with the newer firmware the SRT to CSV converter script needed a little modification (they've added the "rcSignal" column at the end). so use the newer script if you wanna convert SRT files for Excel use: drive.google.com/open?id=1tReDPHsI9d32bzS7eNKSoKZVBoQ9cEYG
Thank you for the .vbs script - it took me a while to get it working but it's extremely helpful for excel plotting this data! I found by default the semicolon ( ; ) delimiters didn't work for me. It might be a locale thing (UK uses . for decimal point not , and CSV imports use comma ( , ) between fields instead of semi colon ( ; )) I made some changes to the script which I've copied below, hope it's useful for you! 1) Changed to a comma , delimiter which seems to be required for the UK 2) added some comments at the top on how to run with CScript 3) Swapped around Timestamp and CSV data so that Timestamp is first column 4) Used mid function to crop out hours from the timestamp leaving mins:seconds.thousandths - this makes it quicker to plot charts - just select time & data column and plot to a scatter chart. [Srt2CSVConverter.vbs copied below] ' Put this script into the folder containing .srt files ' Open a command prompt (cmd) and run the script with CScript: ' CScript Srt2CSVConverter.vbs ' Set objFSO = Createobject("Scripting.FileSystemObject") Set oFolder = objFSO.GetFolder(".") For Each oFile in oFolder.Files if instr(ofile.name,".srt")0 then 'wscript.echo oFile.Name filename=ofile.name Set fRead = objFSO.OpenTextFile(filename) Set fWrite = objFSO.OpenTextFile(".\" & replace(filename,".srt",".csv"),2,true) row=0 TimeStamp="00:00:00,000" fWrite.WriteLine("Time,Signal,channel,flighttime,uavBat,glsBat,uavBatCells,glsBatCells,delay,bitrate,RCSignal") Do Until fRead.AtEndOfStream buffer=fRead.ReadLine anf=instr(1,buffer,"signal:",0) if anf 0 then ' If line starts with signal: buffer=mid(buffer,anf) buffer=replace(buffer,"V","") buffer=replace(buffer,"signal:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"ch:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"flightTime:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"uavBat:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"glsBat:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"uavBatCells:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"glsBatCells:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"delay:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"ms","") buffer=replace(buffer,"bitrate:","") buffer=replace(buffer,"Mbps","") buffer=replace(buffer," ",",") buffer=replace(buffer,"rcSignal:","") buffer=TimeStamp & "," & buffer ' Combine the Timestamp and CSV data fWrite.WriteLine(buffer) else if instr(1,buffer,"00:",0) 0 then ' Else if line starts with 00: 'Time marker buffer=replace(buffer,",",".") ' replace the , in the time stamp with a . ' TimeStamp=left(buffer,12) TimeStamp=mid(buffer,4,8) ' take mins:seconds.thousandths end if end if Loop fRead.Close fWrite.Close Set fRead = Nothing Set fWrite = Nothing end if Next
Thanks MC, you'd have to be one of the most loyal commenters on my channel - deserve a note on my wall. Maybe I'll create some wall of commenters fame in my hangar...
lot of guys commenting in a good way about them TrueRC Singularities. I will try to get them - but honestly - they're a bit expensive to get around here it seems. Also they are out of stock in EU maybe...
I really liked how you graphed out the bitrate. In my own testing, I often just search the bad areas in the srt and note the lowest bitrate. But with how you graphed them, it makes you notice how wide the bad area is, not just how low the bitrate dropped. I found myself thinking one was worse than another even though the latter had a lower bitrate.
thanks, it's very easy now with those SRT files, to get good data. Dont know how you're with Excel - but after converting the SRTs with my little script it's really easy to get those charts - and as you say - they are pretty good in visualizing stuff. If you need help, just let me know...
@@Rcschim Thanks. Will definitely try that out. I'm definitely a spreadsheet and scripting guy. I have some scripts that I use to burn the srt's in when I post to youtube. My stuff is fire and forget,... not all the good editing successful channels like yours do.
@@rcrdps8144 can you point me to that scripts to burn SRT infos into video files? before the charts I just wanted to include bitrate as an OSD overlay. I can import SRT as subtitles track in vegas - but it is a bit cumbersome and I cant edit it really. I used to use VideoLanClient with subtitles burn-in - but I somehow also didnt like that approach... my mail would be schim@gmx.at thanks!
