I've been experimenting with inexpensive (read "cheap") on board video for a while, so
far without much success. It seems like a big hassle, especially since I really don't
want to fly the plane from the video...i just want to get some cool stuff recorded. I
think the best solution to this is to get a video camera and strap it to the plane,
as Paul Naton did in Endless Lift 2. Of course, this requires a somewhat large plane
and some good lift, not to mention risking your video camera. My hope is that smaller
video cameras will come down in price fairly soon and make it worth trying. Either
that, or I'll try to find a used/damaged camera (for example, a camera with a broken
view finder, which i really don't need anyway).
Tord wrote:
> here are always those who know how to up the
> output on your tx (say using directional antennas, high-power
> ops), but in most cases the video link dies first!
>
> It is normally less than 1000 yards, unless you use
> pro stuff, satellite links or something likewise
> exoctic.
>
> A german group using 4.4 MHz equipment stated that their
> tv-tx range was about 800 meters, depending on direction,
> and they use small directional antennas!
>
> I gather that Tom Rust at times has run into rf problems,
> with the tv camera eventually giving a very close view of
> the terra firma before transforming into something that
> might once have been a glider with tv-equipment onboard.
>
> There is simply no room in most models for high-power tv-
> equipment, so you will have to rely on directional antennas
> and such, and asistants, working the amplifiers and antennas,
> if you want to get far from your home base. And a safety pilot
> will den needed as well!
>
> For selfnavigating aircraft (aka UAVs), whichever size, you
> still want to have a take-over-and-bring-home function
> (a bit like a TACOMA (sp?) Herc). And a selfdestruct, and
> emergency parachutes!
>
> We are now speaking LOTs of money, and extremely complex
> operations, not least legal-wise, as AF, ATR and other
> agencies must be cooperated with.
>
> The among best pictures I've seen have all been taken from
> simple aircraft, like the Teddy and a HLG!
>
> So a two miles radius, at the very most, for us without
> sponsorship from CIA, The Sultanate of Burnei or similar
> institutions!
>
> EPP models are good as they provide some shock protection
> for your equipment an ability to take off almost anywhere!
> Size is a matter of legalities, taste and funds.
>
> Tord,
> Sweden
>
> PS A lot forget that the a badly taken photo doesn't get better
> if taken from a model airplane, and that their own upturned
> faces aren't the most interesting either!
>
> As a technical feat aerial photos are as old as flight itself,
> so while it at times can get thrilling, as when some strap their
> digital camcorder on the back of their models and then start low-level
> aerobatics, while photos of the local model airfield seldom is!
>
> <URL:http://www.ozemail.com.au/~majali/Zagi-THL.jpg>
>
> <URL:http://www.ozemail.com.au/~majali/Zagi-N-big.jpg>
>
> <URL:http://www.tord.nu>
>
> Local weather: http://www.reab.se/weather.html
> --
> If reply difficulties - use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Tord S. Eriksson, Ovralidsg.25:5, S-422 47 Hisings Backa, Sweden
> Tel. (mobile): +46 (0)736 77 88 96
>
> RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
>"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
