Jump to content

skola28

Trusted Member
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by skola28

  1. Awesome work! Keep that up! Crash9 is right on, TAKE VIDEO!
  2. I have a JR 652 (older computerish radio). I have a landing gear toggle, and a flaps toggle built into it; but I'd like to have a potentiometer instead on one or the other... probably both. I read through that thread you forwarded (nice work on that by the way); You said: "I do not know what that model Tx is. But, if it is an "older" design (pre-1995 origins) then you may be in luck. Just open it up and see if a NE5044 IC is in it. If it is, then the basic concepts outlined here can be used." Does that still apply to the JR radio I have? I'm guessing b/c its a 'computer' radio this will not work. But also, I'm not trying to ADD a channel, but rather just convert a current one. I may end up having to use a separate RX and TX for camera pan, or possibly just forgo use of the Rudder...
  3. I have a 6 channel JR radio that has two switches on the shoulders of the controller which are simple two position toggles... Do you know if it is possible to change those into a dial type switch which would use a potentiometer like the other 4 channels? And by possible, I mean relatively easy...
  4. I agree... Without having a way to easily change the focal distance, I'm not sure that a moving application would turn out as you hope. I know it works well for one focal object a few meters away, but something where you are looking around at different distances ... could be hairy. I'd say, find a way to strap a ranging device on it that could update fast enough to 'refocus' the cameras at a certain distance.
  5. As an update. I took the back of the case off, and indeed there was damage from a screw. I deduced that it could not have been me that damaged the board, since the screws I used couldn't possibly have traveled that far into the case (ie: they aren't physically long enough). I emailed Vova at rangevideo to see if he would still replace it, but I am not sure this will do any good. He has only my word that I didn't damage the board; and on the internet that usually doesn't go very far. I'll let you know how things go... http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=644584 That is the link to the pictures of the damage.
  6. I actually plugged the camera straight into my TV (bypassed all the wireless tx/rx stuff). I subsequently plugged my Gamecube into the same video port on my TV to make sure it wasn't an issue there.
  7. I recently bought a KX-131 cased camera, and hooked it up to my aircraft. The first day everything looked fine, but when I tried the system out the next day, the only thing that would show up on my screens/monitors/recorders was a blank white screen; as if that was the only thing being sent out by the camera. Has anyone heard of this or ran into this problem before? I sent an email to the store that i bought it from and I am waiting on a reply. Hopefully warranted against this failure!
  8. Thanks for the replies everyone! I'll try your suggestions out when I get back to Iowa (in Maryland on work travel right now).
  9. It just seems that if it were a power problem relating to the sharing of main battery with the motor and the vid transmitter, then it wouldn't have shown up when the battery sources were independent. I had the system installed on an RC Car where the Camera was powered by the 11.1V Lipoly while the car ran on its own power.
  10. My video transmitter and motor run off of the same battery. I ran a test on a different setup which had separate motor and video TX batteries, but I still got the interference in the video. As the throttle increases, the video disturbances are altered. At full throtttle the distortion lines in the video get nearly horizontal and they are very thin. At about half throttle, they are at about 45° and are wider (this condition is very distracting). I am thinking it is not a problem with the shared power source (the video problem at least, maybe a range problem as Mr. RC-CAM pointed out). Do you think its just a problem with my transmitter picking up EMI from the motor? Is there a shielding solution? I guess I could try moving them further apart and see if it helps at all.
  11. Hey guys, I got my entire aircraft wired up last night, and I've discovered a very disturbing problem. My video takes a huge hit when I run the motor on my airplane. I've read many times that its a bad idea to power the camera and the Video Transmitter from the same source b/c of interference, but I have them both isolated (camera has its own battery pack). I'm guessing I'm getting interference from the motor through the video line or transmitter itself. Here is a wiring diagram which shows my setup. Any suggestions? A little background as well: Brushless AXI Motor Panasonic AV100 Video Camera One of the new ebay special video systems (the ones where the sound doesn't work) 11.1V Lipoly driving the Motor and the Video TX
  12. After looking a few things up online about AM vs FM, seems that AM would in fact be WORSE...
  13. Would using a AM Modulation make any difference? I have a few of those laying around and would be interested if anyone has info on AM being less prone to interference....
  14. Wow, sorry about the plane! But interesting footage none-the-less. Also, the Robocat looks very interesting. LOL Just watched the video again, and I would be very surprised if the problem wasn't range and control related. Looked like you handled it fine, until the plane got a certain distance from you. Then it looked VERY sluggish to respond to any of the possible commands. Also, it didn't look unstable, so I wouldn't suspect a CG problem. I agree with the others that it was probably a range issue related to interference. Did you have your TX antenna pulled out? I've nearly lost 2 planes b/c I forgot to pull out the TX antenna. Gets a little ways away, then quits responding... Luckily I figured it out and pulled the antenna out PRONTO! Sounds like you're having a blast EITHER WAY! J. R. (Still waiting for my video TX/RX package to come in the mail)
  15. Couple things: All of my FPV stuff will probably involve a laptop computer b/c it allows me to capture the video directly to hard-disk while flying. I also am planning on eventually replacing all of the TX/RX capabilities with the computer (ie: plug the controller into the computer). Maybe this irTracker could be coupled with a cheap set of goggles to get the motion part. Then, tune the irTracker so it really is 1:1 movement ratio like you said. I agree that turning your eyes the other way is kinda counter-productive. It looked ok in the videos on that site, but I agree that the goggles would be MUCH preferred.
