Jump to content

Blue Sky

Members+
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Blue Sky

  1. I'd say that You've been lucky! There are plenty of tales of woe out there. Burned screens, broken temples, bad connectors, bad modules etc. Or maybe I just fly too close to the sun!
  2. There is something to be said for Eagle Tree Systems OSD. http://www.eagletreesystems.com/OSD/OSD.htm It would give you both barometric and GPS readings as well as data logging. There are alot of accessories for it. They provide good service and they aren't likely to go out of buisness any time time soon. They have a new OSD in the works that looks great! http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread....018&page=23 Hopefully it will be out soon. Their barometric altimeter is only rated for 1 meter resolution but that may be about all you can expect to get in your application.
  3. I wonder if the OLEDS will prove more robust than the LCD displays. My Fat Shark's now have spots just from exposure to overhead compact fluorescents. The video circuits seem to be getting flakey, the display tends to white out and get moire patterns when the camera is exposed to a bright light. My old 920's acted similarly just before they quit working. I'd be willing to spend more for something that would hold up better under the somewhat harsh conditions my goggles get subjected to.
  4. I'm suprised to hear that your land based 2.4ghz video setup has better range than your 75mhz RC controller. Maybe your receiver lacks sensativity. You might consider a better double conversion receiver and a longer antenna as Mr. RC-Cam suggested. Perhaps your equipment was only intended for close range and an upgrade is needed. Unfortunately I'm only familiar with the RC plane stuff. -Dave
  5. Try servo city. They have various servos, drivers and gear heads. http://www.servocity.com/html/servos___accessories.html -Dave
  6. http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.sma Dirt cheap AND the price includes shipping! They have alot of useful and not so useful stuff. -Dave
  7. Ho's on first? For $50 I'll sell you the schematic off the back of my TV! Think of the challenge! -Dave
  8. Very tempting! The screen displays look dynamite! Still, alot of unanswered questions. There is no picture of the OSD and even the actual weight and dimensions are undecided. The specs put the autopilot and return to home on the same line, raising the question can it actually follow waypoints or is it just a failsafe feature. The specs show a vario function, would that be from gps altitude alone? Most are not accurate enough to do that. There seems to be an arificial horizon, how is that supposed to work without IR sensors or an IMU? In theory bank angle can be calculated knowing speed and turn radius but I've never seen it done for an artificial horizon. Will there be options for sensors, IMU, data logging, Google Earth mapping and waypoints? It does look promising, and the price is right. -Dave
  9. Hi Steve! Thinking about it, there are some pitfalls to using a capture card. Some cards run slowly and have trouble presenting a picture in real time. This may be doubly true if you are using the computer to control the servos. It may be best and certainly simpler to feed the camera into a video monitor. To save money you could use a TV, the larger screen would be more impressive and more people could view it at the same time. -Dave
  10. Here's another solution. Advantages: Almost free! Uses joystick or mouse. Disadvantage: You'll need a seprate wire for each servo. http://users.swing.be/philippe.jadin/servoen.htm -Dave
  11. It sounds like you want to control your servos over a serial cable. I googled up these guys, seems fairly reasonable. http://www.imagesco.com/catalog/servobds/s...servoboard.html There are probably other solutions. Why not just feed the video signal up a wire to a capture board on the computer? The only other wrinkle might be sending the signals 20 feet without some sort of line driver, amp or buffer. Perhaps you can e-mail the people who make the servo board for advice. -Dave
  12. "Gizmo" has link to a sale on the now rare CX-161's here: http://www.rc-cam.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1749 -Dave
  13. "Gizmo" has an excellent comparison of diffrent cameras on RC Groups. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=631723 As to Web Cams, the 800X600 and "HD" cams look interesting. Getting the signal to the ground and viewing it is another matter. -Dave
  14. I believe Wallaguest's post shows a picture of a pinhole camera like yours with a wide angle lens on it. The link shows the lens he is using. He meant this lens should work on your camera. The link describes a "fish eye" lens but is really more of a standard lens. Probably why it fits. It may still be an improvement though not exactly what you were looking for. -Dave
  15. Ah so. These seem to be intended for marine and automotive use. They might still work O.K. on planes that are stable. To my mind people have been looking at things backward, or should I say at right angles, as far using geomagnetic fields for stablizing a plane are concerned. It seems to me we should be using the geomagnetic field to determine inclination or tilt so as to provide a fixed frame of refrence for everything else. Where I live the strongest component of the earth' magnetic field is vertical. Inclination is actualy easier to sense than compass heading. I realize that the inclination should still be combined with other sensor readings, I just think that inclination should be first order rather than compass heading. I'm a hobbiest and not an engineer, I'm sure this must have been thought through before by people with a better grasp of things than I. I think I'll play around with it anyway. I'd really like a geomagnetic replacement for the Copilot. -Dave
  16. Hi! THese use mems type accelerometers for gravitational tilt detection. They may still have a problem when subjected to a 3d accelerated frame of refrence. -Dave
  17. Yes, for several reasons. First, the lines of resolution that you refer to are virtual lines. All video cameras in a given format have the same number of scan lines. therefore goggles that can display more of the actual scan lines will provide a better image, even with an inexpensive camera. A higher contrast ratio will also provide a better image. Perhaps even more important than the pixel count is the field of view. A wider field of view is important for FPV and is dependant on the optics rather than the electronics. -Dave
  18. Better check the numbers on your motor. The megamotors website doesn't list a 22/45/6. The 22/45 series motors are monsters. Perhaps you meant a 16/15/6 or some other motor? -Dave
  19. Sorry I haven't checked this forum for a while. Here is a link to a thread on RC Groups with some stills taken from the video and a short video clip. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread....=don+t+laugh%21 -Dave
  20. A 25 degree FOV is probably too narrow for your purposes. And it's B&W. Try this one: http://www.mavin.com/index.php?crn=204&rn=...ion=show_detail I own several and they work great. The FOV is about 50+ degrees. You can sometimes find wide angle lenses for cheap on ebay. -Dave
  21. I recently purchased a MPVR. I LOVE this recorder. So far it has worked flawlessly with even the worst signal imaginable. It is also very easy to convert the files to .WMV format using Windows Movie Maker. This file is 640 by 480 and filmed using a 200 mw lawmate Xmtr and a 380 line CCD camera. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=547223 This file was made using an absolute junk 1.2 GHZ spy cam mounted on the nose of my Stryker. It was filmed at dusk on a cloudy day. There were lots of drop outs most of which I edited out. It has been heavily compressed and reduced to 320 by 240 to save space. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=547305 -Dave
  22. Sure. That would be Bill of BWAV fame. http://www.yb2normal.com/antenna3.html -Dave
×
×
  • Create New...