Jump to content

Kilrah

FPV Experimenter
  • Content Count

    2,089
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Kilrah

  • Rank
    RC-Cam Mentor

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.andrebernet.ch

Profile Information

  • Location
    Dubai
  • Interests
    Modelling, electronics, computers

Recent Profile Visitors

1,965 profile views
  1. Of course, what I mean is that when I see that I get the "That's what I want to do" feeling - then it really gets pleasant once I do. That's what we have on our "imagery" machines, stabilised gimbal but with AHI on the OSD. To me it doesn't work at all, it's like trying to fly FPV while also looking at the model, you end up not being able to follow either. Either I'm looking at the image and the AHI makes no sense to me as it's completely contradictory to what I see, or I concentrate on the AHI and then don't even see the image anymore. Maybe with a lot of training... There are
  2. An example I just received, apparently the French have announced a new parachute requirement for 2015 for the "involved" usage cases, that none of the existing systems satisfies. So if you want to build a machine for that use case now where a parachute is already required you'll have to shell out a good $1000 for your chute system, but that's only for 4 months as it will not be compliant anymore then. And then you'll have to stop operating until someone finds a way to build a system that satisfies the requirement...
  3. Of course not, the Phantom is an awesome machine. And yes things will eventually settle for good I'm sure, but in the meantime it causes a lot of mess and uncertainty. DJI forcing things by putting millions of quads into all hands does both good and bad, good because it pushes for clarifying things, but bad because they've now started a 15-year period of negociations, regulation rounds, and general unstability in the field that nobody wants to have to go through and that was avoidable if people were a bit responsible. See the whole mess with the FAA lately, in one year UAV operations have gon
  4. I've been following all the RCG discussions about the Lightbridge since when they started in January, and it was impressive to see the number of people who found the price outrageous. Several things to point: "Drone people" have no clue about the technology leap involved, how long we'd been hoping for such a thing etc, and often don't even understand the benefits involved They're seemingly incapable of simply looking up data and understanding that the closest existing alternative would cost 4x more. And it's already kind of a moot point as like said above they probably don't even know why
  5. It's being done step by step with the big picture in mind, just takes time. And yes, the platform is perfectly adapted. The lua interpreter that was introduced in 2.0 is the perfect foundation for the configuration UIs, by having the ability to execute scripts that are basically 3rd party apps anybody can design an UI that is best adapted for a particular type of onboard device without needing any firmware changes. Now what was still much needed is a complete overhaul of the telemetry processing layer. It was initially hardcoded to the finite number and types of sensors of the D FrSky pro
  6. Now for 2015 what I want to see is a trend towards integration of all the various digital systems on a vehicle. We have an R/C system, with a radio that has a graphics screen and buttons We have onboard flight controllers or other "intelligent" airborne devices We recently got a telemetry downlink data channel, unfortunately usually independent of said devices that would have a ton of useful info to give (getting better though, there have been quite few "bridge" solutions developed this year to connect some flight controllers to some telemetry systems) Some manufacturers implemented the compl
  7. Hi all, nice to see you back here Why not. Some kind of "peer review" board where elaborate things could be discussed before public involvement... But IMO for general discussion away from the "noise" the public board here is already quiet enough. For FPV flying as its own goal, the 250-size mini quads and associated signature flying style that have developed tremendously in the past 1-2 years. It's what I currently find the closest to the pure flying freedom. As a rotorcraft they have all the related advantages, but also the capability of fast forward flight and great maneuver
  8. This one would actually be a pass for me, at least partial because it might not always do as much as expected, but in the right direction... several manufacturers (Spektrum, Graupner come to mind) have released receivers with integrated 3-axis gyros for at least "wind shake" stabilisation. Then there are heli FBL controllers with integrated receiver that might actually be closer to the definition, even if they are more a "controller with integrated receiver" rather than "receiver with integrated controller". Oh and the DJI A2, even if haven't yet heard about anybody actually making use of the
  9. Got 4 of the DJI units on order, can't wait to get my hands on one
  10. Hey, cool to hear from you again Yes probably too late for trademarking - it's already been used in the entire world for a good 6 years now, both casually and commercially and even became the standard in other languages... I think it's still possible to find challenges in niche fields... for me it's mostly the micro sized stuff. Very cool to fly a 9-cm quad in stereoscopic vision, not something everybody's doing or is capable of setting up regardless of available gear And of course just the fun of flying, but managing to make something that perfectly fits just that flying st
  11. Interesting, what are you using at the moment? single USB capture device, and software that transforms/duplicates the image for the Rift? You may have seen about this: http://emrlabs.ca/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=5&zenid=uplon1ct5d0ifcdfd7729e97u6 Allows live 3D FPV with the Rift and other HDMI-based goggles or monitors. Been doing some tests lately (not with a Rift at this point) and getting great results. Advantage being no PC-related latency, "bluescreen" or reliability issues
  12. http://www.opale-paramodels.com/index.php/en/shop-opaleparamodels/18/rescue-systems/for-multirotors There are a few videos on there.
  13. There are parachute systems that work well on the market, pretty neat and lightweight too. Some use them. Prop guard is only good if you nicely come from the side where it is and not too hard not to break it. Won't be of much use anytime the machine is above you or when it falls out of the sky. I guess the take is why carry one and put up with it if it's only gonna potentially help in a minority of cases.
  14. Pretty strange. I have had a few great exchanges with Val in the past - he's the one who got me hooked to FPV more than 10 years ago in the first place (even if it was already by the time his activity in the field had started to dwindle), and I'm still grateful for it. I still have the e-mails from 2003. I hope it's not the same as several other cases that I've witnessed of people who just go through bad days at some point, and instead of getting through them and/or talking to people to get some help become isolated and try to cling onto whatever they did in the past to try to value themselv
  15. Voice announcements already are. Recognition... still not sure about that.
×
×
  • Create New...