Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well I must just add I use 608's on my 4 way diversity RX and the first 4 I used were a bad match. 1 poor, 2 ok and 1 good then I messed up and blew all 4 and had to replace them and the next lot were a much better match. They are still not very sensitive but as its for close to medium range I'm not too worried. Maybe one day I will make a better one but you have to think about the price of 4 good receiver and decide if its worth it to you. As soon as the range gets over 1/2 mile I switch to using a 14db aerial anyway so max range for my diversity is not important to me. I don't think long range is where the best use of diversity is, I think it is of more value at short range and near buildings.

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sensitivity of diversity receivers is hugely important, and a diversity receiver would be great at long range.

I could use my 14 dBI patch for far away, and let the diversity switch to a non directional antenna close in. When I fly, I fly close, touch and go's, long range, all in one flight. This is exactly where I need a diversity receiver.

Im very glad to hear that he is not going to use those cheap ass airwave modules, those just plain suck and no one would be happy with them. Even the low power close in guys would have their range limited much shorter than normal, and lots of static with airwave modules.

Right now I have a pretty good lawmate receiver... I am very willing to spend money to increase the performance of my system, but if im going to spend a bunch of money, it has to work better. Im really glad that Mklarich decided to go with better receiver modules, even if it does cost me more :P

JettPilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised to hear your comments on the airwave modules, I've been using them exclusively for well over a year now, and don't have a bad word to say about them.

As far as static and short range, I'm not sure where you get this from. I get better results from the airwave 612/623 combination than from by original 600mW BWAV system.

For range, I fly routinely several km away using even an 8dBi patch. My current problem is the uplink range/quality, certainly not the downlink.

Of course, since they are sold as modules, you need to take care with PCB layout, clean supplies, etc., but that is far from a problem.

If you are willing to beta-test an airwave diversity system I would love to get your feedback

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could use my 14 dBI patch for far away, and let the diversity switch to a non directional antenna close in. When I fly, I fly close, touch and go's, long range, all in one flight. This is exactly where I need a diversity receiver.

Thats not a diversity system you need it's more of an automatic switch.

As far as static and short range, I'm not sure where you get this from. I get better results from the airwave 612/623 combination than from by original 600mW BWAV system.

For range, I fly routinely several km away using even an 8dBi patch. My current problem is the uplink range/quality, certainly not the downlink.

Yes I agree the Airwave modules are not that bad, they are usable and a great price. We don't all want to fly over a mile away and not all of us can anyway with standard R/C gear.

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fly routinely several km away using even an 8dBi patch. My current problem is the uplink range/quality, certainly not the downlink.

Hello Anthony,

It's good to see you around.

Question for you:

How can you fly few kilometers away without loose your plane?

I know some RC receivers are far better than the others, but normaly I can not go further than 2 kilometers away.

My video downlink works great that far, but my RC system is very limeted.

Is there any anntena, or booster for Futaba radios to improve the range?

Thank's !!!

PS: Sorry guys, I got out of the topic :huh:

Edited by wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I agree the Airwave modules are not that bad, they are usable and a great price. We don't all want to fly over a mile away and not all of us can anyway with standard R/C gear.

Terry

Why would anyone want to use receivers that are " NOT THAT BAD ??? ". Its pretty well known that airwave modules are sub standard... , and now Mklalrich has just tested this and come up with the same results. A very good, high quality module is just not that much more. Why are you so anxious for sub standard receiver modules Terry ? If you are that cheap, you probably should not even consider a diversity receiver...

You dont have to fly over a mile away to need good receiver sensitivity. If you have a low power system on a small electric plane, and bank the airplane so that polarization is bad and the airplanes antenna is in a null spot, you will get a weak signal. Even in much closer range work, most videos you see get some areas of static, and low signal level. Having good receiver modules will make the difference between more areas of static, or a very nice clean high quality video.

JetPilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jett, I wouldn't say that they are 'not that bad', I would say that I can't tell the difference between the lawmate stuff, and the Airwave modules, at least the models that I have been using for the last year.

What kind of testing is your comments based upon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had bad experience with one too. A $10 chinese made receiver had about 3x the range of the Airwave (actually Felsweb) one, and no dropouts at close range while the Felsweb would give me drops at 100m...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would anyone want to use receivers that are " NOT THAT BAD ??? ".

JP, I will try and make it easy for you. :rolleyes: "NOT THAT BAD" means they are perfectly useable but not as good as they could be. I don't go out and buy the best wide screen plasma tv for the kids room I buy one that dose the job.

Why are you so anxious for sub standard receiver modules Terry ?

I am not anxious for sub standard rx modules but I do recognise there is a need for cheap modules as there is a need for top end modules.

If you are that cheap, you probably should not even consider a diversity receiver...
:o

I think you miss the point again. Cheap modules helped me get a 4 way/direction diversity system designed and tested at minimal cost. Now the system is proven I have the choice to upgrade to better modules if needed, but they are not needed, it performs the job I wanted perfectly. Maybe you have the money to just go out and buy the best of everything and not care if its realy needed or not, I don't. :(

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More than happy to beta test a unit for you as long as you don't see it as a conflict of interests.

Matt

Good news Matt, are going to have any beta version available for sell?

Or any idea about final cost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a 900Mhz version? With Spektrum, JR, Futaba, and XPS 2.4Ghz modules, I think the days of 2.4Ghz video are numbered.

-dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have the choice here, 900Mhz is not an option :(

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the days of 2.4Ghz video are numbered.

Not sure I would agree with that one... At least until 5.723GHz to 5.875GHz equipment comes down in price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.4Ghz video in Europe will stay for a good while yet I think.

This thread is called 'New Diversities' anyone seen them yet ?

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Am very new to all this so excuse my dumbness

I did buy a FPV system which had a 500mw Tx . an 8 channel Rx with battery, a 8Dbi patch antenna and a 1/3 CCD KPC 700CB camera All this for under 375.00

Then I bought goggles for 349.00 that did not work that great because they did not have brightness or contras controls. But then did find another set that did and they work great.

Range of this system is beyond my fear point which is close to half mile. As I have never gone more than 300 yards the old way.

Please help me understand what your set up will do. Something different or the same?

Thanks

3R

PS please spell out things like FPV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I normally fly a smaller Electric airplanes and heli's and finding my airplane up so high that I would have to spiral dive to figure out which way the airplane was heading is just a LOT different than I have flown for years. I normally fly tree top level and below at 800 feet or less. The electric airplane at 1500 feet and almost out of sight and the video link still running sparks some real BIG "I want to go farther and higher" idea's. I converted my Futaba 7C on 72 mhz antenna over a couple of years a go so I could fly inside my car looking out the window on cold winter days. I replaced the factory antenna with a rubber duck with a BNC connection. I guess I'll be finding out soon enough how far my ground link transmitter will go. I will continue with my Fuataba R138DP and try to send back a signal when the receiver fail safes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×