@@Rcschim I put it in the description of some of my videos, but those descriptions can't have ">" signs,.. luckily, we can post them here! This requires "ffmpeg" utility. It is opensource. The first section of this simplifies the srt. The ffmeg line burns it in. The syntax is powershell,.. .you can remove that if needed. The main part you're looking for starts at "subtitles". I designed it so you can just replace the contents of the $myVid variable and then just copy/paste the whole thing into powershell and walk away. $myVid="268";(type .\DJIG0$myVid.srt) -replace "ch:[0-9]+ ", "" -replace "glsBat:[0-9]+\.[0-9]V ", "" -replace "uavBatCells:[0-9] ", "" -replace "glsBatCells:[0-9] ","" -replace "signal", "Signal" -replace "flightTime", "Time" -replace "uavBat:","" -replace "delay","Delay" -replace "bitrate","Bitrate" > DJIG0"$myVid"trim.srt ffmpeg -i DJIG0$myVid.mp4 -s 2560x1440 -aspect 4:3 -b:v 30M -vf "subtitles=DJIG0'$myVid'trim.srt:force_style='Fontsize=10'" DJI-FPV-blahblah.mp4
Great video and thanks for sharing. I love my DJI FPV system and I'm still in the hunt for a great antenna combination to use on the goggles. After watching your video I want to go with the short stubbies antenna instead of the patch antenna.
What do you think about the four stubbies sold by TrueRC for the DJI Goggles and two long SMA Singularities for the quad? Do you think two Crosshairs on the bottom of the goggles with two stubbies on top would be the best?
I’m far from being an expert but if the antennas work in pairs (top one and bottom one) why don’t you put one directional and one omni on the bottom and same above (maybe inverted)?
Yea it's recommended by Hugo true rc to put directionals on top for improved performance or for the ones w 2 sma to use top 2 or 2 on 1 side, dunno why he didn't put shields on top n try
how did you connect these antennas to the goggles? they have unique mounting bracket yes, most of these antennas are SMA, so you have used adapters? which adapters did you use and is there a loss of signal if you use an adapter?
hi, you mean the "dual shield"? It's got a flat back (3d printed part) which I taped with velcro sticky tape - so it's removeable but stays there quite well. here in this vid I used all "normal" SMA antennas - that means I had to use SMA to RPSMA adaptors. Later I bought just AOMWay SPW antennas (with short coax) which already were ordered in RPSMA - so I dont need an adaptor. Sure you loose a bit with sma adaptors - but not much. Most loss would come from longer extension cables (like I once tested 3m extension - and here the loss is 50%!) Adaptors have to look like these here: www.amazon.de/gp/product/B07RQSSBTY/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Very Impressed ! My First time seeing your stuff and Im very very Impressed. I really want to see a long range setup using these goggles as I want these googles but for long range missions say 10km - 30km at least
Thanks! Longrange with DJI FPV will not happen soon I guess. You can install directional antennas, but as far as I understood they use some sort of sync puls which means, beyound 4km (or miles?) you get rather immed drop of signal quality. Some say they flew further, but most run into this 4km range limit. not a problem for me here, since Copter FPV 2km are already considered longrange :)
@@ctbully as far as I understood, it's not a fault of too little RF power - but the "runtime" of the signal exceeds the sync-pulse time - pakets are too late - and therefore it doesnt work with more distance... maybe they implement a longrange mode tho - with more range and higher latency, without the need for a syncpulse... they show quiet impressivly that you can have 10km range on a standard mavic air 2 (without and directional antennas) - but normally their latency is really high on the ocusync vide transmission (which is totally different from the DJI fpv video transmission we use here btw.)
