st November 2013, 02:12 PM
How do you guys get this far in the hobby without any understanding of expo?

Never needed it :)

I have had planes that requird me to FLY them, and I did. Would expo make it easier? ma ybe

I understand Exponential and Logarithmic......what I don't understand is how mu ch EXPO will reduce at say 1/8th inch deflection vs non expo.

If it turns DOWN the gains such that for the first half of the stick press, great....exponentially increase - fine....but never liked fly ing with that.

So basically my misunderstanding is, does it t urn it DOWN so you can turn it up slowly?

Rexnoobs247
21st November 2013, 02:23 PM
I like my aircraft to fly like real aircraft, since I do hold a pilots license. Cessna's don't have expos.

Channel 1
21st November 2013, 02:33 PM
In fact, this makes me wonder. Why does UHF get a better range than 72mhz (on the same power output)?

Wavelength and antenna matching, at 72MHz a half wave is about 7 feet in length while the transmitter will have a shorter than that whip antenna and for that antenna to be matched to the transmitter, it must be loaded, be it base top or midsection, producing an antenna with less that zero gain, the situation is even worse in the air.

None the less in both situations the effective radiated power (ERP) will usually be less than the transmitter output power.

Conversely with UHF a half wave will be about 1.5 feet allowing at least on the transmitter side the use of a gain antenna which allows for an ERP higher than the transmitter output power.

Wayne

crashy
21st November 2013, 02:34 PM
There's both positive and negative expo... and, oh joy, different radios define them differently. On Futaba, negative expo "softens" the stick sensitivity from neutral, while positive expo ramps it up (i.e., more sensitive at center, less at max throw). JR and Spektrum do the exact opposite.

You probably aren't getting linear control responses even if you don't use expo. For control surfaces, look at the geometry of your control horn, pushrod, and servo arm... in most cases, you're getting more control surface movement per degree of stick movement at servo center than you are at max servo rotation. Have you ever set up a control linkage really poorly such that moving from 80% to 100% stick actually causes your control surface to come back the opposite direction? I have. Surprise! :D Motor / ESC combos don't always respond linearly either.

And... even if control surface movement or motor RPM response is perfectly linear with control stick throw, what about the aerodynamic response? Not linear!

So, in the end, you either accept how the craft flies with no special settings, all factors considered... or you "tune" actual flight response using mechanical adjustments, expo settings, adjustable curves, dual rates, control input mixing (mechanical or electronic), steadier hands, etc. It's all very much up to you.

Oh, I didn't even mention aileron differential. So many cool things you can do with just control horn / servo arm / pushrod geometry alone. Now add in bell-cranks, servos moving other servos, etc. Much fun!

squishy
21st November 2013, 02:44 PM
I like to tune them to they feel perfect...as for expo, I have found that 35% is perfect for me on all airplanes. I fly my Naza without expo because it's not a direct control.

The full size argument and comparison is complete nonsense.. A full size aircraft will behave sluggishly compared to a scale model, expo which softens the middle, the reaction, actually makes it more realistic, not less. And I bet full size craft have some sort of non-linear way of softening that center. Most likely mechanically..

Hucker
21st November 2013, 03:33 PM
I like my aircraft to fly like real aircraft, since I do hold a pilots license. Cessna's don't have expos.

+1 to squishy whose name predicts his expo

Noobs: Cessna's don't have expos...but fighter jets do. RC airplanes with powerful brushless motors are much closer to fighter jets than they are to 152/172 trainers when you look at things like power to weight, speed envelope (stall speed/max speed), roll rate and g tolerance. Because of the wide performance envelope optimizing with expo and dual rates simulates what flight controllers do in fighters. The only aspect of 'real' aircraft I yearn for is women thinking I look cool rather than like a goggle wearing dork.

There are so many nonlinearities in the system from the control geometry, the servo torque output, the airspeed that it just seems crazy to think there is *anything* special about the linear mix on your radio. It would be a fun experiment to have a buddy setup 5 different mixes from negative expo->linear->positive expo and have people pick what they like. Or even better challenge people to find the mix that they swear by.

Scotttu
21st November 2013, 03:49 PM
^-True....

And as said, servo's and radios don't always behave the same.

But I'm happy with default settings and when it's too much I use dual rates....which keeps me at the radio's default rate vs an expo rate.

gobigdale
21st November 2013, 03:53 PM
I have flown with and with out expo, and I can tell you that once you get your expo setting dialed in your flying experience is so much more enjoyable. The main reason I use it now is to get all of my different aircraft "feeling" the same way on the sticks. There is nothing worse than having to learn how much movement is too much movement from plane to plane. Expo helps make the plane less twitch around the center of the sticks.