  16. I just came across a really interesting site for a head tracking device which could pan/tilt the camera onboard our little aircraft. You don't have to buy goggles; you simply turn your head a small amount and that translates to a much bigger turn of the servo. They make it look really easy online (probably b/c they are selling it!), but it looks pretty feasible. Let me know what you veterans think. Could also be a bit cheapter ($200 I think for the whole kit and caboodle) http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/ J. R.
  17. qnzkrew- If you're looking to have the most range, you may want to look into a glider platform. With relatively low power requirements, you could get a lot of 'lifting capability' and endurance from a glider with a beefed up power supply. The gliders here in the States are usually thought of as sub-par as opposed to those made in eastern Europe and the like. I guess it depends on how high you want to fly. If you don't mind losing maneuverability and speed, I think a glider would indeed be a good start. If you're looking for ground hugging distance and the ability to maneuver better, a glider would be a bad idea I guess. VRFLYER- In my experience with four-strokes they seemed to run much more smoothly than the 2-strokes that I fly today. This could be an issue with my 2-stroke engines though, in that I haven't tuned them correctly or something. A year or so ago as my senior design project, we created a FPV R/C aircraft. It was gas powered (OS Engines .65FX) We mounted the engine in a push configuration and mounted the camera inside the nose (behind glass) about 2 ft from the engine mount. With this distance the vibration was damped out enough to not be a problem. J. R.
  18. If you're looking to stay under $100 for the entire project, you are in serious trouble. Unfortunately the planes themselves and the radio required to fly them will generally run you much more than that; and thats without the video capability. You can get a cheap video system off ebay for about $60, but the cameras aren't very good (Video transmitter and video receiver are ok though). That leaves you about $40 to find a suitable camera... This is assuming you've already aquired a free aircraft to put all this stuff on. J. R.
  19. Just keep in mind the VRFLYER is basically one of the Big Wigs around here and he knows what he's talking about. From your post I read almost exactly what he read. Also keep in mind that your post was very poorly worded and not everyone on here is speaking English as a first language. Now that you know that people aren't really excited to tell people how to do things that are potentially dangerous, it helps immensely that you described where your flying field is. VRFLYER has some very good warnings in his message; aircraft that lose connection can kill people and damage property. This type of flying is NOT covered under the AMA insurance. Your question about gas... The best thing about gas is, you have a fresh set of batteries setting next to you at all times, and nearly unlimited power. Worst thing? Vibration.... You'll be hard pressed to get the vibration issues taken care of, especially with a two-stroke. The f-f-f-four strokes are better. Gas fumes are also a problem... Even if the motor is mounted in a push configuration, nasty gas exhaust can still wreck havoc on cameras. I believe eventually everyone will be flying electric lipolys in the next few years. The simplicity is just SO MUCH of an advantage over gobs of power. Good platform? VRFLYER has been flying an Easystar and so have a lot of others. For me, that platform is a little too small, as wind can really throw those puppies around (I live in a windy area, so its hard to find calm days that seem to be everywhere for everyone else). I hope I talked enough in circles to throughly confuse you ;-) J. R.
  20. Dennis, always have to show everyone up :-p AWESOME VIDEO. Really great transitions and choice of clips. Probably should have had one of us English professors proof read it for you though
  21. Amazing! I really need to fall into some money in order for this to work out for me. It looked like there was almost NO wind that day... Is that true? Thanks for posting your setup too! Very helpful in comparisons for determining what to buy. J. R.
  22. Holy cow! That head unit is amazing! Specs: Weight: less than 15 grams Rotation Range: 360 degrees (all axis); Mouse emulator mode provides control over 360 degree horizontal and >60 degrees vertical Data Update Speed: 125 Hz Maximum Latency: 4 milliseconds (from device) Drift: 1 degree/5 minutes Resolution: 1 degree (yaw, pitch, and roll) Check out the FAQ section for a LOT of info... I think this really might be the way to go with a video screen... With adrift of 1 degree per 5 MINUTES that is amazing. Plus HiDef... If only they didn't cost so much! J. R.
  23. Sweet... That WIFI car project looks promising and I can assure you I'll be following it. I bought a $5 router (just like the one he has) from www.fon.com. I think I may 'toy' around with the same thing. Kilrah, are you saying you're working on an Autopilot of sorts? On the aircraft I built in college last year for my senior design, we had a very simple method of 'autopilot'. We found a trainer R/C aircraft online which had a module that sensed heat/cold of the sky/ground. When we lost connection (or flipped a switch) the module would auto-correct the attitude of the aircraft to fly level plus a slight left rudder input (so it would circle). This actually ended up working pretty well;we had planned on further implementing some GPS waypoint following, but ran out of time.
  24. This is an open discussion of an idea I had on alternate methods of FPV, UAV, etc. I have two ideas, first off: Using 802.11a/b/g/n or any other method such as WiMAX, UWB, to transmit data to the aircraft. With all the wireless networking options going around these days, it seems that incorporating a small computer onboard an aircraft, and equipping the computer with some flavor of Wifi could be extremely beneficial... I know it is possible to tranmit data over quite large distances with Wifi. Most versions utilize the 2.4GHz frequency (not counting 802.11a which is 5GHz). Major benefits would be massive amounts of flexibility with software and modifications onboard the aircraft. Getting GPS data, telemetry, etc would be highly simplified. Secondly, why not use a SpringPCS card or similar cellphone/mobile-phone based card on the PC installed in the aircraft? This would have EXTREME range possibilities as long as you don't fly to high, or use Sprint . Just a thought, and wanted to see what some of the veterans think (Kilrah, vrflyer, I'm looking at you two). J. R. Skola Cedar Rapids, IA
×
×
  • Create New...