Thank you for your incredible work. You have bring a high quality work for us for testing this system. I have do my own antenna test but not as good as yours. I will try to make better video like yours if i have the time. Nice work i hope you will make another test with other antenna for example x2-air.
did someone already measure difference between trueRC singularity vs lollipop vs. lumenier AXII? vs VAS ION? I cant test all of those antennas myself - that's an endless stream of possibilities :)
@@Rcschim i messaged RCRDPS he has both lolli stubs and singularities, to do a test, he overlays osd on vids, but have a hard time believing they are leaps n bounds better than lollipops
@@Rcschim I have tested lollipops stubbs vs 2x vas ions stubs on top ports and they are Def little better, how much % is hard to say, but mbps is higher in difficult spots with them
I LOVE THE DJI SYSTEM ! I don't think just the video I think the complete system. SO EASY to install. I LOVE the tx. Simple. KISS Exactly what we need without a lot of crap. binding is no longer a gymnastic experience. Antennas ...I was using 4 AXII stubbies and it was fine. THEN I got the X-Air on the TOP. Better ! Now using an iBCRAZY small and one AXii. on bottom. I am getting AMAZING RANGE ! I have built 5 DJI so far. two 5" three 7" now I am starting to convert my bigger analogs …
@@shambler01 WOW! good find. Is this legit? We need to see / wait for first tests of course. But this is way faster than I thought. I figured it would be next summer till DJI releases a smaller air unit. Why would they license their tech to a small company?
Hey, I just got mine today :D But there are still parts on the way for the copter, so I'll have to put the air unit on my head and run around with it, to get an impression 🤣
@@Rcschim Yes! :) But also to get a feeling how it would be to be 15-20cm bigger 😁. I have an old CarbonZ Cub laying around, this will take the 2nd air-unit and then I'll see, what comes first: better weather or the missing parts.
In many of these DJI range/antenna test videos we see the quad flying slow and low, struggling behind vegetation. I can't help but think while watching "just fly higher till it clears up", but I don't know how well it would actually work. Could you perhaps include a small section of a video where you practice real world transmission optimization like this? I understand why you are doing it the way you are right now, but I'd love to see perhaps a less data intensive video where you purposely try to get it in trouble then raise altitude, to see if the signal recovers, and if so how quickly.
This is a great video and approach. Can you tell me why you only test the patch antennas on the bottom ports? I am assuming those are the only ports that you thought receive video data? Thank you for this work. I only ask this as IBCrazy (VAS) suggested to me two VAS Crosshair Extremes on the top two ports while TrueRC stubbies or VAS Minions on the bottom
I use two TrueRC X-AIR. I just can compare with the stock antennas, but it's a night and day. I was watching tons of vids before bought it because it was expensive, but I don't know at this moment better antennas for DJI FPV goggle.
How do you mount your x-airs? Vertically, with one connected to the top and bottom, or horizontally with one connected to the two top sma's, and the other one connected to the two bottom ones?
I didnt actually compare the stock Air antennas vs. my upgraded ones. The reason for swapping them out was just the wrong polarization (all my antennas are on RHCP, DJI is here on LHCP).
Amigo, você tem lugares muito bonito para fazer seus vôos em fpv, e obrigado por nós mostrar tecnicamente os seus experimentos com as antenas e os modelos de óculos fpv.
Obrigado pelo comentário! Aqui eu tinha um lugar com muita merda :) Mas, em geral, temos uma bela paisagem - é isso mesmo! Espero que o google tradutor funcione - não sei português ...
Hello shim new to your channel. Are we free to use any 5.8 antenna as long as we match polarisation. This will give me plenty more options on a build where I need length on a big 10” nasty muscle quad stick antenna just to short don’t clear battery. Thanks.
yes, you just need to match polarization! last time I tried to use my only UFL rhcp pagoda (Foxeer) but it gave me terrible range on caddx vista. Not sure what went wrong there... other than they, yes you can still use the "old" 5.8 antennas in the digital world :)
Mario thanks, but why didn't you try any directionals on top ports ? Hugo true rc says use tops or 2 sides for dual directionals like those shields. I only use my 2 cross hairs on top.
@@Rcschim cool no pressure man I was just disappointed, I love dji testing :) i also wanted to see how those dual shields look on top w lollies on bottom, might sell my 2 vas cross hairs, they look like huge mouse ears lol
Very interesting video wow! Ya know why is it everyone feels the need to do all these tests? I like it I just think it’s funny .. just hope everyone doesn’t forget to have fun and just fly right I mean that’s what’s most important!