I have noticed flying FPV that I like less expo. Still trying to figure that one out.

crashy
21st November 2013, 04:16 PM
...I have noticed flying FPV that I like less expo. Still trying to figure that one out.

Do you have any flight stabilizers running? Even though I like a lot of expo, typically 70 to 80%, I have noticed that I like to dial it down (perhaps by half) on planes with stabilization.

Edit: could be due to differences in the planes you fly FPV vs LOS, too. Are your LOS planes more aerobatic than your FPV planes?

Derrick
21st November 2013, 04:29 PM
This is just my opinion/preference...

I use expo, normally around 30% (softening around neutral stick)... I use Expo because I still want higher control throws at full stick, but I want to have fine control near center stick. Setting up my planes this way allows me to "not" use dual rates... I have all the control motion I need by moving the stick further. Leaving my dual rate switches open and available for other functions.

Reliku
21st November 2013, 04:54 PM
Wavelength and antenna matching, at 72MHz a half wave is about 7 feet in length while the transmitter will have a shorter than that whip antenna and for that antenna to be matched to the transmitter, it must be loaded, be it base top or midsection, producing an antenna with less that zero gain, the situation is even worse in the air.

None the less in both situations the effective radiated power (ERP) will usually be less than the transmitter output power.

Conversely with UHF a half wave will be about 1.5 feet allowing at least on the transmitter side the use of a gain antenna which allows for an ERP higher than the transmitter output power.

Wayne

Hm, good point there. Didn't think about that.

Theoretically though it should be possible though, given big enough antenna's.

Pretty much same thing when I was wondering why people don't use cloverleaf antenna's on the LRS, but then I realized the antennas would get pretty huge to the point of being impractical :p

squishy
21st November 2013, 05:36 PM
This is just my opinion/preference...

I use expo, normally around 30% (softening around neutral stick)... I use Expo because I still want higher control throws at full stick, but I want to have fine control near center stick. Setting up my planes this way allows me to "not" use dual rates... I have all the control motion I need by moving the stick further. Leaving my dual rate switches open and available for other functions.

Exactly my feelings! Although I do switch into lower rates on occasion for high speed flight..I have been known to rip off more than a few wings..

Rexnoobs247
21st November 2013, 05:38 PM
Squishy the full size "argument" is anything but nonsense. The fact that you call it an argument is nonsense. It's a preference. You're clearly not a full scale pilot, so keep your opinions about full scale feel out of this.

A Cessna doesn't have expos built in. From what I can tell, I move the yoke half way to the right, and the ailerons deflect half of their potential.

In all this expos vs no expos debate, all us non expo guys are just saying we fly with linear settings in our controllers. The aerodynamic factors and servo movements are outside what were talking about. Of course the control surfaces move differently when they're under load, and of course the servos don't travel 100% consistent.

This really escalated quickly.

Rant over

squishy
21st November 2013, 05:45 PM
I never said a Cessna has expo (the small one's anyway), but all the complex full scale fly-by-wire flight software systems do, that's without question, I actually searched before replying. There's patents on algorithms which use non-linear curves on all the control surfaces of a jet like the F22, or even a large passenger plane. A Cessna moves so slow and reacts so slow there is no need for expo (or fly-by-wire), it's like flying a Night Vapor compared to the F22, and I wouldn't use expo on anything that flies as slow as a Night Vapor, what's the point?

Even if I had a giant scale gasser, like 40%, I would still use expo because I am flying via a radio link and not direct control and feel, we have no force-feedback from the air pressure and therefore are in effect flying-by-wire...even on something that large and slow reacting I would use expo...

I find that people who do not use expo, have never tried getting use to it or they didn't understand it enough to set it up correctly and realize it's benefits. Have I seen great pilots who never use it? Sure, but they could be much better..This is kinda like the thumbs vs pinch method. Even with logic, stats and results that clearly show pinching being the more accurate and the better method of control, we all still use thumbs...Campfire smoke is also more harmful than second hand cig smoke but you won't find me putting out my campfires anytime soon...humans are a stubborn lot..

I will tell you how I do it, it's simple..

I set the expo on all my airplanes to 35%, that way the expo feel is always the same, my soft creamy center is always the same size.

Then I adjust the rates (on max rates) to the max the airplane can handle without folding. This changes the range of control but my expo always seems to feel the same, even though I know it is compressing or lengthening depending on what the rate is configured at.

