Jump to content

eMan

Members+
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About eMan

  • Rank
    RC-Cam Visitor
  1. eMan

    Multiplex Twinstar II Build Blog

    regarding antenna tuning/video Tx heat which i mention earlier, this is the forum post i had in mind: Simple Solution to Range Video 900 Mhz Antenna Issue
  2. this is a question i'm interested in also - will a 500 MW, 900 MHz video Tx cause problems with GPS reception? also what frequency do the satellites broadcast on?
  3. eMan

    Multiplex Twinstar II Build Blog

    sounds very encouraging! it's not often things exceed ones expectations when experimenting with things that fly i did some reading on Li-Ion/Poly technology and am far less impressed than i had been. i too will be looking harder at the LiFi.
  4. eMan

    Multiplex Twinstar II Build Blog

    regarding the "plane" on which the video Tx resides, i was talking about the antenna. in other words you don't want the side of your antenna, where radiation is the strongest, to be on the same plane as any of your other gear. in earlier pics i think you chose to mount it sticking up near the vertical stabilizer which i think would be OK. as far as i'm aware, having the Tx itself on the same plane as other gear isn't going to matter, just so long as there's some distance between it and the other gear. how the optimal distance is determined i have no idea. might want to power up the whole system and move the A/V Tx around and see how it affects it. from my experience with heli's and the same type of A/V Tx's, except on 2.4 GHz, i would say yes, a few inches is probably good. for whatever reason the video Tx worries me the most however and, personally, i'd keep it as far away as is reasonably possible.
  5. eMan

    Multiplex Twinstar II Build Blog

    i'm no expert, but i think i would be placing the A/V Tx as far away from everything else as possible, including the batt. i'm thinking of sticking mine in the tail and shielding it the best i can, maybe with aluminum foil, as well as shielding the cables. the antenna i will likely let hang below the fuse on about a 8 in. + extension that provides just enough stiffness to keep it fairly vertical. anyone aware of any consequences of having the antenna touching the ground upon landing? i'd be worried that placing the Tx near the battery might pump RF into the battery and therefore the whole system.
  6. eMan

    Multiplex Twinstar II Build Blog

    thanks for answering my questions guys D4RK1 - here's another type of nut that probably weighs a bit less than the "T" nuts - look at the 'Retainers for Threaded Studs'. don't know if this would work for you though. i think i'll be doing something similar to make this thing easier to split.
  7. eMan