So true! Sometimes the curiosity about such things is stronger than the need to just fly. While flying and trying to fly exactly the same path - to get better data for the test you think to yourself: why can't I just fly normal and have fun. But then again, there's so much positive feedback for these kinds of test-videos with solid data - and only so much response on my "just for fun flying videos" - now please watch a few of my last videos which were just for fun ;)
Seems like we all come full circle on DJI antenna testing. We won't keep them stock,.. but after we find the best, we revert to what's "good enough" but will pack without removing because the DJI really does quite well regardless. BTW, the Cyclops does pack fine if you leave it on there. It stays in position. It's just one of the more ugly antennas,... I find it interesting that people put the patches on the bottom. Since it is a bidirectional system, why would it be "better" to have your best antennas on the RX only? That means the return signal to the quad will be weak. The precedence that we have for something that can receive only isn't pretty: In a Mr Steele video, he filmed a "spectator" goggle, and it often would lose sync even though Cricket never had an issue with the primary goggles. With them on the bottom, you are increasing the efficiency of the system overall, but not by as good as you would be if those antennas could also transmit. I'm fairly certain I ran with high gain omni's on bottom, then on top, and on top was better. On the subject of the bottom two being RX only, I am wondering if that is its "default" mode, but changes based on conditions. The FCC docs showed different configurations and 3 of the 4 had RX/TX. Only the bottom left( while worn) was RX only. I'm curious if you ran it out a ways to were the signal goes bad, if that lower right hand antenna would wake up. I really want to get one of those meters eventually,.....
@@AgustinMolini it's known info that directionals should go on top or duals used on one side for best results, disappointed he didn't try that configuration, I use VAS cross hairs on top 2 ports
@@flo-ridafpv5713 Yea I'm only 6 months in to the hobby and my goggles should get here on Saturday so havent really heard that before. But that's great to know.
na des nenn ich mal n Test ... Hut ab . so wirds gemacht Freunde . Schader dass net deine Gewinner als Link gepostet hast . wäre einfacher sich dann gleich die Dinger zu bestellen , trotzdem danke für deine Mühe und die dadurch Erleichterung meiner Kaufentscheidung
Get rid of those 90deg connectors on the end of the antennas and your signal will improve greatly. Look at the painless 360 video he did on signal quality in conjunction with Menace rc.
Also CP Antennas in your open test environment have reduced range when compared to linear. I use a mix of larger CP and homemade enhanced linear antennas on the quad. See: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DFe1fpssARo.html
Why do you use the stubbys on top and not the crosshair? Would you try this foe me. I will buy two crosshairs and two mad mushroom v2 foe my dji system
Sorry, I don't have those antennas. I flew with the stubbies left top and bottom, and the dual shield on right top and bottom. Didn't really measure it but: flew on 25mw accidentally and didn't really notice have issues until like 800m out in the mountains when the first bitrate reduction occurred!
Yes! If you buy some for goggles you can buy rpsma so you don't need adapters. On air unit it is mmcx. I bought some cheap aomway spw with short cable for the goggles.
i run with vas cyclop ond the googles and axi 2 ond air unit. the range with this is awesome. my transmitter going to loose signal before my mb/s drops under 20mbs you should try one time the vas cyclop
I have a full VAS set for mine I use 2 xhair xtremes on top as they send n receiver + 2 vas ion v2 stubbys on bottom, but its big, so mostly run 4 lollipop stubbys w mmcx lollies on all kwads. Check my vids to see range it's crazy good, I just superview my dvr lol
That's what I thought: with enough power you dont care about big directional antennas, just a few stubbies :) But I see you mainly fly freestyle close up and thru a lot of stuff (remember your videos). Nice collection of DJI FPV vids already :)
I have a friend who flew his plane out 3 1/2 miles and set it to circle, then he tried patches on bottom with omnis on top and then tried patches on top and omnis on the bottom and he said he got better performance with the patches on the top. he said latency was at 115ms with patches on bottom and 23-30ms with patches on top. Have you tried this and if so what are your thoughts?
Thanks - good info. Gives me ideas what to try next. Going out that far is of course perfect for testing antennas and their placement! I plan to have a GPS RTH copter with caddx vista so I can safely go out further and test similar things.