If the airplane is fast, I setup a lower rate (usually 50% of max) and I use this rate for high speed flying to create less drag.

When I fly the airplane for the 1st time I pay attention to rates, and I adjust as needed, not expo, I leave it alone.

I have some friends who do the same thing, every person has a difference preference. I know a guy who uses 25% on everything and one guy who uses 15%. Whatever your number is, it exists, you just have to take the time to find it. I would use an airplane with a wide flight envelope and start at 25%, most people will fall between 0-50% (spektrum/JR) expo..

When I race by b4.2 buggy on the track, I use expo on both the steering and throttle and I can adjust the levels during the race, very handy when the rear tires start getting tired and my finger still wants to win...I consider expo like a buffer...from yourself...why wouldn't you use it if you makes you a better pilot?

Channel 1
21st November 2013, 08:19 PM
Theoretically though it should be possible though, given big enough antenna's.

That is true and generally speaking watt for watt you will get more range out of the lower frequencies.

For example the State of Florida is in the process of decommissioning a 72MHz Motorist Aid Callbox system, the callboxes used a quarter wave coaxial antenna, giving them what could be considered a unity gain vertical antenna on the transmit side and the receive side, which I worked on used a 72 MHz yagi mounted 80 feet up on a tower at the east side of Alligator Alley, and that link had a 35 mile range.

Now considering the transmitters being user powered (pulling down the handle operated a generator which charged a cap) had to have a very low transmitter output that’s some dang good range which could not be achieved with VHF or UHF.


Pretty much same thing when I was wondering why people don't use cloverleaf antenna's on the LRS, but then I realized the antennas would get pretty huge to the point of being impractical :p

I am looking into “cloverleaf” antennas and most of what I am finding is they are circular polarized which really complicates finding off the shelf directional antennas.

<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://fpvlab.com/forums/ /><st1:City w:st=</st1:City>Wayne

criccio
21st November 2013, 08:31 PM
It's my understanding (and experience) dialing in a lot of expo allows you to have a really high rate (and i'm talking about multicopters here) and still be able to make small, smooth control movements. Without any expo its VERY twitchy. For example, watch how fast hadriez can spin at the 0:15 second mark when full stick, then watch the rest of the video where he can fly smoothly. That couldn't be done without expo.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2rwJU4x8_w

Basically for CRAZY high rates, it makes everything easier give you the best of both worlds.

Byro
21st November 2013, 10:21 PM
That is true and generally speaking watt for watt you will get more range out of the lower frequencies.

For example the State of Florida is in the process of decommissioning a 72MHz Motorist Aid Callbox system, the callboxes used a quarter wave coaxial antenna, giving them what could be considered a unity gain vertical antenna on the transmit side and the receive side, which I worked on used a 72 MHz yagi mounted 80 feet up on a tower at the east side of Alligator Alley, and that link had a 35 mile range.

Now considering the transmitters being user powered (pulling down the handle operated a generator which charged a cap) had to have a very low transmitter output that’s some dang good range which could not be achieved with VHF or UHF.



I am looking into “cloverleaf” antennas and most of what I am finding is they are circular polarized which really complicates finding off the shelf directional antennas.

<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://fpvlab.com/forums/ /><st1:City w:st=</st1:City>Wayne
Making a helical antenna is pretty darn easy. I've made a 5.8 ghz ones, and they are fiddly tiny. The size would get troublesome for 72 MHz though. Have a look through IBCrazy's designs.

Sicarius
22nd November 2013, 03:20 AM
I have to pitch in here, making a cp antenna for 433 and below would do anything but extend the range, simply because the penetration is higher (therefore the reflection is lower) than the lost gain you get from having CP. I think a linear patch or dipole will do much more for the range of uhf and vhf systems, not to mention the complexity of hauling 72 mhz helicals around in your large truck :D

Reliku
22nd November 2013, 03:35 AM
Yeah, 72mhz or even 35mhz as we used here should be manageable, but considering you get wavelengths of 10 meter or so such antenna's will be impractical. You could use a cp antenna though, and like video use a high gain antenna on the ground, possibly just use two (or even more?) Antenna's, one spw and one directional. With a cloverleaf on the plane this should give great range but no loss of polarization. The problem however is that your cloverleaf will be like half a meter across :p

I believe there are people who use yagi's for control though. But I'd rather go with a normal whip antenna for practical purposes.

Just imagine the penetration you'd be able to get using 35mhz and a high gain antenna... damn.

