Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
> John Doe wrote:
>> Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>> John Doe wrote:
>>
>>>> Check out the first minute of this video, it's worth your time...
>>>>
https://youtu.be/9LbDtKsdS9w
>>> Must have a pretty good radio in it, to do that.
>>>
>>> It's a wonder you don't get a loss of signal
>>> once in a while.
>>
>> Not much lost between the camera and the SD card :)
>
> But for flight control.
That's FPV. I tried to explain that in the follow-up to my own post.
There are plenty of examples on YouTube of what the pilot actually
sees (FPV). But they usually upload the recorded onboard pretty video.
In fact, the pilot FPV video is glitchy. How glitchy depends on stuff
I don't know enough about. I think one factor is voltage drops.
Another might be antenna placement versus aircraft orientation during
flight. And of course the choice and setup of the video transmitter
and receiver.
There are two different transmitter-receiver combinations.
The controller transmits to the receiver on the aircraft.
And there is a video transmitter on the aircraft that beams back to
the video receiver for display.
Almost all now have video return signals from the drone. The only
difference is whether it's Wi-Fi or analog.
> Abd flying above trees, if it had a "return home"
> function on loss of signal, that could be messy.
I have been a little disappointed in the combination of GPS and manual
flight control. I'm not sure the makers are technically capable to
combine those two. I think that's one reason users suffer "flyaways".
I didn't like the manual control of my Bebop 2. It flew automated GPS
courses well, but that was not interesting after the novelty wore off.
If I'm concerned about losing a drone, I will use my Marco Polo.
Currently I plan on avoiding GPS during flight. I plan to concentrate
on decent FPV. There are various categories of drones. Picture taking
drones include GPS. Racing drones typically don't.