I’m trying to make a fast and easy 3D model of the air unit so I can play with fitment on a few frames before buying one, it’s list as 44mm long can anyone verify that it’s 44mm to the longest part ? I know the air unit protrudes a bit where the camera comes out is that the 44mm or are the shorter sides thanks
Check out my Kaiju review - this on is specifically designed for the DJI FPV (potatoe) or the Digieyes V2 from ORT (they are cheaper and smaller, I'd prefer them).
But the two top antennas work together and both bottom antennas according to DJI, I have hear that you shouldn't mix antennas ,I mean you have to have two exact the same antennas on the same row ? Upper antennas only transmit so the lower antennas is the most important i think as they receive the information to the googles
BTW, someone on the Facebook group did some testing and noted that the goggle would spike to full power when first powered up. However, they were using a rubber ducky and not a pigtail like you are. Would be interesting to know what numbers you see with your pigtail. I have a hunch that it will be below 200mw when set to 700mw.
I'm also curious about how much mw the airunit really outputs. I'll hook up the mmcx sma cables there and will test soon. 2nd bulletpoint for my followup :)
@@Rcschim Actually,.. after I thought about it, I'm pretty sure they said the air unit spikes on startup, not the goggles. The goggles stay quiet until they hear an air unit. But the air unit may be spiking full power to reach out to any goggles.
yep, I really should have done this from the beginning. pls check my current DJI antennatest videos - they have the stock as a baseline. here's the playlist: ru-vid.com/group/PLb__gsFB2DQFwyG3kcZA6xC1_xhzyTg7N
mich würde extrem die Antennen von "Antennenfreund" und die "TrueRC" Antennen interessieren, haben beide einen Super Ruf, das Sie Perfect für das Dji Digital System, angepasst sind ! ..aber guter Test ! ...weiter so
Nice, very tedious getting all that into one video. I run 4 Long VAS Minion Pros on the goggles. They bend nicely so I don't have to take them off and on again.
If you were to start from absolute zero FPV equipment... which I am... Should I go the ANALOG ROUTE with a Caddx Ratel viewed on 10.1' Feelworld PVR-1032 analog monitor on tripod ($45, already bought, because I wear glasses) and Jumper T16 transmitter upgraded with Crossfire transmitter/receiver modules, or instead go the DIGITAL ROUTE and save up and instead just go with the complete end to end DJI Digital FPV Goggles/Camera/Transmitter setup? I can see where I could learn a lot more going the ANALOG route playing with cheap CMOS cameras and vTX's and flight controllers and OpenTX and Crossfire on the Jumper, but on the other hand I'd never reach the video quality of the Plug and Play DJI Digital system. But with the DJI Digital system I wouldn't end up with a bunch of cheap analog things I swapped in and out and I tried and spent money on and never fly... So starting from zero.. should I go totally DJI digital from the start, and just dabble in the analog stuff to learn and experiment with it... (I think I can learn cheaper by watching tons of videos without having to buy it all) or should I just burn my way up the ranks buying a lot of analog incrementally stuff and trying to cheap out but end up with a lot of junk but with a lot of experience? I mean, there's merits to both. I like to build and solder, it's true, but I also would rather spend my time instead flying to gorgeous footage instead. My inclination is to go the school of hard knocks route experimenting and learning, but I watch videos of people flying the Digital system and it seems they never really want to go back to analog after that. I guess soon, we'll have other competing lower cost Digital systems out there to chose from than DJI, but it may take a while for those to come out. I have a crappy job, so money is not the biggest issue, as saving up for either route is just a matter of time. I think in the end when you add it all up they will mostly all be the same ballpark $$$ wise. fpv.air-war.org
Wow, that's a long comment... I think I'd suggest to go the DJI route. In the end it could be even cheaper while giving better quality. Depends also what you want to do with FPV. If it's "just" for the flying experience DJI is more than enough. If you need cinema quality - you need extra things like good gopros... Radio link? I'm not so sure about their remote. Bruce (RCModelReviews - check out his latest reviews - like the Kopis DJI sys for example) he also tested the Radio and came to like it. You just cannot program so much like with an openTX sys - so it's not as flexible. But maybe it works for you, and you never miss the extra features? OpenTX on the other hand, + Crossfire - they're not only expensive but also need firmware updates... this can be frustrating. DJI also comes with Updates - but here it's simpler - like apple... Check my other video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vvJmRN5tS2A.html where I try to compare Analog and DJI FPV... hope this helps, greets and have a good start into this hobby - you have no idea how easy and great FPV has gotten these days (I started 2008 and it was soooo experimental and crappy back then!)
