FPVLAB

image
Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 93

Thread: open source HD FPV using 802.11n for under $500

  1. #1
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    oregon coast
    Posts
    90

    open source HD FPV using 802.11n for under $500

    this is a R&D thread not a store jump in if ya can help

    **UPDATE**
    Please don't just tell us "it won't work" it does keep reading
    also no "it's to heavy" if it is i'll beef up the airframe
    if you can't stop yourself send it to me in a pm i enjoy a good argument now and then
    BTW positive criticism is encouraged ie "it won't work because of this, try that instead"
    oh yea please read the whole thread b4 commenting we're trying to do something not just defend the theory

    ** thanks**

    http://www.h264soft.com/
    http://store.videosurveillance.com/i...264-ip-cameras

    take your pick i'd stay away from the ones with small lenses (tunnel vision) and i'd try to pick one with at least a plastic lens if not glass (vibration)

    and make sure its running linux


    http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss...&sprefix=alfa+ get 2 of these

    a laptop
    one of those r/c sim controlers


    theres your parts list till we rip open one of those cameras and see what inside:
    might need
    http://www.sparkfun.com/products/198
    Last edited by not a ham yet; 24th November 2011 at 03:08 PM. Reason: update
    who says a laptop can't fly?

  2. #2
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    oregon coast
    Posts
    90
    http://www.h264soft.com/uc7001h.html

    this one has my vote $180 shipped
    Last edited by not a ham yet; 23rd November 2011 at 03:32 AM.
    who says a laptop can't fly?

  3. #3
    One with the machine FPV FLYER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,121
    Not a bad idea.... I am just concerned about the weight of this. I am going to be watching you now
    ONE WITH THE MACHINE --> https://www.youtube.com/FPVFLYER

  4. #4
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    oregon coast
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by FPV FLYER View Post
    Not a bad idea.... I am just concerned about the weight of this. I am going to be watching you now
    why do so many ppl have to tell me that theyre "watching me" if your a spook i already have one on twitter you guys should get together. really one of you is enough
    who says a laptop can't fly?

  5. #5
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    oregon coast
    Posts
    90
    ok back on topic:

    why do i pick this camera instead of a go pro?

    well a GoPro doesn't have a built in linux server which is really the crux of this project

    why don't we use an arduino/android/iphone/ipod touch

    there expensive and packed full of unnecessary code (are you really willing to perform a mindwipe on your favorite toy??)

    why do i vote for that camera:
    #1 i like its brain http://www.qihan.cn/channels/hisilicon.html
    it's got all the things were looking for
    built in usb(to drive rx/tx)
    vid processing,
    osd,
    one of these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-485 (this is all of our IO channels (servos and sensors))
    it runs on 12 v (which really means 10 to 14),
    we can mod it to plug a gopro in,
    it can handle multi streaming (which means we can program it to send telemetry even when we don't have enough bandwidth for vid ie THE LAST THING TO GO IS THE OSD)
    ARM controlers are common whatever software we end up writing (or reusing ie ardupilot) can probabally be used on MOST of these h.264 ip cameras

    #2 <600 grams and it replaces your rx,tx,osd,and hopefully is an autopilot too


    why the alfa cards
    theyre HIGH powered 2 watts when you know the trick to em
    they wiegh nothing, the rubber duck antenna they come with wieghs more
    they tend to do what you tell them too(like linux) instead of fighting you (like winblows)
    there cheap


    if ya got any more questions just ask
    Last edited by not a ham yet; 24th November 2011 at 03:13 PM.
    who says a laptop can't fly?

  6. #6
    Pilot
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,076
    pure 802.11 (aka wifi) for transmission is a little bad. If by n you mean that you plan to use the 5.8ghz freqs, uhm.

    Camera:
    - sensor doesnt look all that good
    - uncased, the weight is mostly ok
    - chip doesnt seems to have any low latency mode (?)

  7. #7
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by not a ham yet View Post
    http://www.h264soft.com/uc7001h.html

    this one has my vote $180 shipped
    That camera is 650g! What are you planning on mounting it on?

    Also, I'd be concerned about lag due to compression time as well as power consumption.

  8. #8
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    oregon coast
    Posts
    90
    planing on 2.4ghz
    using n because it handles interference better(gives you a higher bitrate in much worse conditions)
    i've done ALOT of long range wifi research (i don't like paying for internet)
    20 miles is easy when you own both antennas

    yea i know the chip and sensor are cheap (but thats kinda the point)
    and like i said theres alot of ARM controllers (i bet we can find great stuff in surplus in the near future)
    who says a laptop can't fly?

  9. #9
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    oregon coast
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by ramboky View Post
    That camera is 650g! What are you planning on mounting it on?

    Also, I'd be concerned about lag due to compression time as well as power consumption.
    trex 450 i'm replacing the camera, rx, tx, osd, and one antenna system whats yours weigh

    see lag discussion here: http://fpvlab.com/forums/showthread....irplanes/page3
    Last edited by not a ham yet; 23rd November 2011 at 07:49 PM.
    who says a laptop can't fly?

  10. #10
    Navigator
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    200
    I fly fixed wings and multis so I cant really compare, though even the heaviest of those is only 2kg. A non-FPV T-Rex 450 would be what... under 1kg?

    A RVOSDv5 + camera + vTx and EzUHF Rx will weigh less than what you're proposing and you still need to add the weight of sensors and controller or IMU.

    Even reading the other thread I'd still be concerned about latency. Especially in a heli. And especially one as small as a 450. If you're running a controller like ArduCopter maybe but could you fly a heli manually with anything more that the tiniest lag?

    I'm not trying to knock you at all, I'm just curious how you're going to solve the technical challenges.

    Perhaps if you detail your full setup and what you're trying to achieve others here will be able to chime in.

Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Antenna Simulation - Information source
    By Mictronics in forum IFR - Video Link Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 14th April 2019, 03:14 AM
  2. Replies: 41
    Last Post: 8th October 2011, 08:16 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •