Horus vs LoRa APRS (433 MHz)

[Radiocose]

Hello group,

I'm currently trying to decide between two possible tracker implementations that are:

1) Horus V3 on a recovered RS-41 (I have a couple of them with their parachutes).

2) LoRa APRS on 433 MHz based on one of the ubiquitous LoRa modules from China.

From a cost perspective, not a great difference.

As far as the design of the payload is concerned, using the RS-41 would (in my view) imply that a stacked payload could be required, with a second box (a few meters below the RS-41) for the video cameras and their batteries.

In terms of HW reliability at altitude, have anyone in this group had some experiences with Lilygo LoRa modules?

More in general, which could they be the relevant criteria to make a decision?

Of course I could also launch both trackers in the same flight (sort of redundant tracking) but this would also double the cost of loss in case of an unrecoverable landing.

Switching to the video recording section, could in your opinion 3 x ESP32 CAM modules with a frequent shot interval suitably replace a GoPro camera? I'm thinking about generating "timelapse" videos from the ESP32 CAM shots in place of using a GoPro, thus reducing cost, weight and power supply requirements for the payload. I'm mainly concerned about the difference in video quality (e.g. resolution, colors, etc.). Any experience/opinion?

My apologies for the very long list of questions, thank you in advance for any feedback.

73, Daniele IZ5WWB

[Mark Jessop]

I'm a bit biased (given I wrote Horus Binary!), but I'd go with both. 

The RS41 solution is extremely well tested, and you know it'll be fine at altitude (assuming you use the right batteries!). New listeners don't need any particular hardware, any SDR that supports 70cm or an existing 70cm ssb receiver will work to receive, and many amateur radio operators will already have this.

On the other hand, LoRa APRS will probably have existing coverage in your area.

No matter what you fly, you need to be prepared to have your own receiver with you when you go chase it, since there will be unlikely to be coverage right down to the ground where you land.

On the video... the ESP32 cameras are going to *much* poorer imagery/video quality compared to a GoPro.

73

Mark VK5QI

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UKHAS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ukhas+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ukhas/a8eca1ec-07b6-428e-ad3f-ca3adc84b726n%40googlegroups.com.

[Radiocose]

Thank you Mark for your prompt reply. Yes, I think I will go with both trackers: the RS-41 above, in its original case, antennas, etc, and a second box a few meters below, enclosing the LoRa module and the video equipment (the GoPro plus the ESP32 CAMs with a convenient shot rate).

73, Daniele IZ5WWB

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ukhas/CABD2Lt1GD0fNHgONR9tBncJ%3DeaKnhrW7QBRiedO-FRbvj3Tc7A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nick McCloud]

The London launch a couple of Saturday's back had a Go Pro & ESP32-CAM on it. Not yet seen any Go Pro footage but the ESP32-CAM price performance is good but overall picture quality is poor.

Steven in the Netherlands has flown a RA-02 LoRa module running UKHAS & HorusBinary v2 & v3. External temp went to -40℃ with no issues for the tracker on the inside of the insulated box.

The 'challenge' with LoRa-APRS is that you are reliant on the ground stations which may not provide the coverage you need. But no reason not to transmit that as well as UKHAS LoRa which is super simple to receive.

ANY flight comes with risk of loss of payload - says one of DaveA's repeat customers pre-Covid. The more testing & prep you do before hand reduces the risk but it may still land in water or somewhere totally inaccessible, you just have to live with that as a possibility.

 

On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 11:08 AM Mark Jessop <lennieth...@gmail.com> wrote:

No matter what you fly, you need to be prepared to have your own receiver with you when you go chase it, since there will be unlikely to be coverage right down to the ground where you land.

This is absolutely essential - you need to be clear about your prediction and your ability to get close to the landing area as it comes down that last 500m. This will give you enough to get close so you can re-acquire the transmission as radios on the ground have a very limited range. Sondehub will have a good stab at guessing the landing area but it is far better the more data it has.

[John Laidler]

The lack of a "pedestrian mobile" receiver was a factor in my lost payload recently. I will be better equipped next time!

John

M0WIV 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UKHAS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ukhas+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ukhas/45ae1f5f-f1a4-4c6a-a102-d6ec9dadb294n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ross G6GVI]

Yesterday's flight from Ben PE2BZ gave me a perfect opportunity to compare these two modes.

I was using the same antenna (7-ele beam with a masthead preamp) to feed both receivers, via a 3dB splitter.

My LoRa iGate (a Heltec V3) started picking up its APRS on 433.775 as it came over my horizon, at 16:47 BST:

then within three minutes I'd tuned in the Horus V2 signal on 434.714 (with my IC910):

these times are in UTC (BST-1)

So the performance of the two modes at extreme range was very similar, although the narrowband FSK signal needed manual tuning-in whereas the 125kHz BW LoRa was acquired automatically.

On Tuesday, 16 June 2026 at 09:57:13 UTC+1 Radiocose wrote:

Any experience/opinion?

[Radiocose]

Thanks Ross, really an interesting comparison.

73, Daniele IZ5WWB 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UKHAS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ukhas+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ukhas/077bfd85-0b75-4ccb-8186-58f545e55f1bn%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark Jessop]

"although the narrowband FSK signal needed manual tuning-in"

.. only because you were using your IC-910 for reception. 

We have 'headless' decoders for Horus Binary to allow automatic reception without a human in the loop: https://github.com/projecthorus/horusdemodlib/wiki/1.2--Raspberry-Pi-'Headless'-RX-Guide

73

Mark VK5QI

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ukhas/CAES4b1bzw84et%2BS4Xw_%2BOJ2HoaqYz4yr5v%2BLcDJeVk_RDBJtzg%40mail.gmail.com.