EDIT: a half meter across cloverleaf is obviously a UHF, not a VHF antenna ;)

Sicarius
22nd November 2013, 04:22 AM
I believe i read if you use two dipoles with 433 on 500mw you already get like 20km of range.. why screw around with directionals in the first place :P

Reliku
22nd November 2013, 06:51 AM
Because some idiots want to fly 100km ;)

DD1369
23rd November 2013, 11:34 PM
This is just my opinion/preference...

I use expo, normally around 30% (softening around neutral stick)... I use Expo because I still want higher control throws at full stick, but I want to have fine control near center stick. Setting up my planes this way allows me to "not" use dual rates... I have all the control motion I need by moving the stick further. Leaving my dual rate switches open and available for other functions.

I'm fairly new to the RC game, and am only flying Quadcopters ATM. I had a ton of problems at first because the Quads were so twitchy. I finally found a post that explained how to set up my Turnigy 9x (w/er9x) to use one of the pots to provide variable rates. That was a big improvement, but I found that with the rates turned down I didn't have enough control at full throw for acro flying.

I just found this thread today, and after setting expo at 30% it's whole new flying experience.

I realize that there are strong opinions on either side of the discussion, and I certainly don't have the level of skill & experience needed to contribute anything to the dialog. However, from the perspective of an "old guy" who just wants to enjoy flying his quad(s), finding out about the benefits of expo has really improved my experience.

...thanks all!

gen3v8
29th November 2013, 04:27 PM
Expo and Dual rates? I use both too suit myself, after all I`m the one who flies my gear the way I like it feeling on the sticks.

FPVBOB
30th November 2013, 10:50 AM
Spiked,,


You hit the nail on the head.. " What we need is people willing to reach out and mentor novices" Its easy to tell people what to do and not to do but taking the time to teach a newbie should be what many want to do. If you want a better hobby take the time to teach others who are new... As a ham radio operator when I first got into the hobby just making a phone call would get me all the help I wanted.. And I met some pretty good people / friends while doing so.

Reliku
30th November 2013, 01:12 PM
There are already plenty of guides on that though. This is (or was intended as) a good 'what NOT to do'-thread ;)

FPVBOB
30th November 2013, 01:33 PM
There are already plenty of guides on that though. This is (or was intended as) a good 'what NOT to do'-thread ;)



Yes I agree.. But in this thread people are complaining about how newbies are flying when they shouldn't be and people trying crazy things with their equipment......................... Complaining doesn't fix the problem educating those doing wrong is. :)

FPVBOB
30th November 2013, 02:38 PM
I don't disagree... But sitting on a forum complaining and not trying to fix the problem with education doesn't help..


Ive also got a few news articles where " experienced" fliers have done stupid stuff also. If you want to better the hobby don't put a " newbie" down help them... :)

Channel 1
30th November 2013, 03:04 PM
Ive also got a few news articles where " experienced" fliers have done stupid stuff also. If you want to better the hobby don't put a " newbie" down help them... :)

Bottom line is there is strength in numbers and the more people become involved in a hobby such as this one the better it is for all involved.

Reading through the thread I see some unique parallels to Ham radio which not all that long ago was a dying hobby until the FCC dropped the code requirements and is now back on the upswing.

But old habits die hard and many of the brass pounders still have the attitude that non-coders are not Hams and reject the notion of helping to the point of being snide about the so called lack of knowledge of the newbies, when it is they who are falling behind the times.

Wayne

Reliku
30th November 2013, 03:06 PM
Explain exactly where we're putting anyone down? We're mainly just analyzing what people often do wrong, and well yes, those are mainly 'newbies'. Nothing wrong with that. In a sense that's just as much 'educating'.

spiked3
30th November 2013, 08:11 PM
Hey FPVBob, thanks for that.

I haven't even logged on here in months, although I occasionally look in.

I got into FPV to do it before it became illegal. I never supported long range FPV, but I didn't say anything against it either. Well, looks like long range will be illegal soon (and no I could care less about arguing that, it will or it wont and arguing isnt going to change that). And my local AMA club has also banned short range, there chief reasoning being the general attitude of the FPV community (argue with them not me).

The ego here is what the club talks of, and has just turned me off so completely, I shoved $1000s of dollars of stuff to the back of a closet. Some I had just gotten, brand new, like the QAV G10 arms, foxtech 5.8 gear. I just got sick of the disrespect from newbs who think they are experts and have the only correct opinion. People whose careless reckless flying I bit my tongue about and had not say anything about, jumped out to play 'me too' in the bashing. And vendors and retailers ripping people off left and right while the consumers screams 'more please'.