    Multiplex Twinstar II Build Blog

    thanks for sharing this! i've got a TwinStar on the way with the brushless kit. couple observations and Q's... regarding the A/V Tx heat, you could maybe look into changing antenna lengths. i just read a post somewhere where a guy went from something like a 1/4 wave to a 1/2 wave and drastically dropped the temp at which the Tx runs. i don't remember the freq., but i don't think it would matter as far as benefits to be gained from changing the wave length. to maybe dump some antenna weight, you could look at stripping the plastic housing from the antenna, or just making your own from a piece of coax. i have learned from heli's, where there's little room to spread stuff out, that getting the A/V Tx away from the radio gear is important, but it is also important to get the antenna away from the radio gear and not mounting it on the same plane as the radio gear. in heli's i would typically let the A/V antenna hang well below the airframe (12" or so) and i'm wondering why i'm not seeing this with the planes? i'd be curious if anyone has range checked with an antenna hanging low verses mounted right to the airframe. is there a need for having 2 ESC's? couldn't the 2 motors be run off of one? the only advantage i can think of is if you wanted to do some mixing, such as with the elevator or ailerons -- is anyone doing this?
  8. zoom can be had, the question is one of weight, cost and integration with the RC Rx. one thing to consider is what needs to be controlled on the camera. if the camera is not auto-focus, then you'll likely have 2 controls to manipulate - zoom and focus - and you'll have to keep them in sync. auto-iris and gain must also be considered when selecting cameras. regarding camera chipsets, it is my understanding there are basically 3 or 4 types of SONY chips; HAD, Super HAD and Exview HAD. the latter 2 are the best, with Exview HAD seeming to be the best all a round chip, especially for low-light conditions. regarding lens focal lengths... human eye (one, not both) 2.9mm 1.7mm lens has approximate 170 degree field of view 2.1mm lens has approximate 158 degree field of view 2.5mm lens has approximate 147 degree field of view 2.8mm lens has approximate 130 degree field of view 2.9mm lens has approximate 127 degree field of view 3.6mm lens has approximate 92 degree field of view 4.3mm lens has approximate 88 degree field of view 6.0mm lens has approximate 78 degree field of view 8.0mm lens has approximate 58 degree field of view 12 mm lens has approximate 28 degree field of view this is what i've found so far - hopefully others will be able to add to it. 1/3” CMOS Wide Dynamic Range Color Board Camera With TotalFocus™ Lens (link) i have inquired about this cam but haven't been contacted yet. full specs here. one would have to figure out how to interface with the motorized zoom. things to consider... fairly small fairly light, considering it has a zoom lens (109 g - less if the control board doesn't have to be carried) zoom range seems pretty good, starting fairly wide (2.9-8.5mm) probably low cost (guessing under $300 U.S.) no focus, iris or gain to worry about - zoom only - lens uses newly developed TotalFocus™ technology. no image stabilization SONY FCBEX11D 10x NTSC Color Block Camera (link) above is a VISCA to RC controller board interface sitting on top of the camera (probably a different camera) (link) despite the bulky look, this is a very small camera considering what it has to offer... * 1/4-type EXview HAD CCD * Advanced Digital Signal Processor (DSP) * High Horizontal Resolution of 530 TV Lines * 120x Zoom Ratio (10x Optical, 12x Digital) * SMART (Sony Modular Automatic Lens Reset Technology) Lens Control * Angle of View (H) - 46.0° (wide end) to 4.6° (tele end) * Advanced Spherical Privacy Zone Masking with Mosaic Effect * Video Motion Detection * Minimum Illumination - 1.0 lx (F1.8, 50 IRE typical) * 16 bytes memory * E-Flip Function * Slow AE Response - Ideal for monitoring areas in which lighting conditions abruptly change * Spot AE * Multi-Line On-screen Display * Picture Freeze Function * Electronic Shutter/Slow Shutter - 1 to 1/10,000s, 22 steps * High-Speed Serial Interface (maximum 38.4 Kb/s with TTL Signal-Level Control - VISCA protocol * Internal/External Sync * Customizable Settings * Dimensions: 35.9 x 40.8 x 59.2 (mm) * Mass: 95g things to consider... an RC interface may exist, but i don't know how one would go about getting one yet. glassfox doesn't seem to be giving out much information at this point. it is probably trivial to develop a tiny board that would communicate between the RC Rx and the SONY VISCA protocol since both are well documented. everything auto, so only zoom to worry about no image stabilization pretty small - 35.9 x 40.8 x 59.2 (mm) fairly light - 95 g - and the housing could probably be stripped to reduce weight even more inexpensive for what it has to offer - < $300 U.S. focal length starts at 4.2mm, so it's not very wide angle, and goes to 59.2mm, which would be useless without stabilization. there are many SONY block cams available, but i felt the above was the best choice (lightest, smallest, cheapest). KT&C KPC-650CHQ (link) this is the same, or similar, camera that RangeVideo sells, except they spec it with the Super HAD chip and this one says Exview HAD. it has a CS lens mount, so lens choice is large. the lens is not included, but is offered on the same page. the big downfall of this cam, with a varifocal lens, is that you now have to deal with zoom and focus. it's also the heaviest at 306 g. i think that's pretty much of a show-stopper, so i won't provide more detail.
  9. i'm very interested in this system. couple preliminary Q's: is this system airframe specific, or could the end user adapt it to other (somewhat larger) airframes? have you conducted any tests on rotor craft? when will it be available in the U.S.? appears from the doc's there's no servo output for ailerons, so i assume it's strictly a 3 CH board (+ 2 trigger CH's)? if above is true, are ailerons typically not used or are they mixed with rudder? is there an "assisted" flight mode where one can fly manually with some degree of stabilization?
×