@@Rcschim - I bought a TX05 yesterday (eta Jan 4) to run with my Remzibi OSD and tape to the top of a JJRC H68G gps quad... and the 10.1' Feelwell Diversity flatpanel monitor I got for $45 (eta Jan 28). So only $65 so far spent to dabble my feet in analog. While the golden age of quads were taking off I spent 5 years inside a video game flying a quad like vtol attack aircraft in BF2142 so I'm not an entire stanger to the flying part. I got Velocidrone installed with a Realflight RC type usb contoller and just got a Geforce 1070 in mail today so I can install Liftoff as well. The DJI stuff is probably more headache free. exactly as you say but Im not crazy about being geofenced off or their random updates happening in the middle of a flight on their Mavik quads, etc or so Ive heard. Also being able to run a lua script with a flatpanel telemetry artificial horizon on a Jumper T16 displaywould be good backup if I ever lost the video feed. Still on the fence and saving up Januarys shitty paychecks for $1000 to go either way. Partial to maybe the Banggod freestyle quad with DJI receiver and 9maybe a Hero 7 or $$$ Hero 8 on it for that Hypersmooth + Boost at 1080p. All pretty $$$ expensive stuff, might easily take 2 months paychecks :-) Either that or buy another ultralight airplane fir $4500 or some hangers... Thanks for your opinion and view in retrospect what you would do from the top of the mountain if starting new from today. I watch thousands of videos to research before I buy stuff so I have some ideas buy now. Id really like to fly supersized (6 ft+ across) industrial quads.... someday. choppergirl.air-war.org
@@Rcschim old news, but for everyone else... DJI Digital FPV system : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--MkVrdaZu4s.html Cons?: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DQaTm1O81H4.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CZYDmOSuWRA.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-oE02v3fx5m4.html
Hope do you mind me chiming in.. absolutely go with DJI if it’s not to late but whatever you do,do not try DJI before you try analog or you will be DJI poisoned and you won’t be able to handle the shitty analog anymore.. lol. The DJI remote is actually a very nice and well built transmitter it feels great and the gimbles are good as the best out there in my opinion! Plus it saves you weight as you won’t have to use a receiver because the air units both standard and caddx are a receiver in them selves.. hope this helps !
yep, the crystalHD are always on my goggles (cause they're small and look nice) if I want to fly further I put the Henrik 3turn Helicals ontop (it's 4 times directional antennas with wide beam - my best antennas up till now). Check my DJI playlist for more recent tests: ru-vid.com/group/PLb__gsFB2DQFwyG3kcZA6xC1_xhzyTg7N This video shows the Crystal directly: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8TYY1-3Lo_c.html
there should always be safety concerns - but I think mobile phones radiate more - also close to your head. I'm sometimes a bit concerned about the wireless VR system (on HTC Vive pro) that I use. It's 60ghz and I dont know what mw - but it's only close range but digital low latency (below 20ms!). This wireless TX get's really hot - and it sits on my head for extended game sessions... (but I read, the higher the frequncy the less "penetration" into your head). and in the worst case it would cook your brain a bit :)
do you think dji glasses are harmful to the transmission of waves in the brain? and if, in these glasses, you mount an external module for the analog, the problem of transmission harmful to the brain remains?
@@Frosttyy12 I expected an exhaustive answer from you, perhaps making a video and explaining to all of us "laboratory guinea pigs", the reason for your statement
@@gabrieletrapani8217 Despite every attempt to the contrary, there has been zero evidence of radio signals in this range, having any kind of effect on anyone's brain, negative or otherwise. Some excitable types have of course disputed this but they can be totally ignored, as predictably, they have absolutely no substantive evidence of any kind for their claims.
literally and spiritually flying over the bullshit hehehe. kinda interesting results, i wonder if the lower antenna transmitting affects the upper ones reception? it might mean patches on the lower would bring significant advantages, Furadi has some normal flying results that were interesting too,
I dont think that their own TX signal affects the RX of neighbour antennas too much. After all: the ammount of TX data is minimal! it's just a few bits with the order to "retransmit" or change channel or something like this. that's also why I think that TX might not need to have as much gain as RX - TX of low bandwidth data is not as critical - but I might be wrong.