FPV is dead to me. I may play with it on land based vehicles just because I got all this crap. Then again, I may just carry boxes to the trash shoot, this group ruined it for me.

Ask carbon how he responded when I offered to explain to him about how IMUs work, if you haven't already seen his public display, long since edited. F mentoring, I was wrong.

BacklashRC
30th November 2013, 09:34 PM
I have been flying RC for going on three decades. FPV is now an integral part of that passion. I cannot imagine personalities on a forum stealing that joy from me.

There are some people here that I like less than others. No big deal. On the other hand, some of the forum members go out of their way to help people out. These are the members that I attempt to develop a friendship with.

It seems insane to say, "FPV is dead to me.", or anything is dead to me, because members of an associated group have what I consider to be a bad attitude.

If you love FPV but can't stand the crowd that flies FPV, ditch the crowd, but keep flying.

Rexnoobs247
1st December 2013, 08:24 AM
The great thing about FPV is you can do it as part of a community, or you can go out and spend time with yourself, your rig, and the outdoors. In a sense, a little like hunting, except hopefully nothing or nobody gets killed lol! My favorite part of this hobby is going out by myself to somewhere a little more remote and just enjoying the scenery and the quiet. Don't get me wrong, flying with a buddy or two is a blast as well, but its nice to be by yourself from time to time.

As far as 2.4 vs UHF, I use both. For medium to long range I use UHF, but obviously both have their applications. Bashing one over the other is pointless.

c5galaxy engineer
1st December 2013, 12:20 PM
FPV is dead to me. I may play with it on land based vehicles just because I got all this crap. Then again, I may just carry boxes to the trash shoot, this group ruined it for me.


Spiked.........
Please forgive me if I am taking this out of context but your statement makes 0 sense to me. I assume that if you are of a maturity level to be able to afford to shove $1000 of equipment into the back of a closet then your maturity level should be at a point also to realize that your statement is like a kid on a playground that would rather sit against the fence because someone called him a ''poop face''. He would rather let his precious recess time go to waste to display his contempt to all on the playground then move on and play. Why as a grown man would you give that much credence to others opinions? You have opinions as well but you are entitled like everyone else. Your ''Im taking my ball and going home'' attitude should have been left at the playground several years ago. It is an attempt at manipulation (and is frankly quite tiresome). Just to voice that publicly to the group makes it so.

I hope you don't give up FPV because your feelings got hurt but that is your internal battle and no one but you is to blame for FPV being ruined for you!

Again I apologize if I took it out of context but it sure seems fitting that you would post that comment in a ''what NOT to do'' thread.

WildWill
1st December 2013, 12:47 PM
Haha, this thread has jumped the tracks. I wonder how many people have already sent spiked a PM about buying his gear. ;)

It's the internet, take it with a grain of salt. I've taken what I wanted from the information posted here and elsewhere and used it to obtain my objectives.

TBO, the best information I've gotten came from watching Bruce Simpson and Ali Sham Wow videos.

Reliku
1st December 2013, 12:58 PM
Unfortunately when someone powers one of those on while I'm half a mile away it causes me to want to fly alone. Or with one or two people only. Big gatherings don't do anything for me anymore

Main reason I dislike 2.4 control, and main reason I want to switch to 1.2 video :/

c5galaxy engineer
1st December 2013, 12:59 PM
I would agree Will........I learned everything from watching Homer Simpson.....lol

Rexnoobs247
1st December 2013, 09:45 PM
Lol @ poop face. That's about the same level of awesome as calling someone a butt head. I had a guy trying to argue with me at a party years ago and I was so sick of him that I threw him a curve ball and called him a butt head. Yes, we're both in our mid twenties. His face was priceless as he walked away along with other people who were standing around chuckling at the butt head insult.

Ok back to the topic at hand ;)

spiked3
2nd December 2013, 04:03 AM
Spiked.........
.....and is frankly quite tiresome....

Holy crap dude. I didn't know the lab offered free wannabe psychiatric analysis.

I think you are over analysing it. What I said was people here are cliquey, and jerks. I have chosen to no longer participate in the hobby with them, and I will make no further effort to encourage youth in a dead end hobby. I'm not sure what ball you think I have to take home, and sorry about you being tired of my 1 reply in the last 2 months. (well actually not really, I could care less if it makes you tired).

I replied in the thread in response to a) earlier bashings from the cliques and b) in response to someone who agreed with my earlier position, that I have no changed. Is that so difficult to comprehend?

F'n trolls, yeah, your right, tired of them.