benbigdude
Member
Is anyone using an IP based solution for video downlink?
IP for Video Downlink
- Thread starter benbigdude
- Start date
brimestone
Member
benbigdude
Member
Had a play with their gear and a C300 a couple of weeks ago. Just wondering if anyone has gone airborne with IP yet.
brimestone
Member
Maybe soon, but for the sake of discussion, What is the benefit over conventional FPV gears? I mean, a good ole 1.2 Ghz at 1500mW TX ( which cost way less by the way ) does the job and it does the job well.
mitmit
Member
I've bought and tried cube last year for video downlink, the main drawback is significant lag about 0.5-1 sec. range is about 100m LOS with loosing details/scattering.
not good for aerial story.
look for cofdm.
brimestone
Member
I think the delay and stream issue is due to the Transmitting power per specified by the FCC.
Check this out.
http://www.readymaderc.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=11_30_38&products_id=321
Check this out.
http://www.readymaderc.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=11_30_38&products_id=321
Last edited by a moderator:
This may be off... Gopro Hero 2 will have a wifi "backpack" for their cameras. It will allow you to control up to 50 (?) cameras. It has remote video/picture taking capability, plus live view. I don't know if it will transmit on 2.4 or 5.8 ghz. It will also allow you to use an iphone, smart device to view and control the camera.
brimestone
Member
Yes, but i'm pretty sure it will obey the FCC rules, 10mW Transmit power or even lower ( Which is pretty much just like the TeraDek )
I could be wrong, but this is my opinion based on facts.
I could be wrong, but this is my opinion based on facts.
brimestone
Member
+1...
benbigdude
Member
The camera can be controlled through IP and means anyone with a browser can see the live feed.....
brimestone
Member
You can achieve that by relay from the ground station, in that case you can use more powerful down-link from the UAV ( and have much more stable WIFI UDP broadcast ).
that might be so but IP adds so many more limitations and stuff on to it all, as there has to be something on the platform to compress and convert the video decode it in to packets, with headers, set mtu's, not to mention the inherit flaws of wifi in general for any type of distance.
where as a standard rf transmission via 1.2 or 2.4 or 5.8 or 900 would just be the modulation and the carriers along with it for the separate streams of audio and video.
imho there is just to much crap in the 2.4ghz band to want to rely on it for a real time vtx downlink....
where as a standard rf transmission via 1.2 or 2.4 or 5.8 or 900 would just be the modulation and the carriers along with it for the separate streams of audio and video.
imho there is just to much crap in the 2.4ghz band to want to rely on it for a real time vtx downlink....
brimestone
Member
Couldn't agree more.
benbigdude
Member
Really good point.