Jump to content

headhunter23

Trusted Member
  • Content Count

    279
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by headhunter23

  1. Nope, just had read that you guys did some testing as to the reason why leaving patch on ground increased range versus having patch on stand. From what I understood the measurments came out to be more noise reduction related than an increase in signal quality. Anyways long story short it seemed that decreasing noise had a big affect on range. So if noise on the receiver side in the airplane could be reduced then I would hope the range would also be increased by doing so. At this point just an idea... what are your thoughts on using a cage around a receiver providing the mesh allowed for th
  2. So pretty much blocks everything, except when the holes in the mesh(dependent on size of holes) allows higher frequency waves through. So this could cut down on noise bellow a certain frequency correct depending on the mesh design? From what I've been reading it could cut quite a bit of noise. Am I reading this wrong? Ivan.
  3. Yet another idea popped in my head a couple days ago. I remember watching some science channel ... I think TLC. The episode was how radio waves are affected by the size of a mesh covering over a fm or am radio(been a year or two since seeing it). I'm sure most of ya understand how it worked, guy tried different sized metal meshes and found one that was the same wave length or something that canceled all radio channels to the radio player. Ok, here's the idea, is it possible to just have a correct size mesh covering a receiver that would only allow then needed mhz or ghz through? I'm sure
  4. Ron, had looked around for depron, it's wierd we must not have it here so much in Kan a da, eh? As neither rc shop carried it and I wasn't willing to drive an hour and a bit to toronto to see if some of the stores had it there, so went with coroplast. Tried 4mm coroplast(4x8), decided to make 84" flying wing, wished I had taken photos to show you guys. Apparently when you make it out of one 8x4 sheet making both the top and bottom you can only make it 82" wide(this size weighs in 970g, for further testing, I'm going to get 2mm corroplast and reduce blue core that holds camera further). I c
  5. I gotta say I bust a gutt reading the the descriptions on the items... that guys hilarious the way he writes.
  6. Ya had looked at that after seeing the video you posted... are those ufo's flyable(the micro one you just stated)? I mean in terms of direction, they seem to float on their own... perhaps there is some degree of control.
  7. I had briefly looked at the thread on rcgroups.com seems that the ufo is coming from same production line or atleast general area. Ron why don't ya convince kilrah to move his micro fpv system to one o these bad boys I remember seeing a vid of his where system weighed in 2.5-3.5g with camera. Wonder what it's like outside with a little wind... Ivan
  8. Came across this on youtube... no way to just pull board and such and change motors/prop to larger platform? edit... came across huge thread on this... not sure if guys have pulled it apart yet to remake... will read later.
  9. ahhh... that's too bad, thought lipo's made more volts as you added more plates....
  10. This one is completely floopy I know theres some new tech coming soon I'm sure to rc world about denser lipo's or some sort of lithium based batteries but until then I noticed there are a lot of times where a lighter power source would be a big plus, even a few grams. So my question is, has any company latched on to making ultra light lipo's but not done in cells, just one pack that serves 11.1v so you save weight on heat shrink, aluminum tabs, lipo bags(whatever that term is), etc... yea it's a few grams but for some of the ultra small planes this would be a big benefit for something not
  11. Couldn't you just use a y connect and flip servo's to which ever way works? Or use a special y connector that reverses servo... couple other tricks. Otherwise kilrah is right in just using the 2 channels and mix. Ivan.
  12. I have the cousin to the fx, an ls70 which works great, not too worried about lag and such. As I wouldn't be flying with it, just friends and family able to look around etc. Thanks. Mr. speed that was what I was looking for, too bad it doesn't auto focus... kinda strange not to have them linked to eachother...
  13. Bugger... still looks like hacking a regular p&s is really the only way to get a light weight zoom function and 3x seems to be all that's worth zooming... unless platform was vibration free. Not likely.
  14. hmmm... just an idea is all, was curious as to wether it had been done and wether it actually worked. Buggar. claiming that much distance and only getting a mile or two is more than false advertising. Although I'm pretty sure we got over 2km on the water with our frs's 8-10 years ago, I would have thought the range would have increased by then atleast based on all the companys advertising such. But I'm sure water and being up north with not much interference helped a lot in that aspect. Ivan.
  15. http://www.cobra.ca/cobra/en/product/printer/PHWC594 was where I first noticed 45km range, wikipedia states under optimum(which is possible with rc airplanes as it would be line o sight above sky) 40 miles or 60km has been possible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Radio_...cal_information rc-cam your right about the gmrs, whole thing is slightly confusing. Seems that if your frs radio has gmrs then the watts can increase to 2 watts in canada eh!? What's that all a boot? Eh? Anyways kidding aside, from what I've been reading is that gmrs has a few channels devoted to frs. About gm
  16. Hmmmm... still trying to understand, your saying that frs radios are less sensitive but seem to have more range than a good radio system(say store bought futaba 72mhz is what I would call a reasonably good system, seems to get around 2-2.5km)? Just trying to associate. as it still doesn't make sense... again I'm not too technical in this respect. Have reread a couple times... so there seems to be less power for frs radio system correct? Are you saying that the data just wouldn't be consistent enough to fly? MMm...... ok... try rewording. By converting from 450mhz to 72mhz you loose the 2
  17. I'm just wondering wether batt disconnected on impact. Would explain no luck via video signal. Hope ya find it. Ivan.
  18. Just curious but why would it reduce the range by switching to an rc frequency? (I'm sure its more complicated than that, but if that's all that's needed)
  19. Was reading up some of mr-cam's fcc stuff and one of the articles was talking about family radio service for hunting. Anyways probably completely off base and probably not possible, but curious as to wether these frs radio's can be modded to another frequency and merged with radio and airplane receiver. I don't know too much about that kind of stuff but figured if there's already the 20 mile range of these things, wondering if they can be adapted at all. Ivan.
×
×
  • Create New...