even with higher mw you want the best possible reception if you fly behind stuff for example. at best you get totally clear image all the time (no matter where you fly around - exept for really massive stuff like mountains :)
I did some testing too ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7TCxfRF8mds.html with surprising results. This is with different quad antenna. I also tested goggle antennas too and the more expensive antenna did poor in all tests. Linear looks like something to test more. The dual true rc x airs are decent but just too much of a faff to put on unless youre doing something specific. look forward to watching this later
@@RcschimBTW sorry don't usually self promote but I'm really curious on how digital pans out and if our analogue antenna are suited for it. I've added your channel to the description as everyone should be subbed here.
@@CoppertopFPV no problem, I like the links inbetween the FPVers and am curious to other testers findings. Everybody has a different approach and eventually finds different aspects. Since digital is great - but also a bit more advanced than good old analog (but even analog FPV was a mystery sometimes to me). thanks for your ad for my channel - I agree - everybody should be subscribed :)
@@Rcschim I'm getting the DJI tomorrow, do you have any sort of complaint about the latency ? Do you use focus mode ? Does it detract from the viewing experience ? Did you test the fact that the normal air unit antennas are 50% atenuators ? Do you know that DJI made the air unit antennas be attenuated so that they could have this much transmission power on the vtx but still be compliant with the law. Smart but they did that by using antennas as atenuators. First thing anybody can do tti their DJI is change the default antennas on the air unit
@@qpmkro Nope, flew yesterday with the DJI digi (and analog as well) and didnt have issues with latency. Did some flips but mainly cruising around. tried to do some hard turns around snowpoles at the street - and it felt right as well. Analog is 20ms, the 10-12ms fatsharks felt a "bit" faster, but I'm not sure if I had noticed it while flying. I fly in high quality mode and focus mode set to auto. seldom the focus mode kicks in, but it's ok. sometimes it kicks in if I'm really close as well - but that's not a problem... - Are those antennas really attis? I read the rumor - but I dont have the RF knowledge to see this on the opened antenna. I switched them for Lollipops (because I had them with mmcx).
@@Rcschim did you try the hdo2 ? Which image you like more, dji or hdo 2. Could you say that the way you fly isn't one that pushes gear to the limit and you couldn't really feel the difference in latency, that's why you fly hq mode where you tested it to have 4 times more latency than low latency mode. So if that difference doesn't bother you the one between analog fatshark 10 15 ms and low latency 20ms is really not something YOU would notice ?
@@qpmkro no didnt try the HDO2. If I need lower latency I would fly in the faster mode - but on the first flights I felt like I like the higher quality more - and for cruising around (which is really fun on the DJI sys) the HQ mode is better. No I dont push gear. I'm too afraid to break something or loose it. I hate to repair drones (because this usually takes way too much of my precious hobby time :)
not easy to answer. currently I have really cheap AomWay SPW (RHCP, RPSma) on top 2 ports and 2 foxeer lollipop stubby on the bottom, this way it fits in the backpack. if I fly far away, I use 2 patch antennas on the bottom ports. I will do another bigger antenna test like this here soon, maybe I can give better results then!
hehe, that's me :) no - I simply didnt know better. Tried it like I would on analog (since the omnis are usually placed better on top). In my flight yesterday I had dualShield on one side (top+bottom) and stubbies on the other side - seems like a good idea - was pretty far out on 25mw with no issues
Ah okay. Thank you for all your testing! The “traditional” way may work better as the tops seem more critical while the bottoms are just to add a bit more bandwidth.
@@TweakRacer Yo dude I'm literally scavenging the internet right now to get an answer for this! I just got a true RC x2 air LHCP for my goggles and 2 TrueRC Singularity stubbies and I found AndyRC's goggle video very informative and he gives like science behind how the top two have a different job than the bottom two?????? lol I'm not really sure. I'm still researching but I think the move is to put patch antennas on the bottom I think. Not sure.. your reply to your findings is appreciated. Watch AndyRC's DJI FPV Goggle video! Let me know what you think.
@@marcusmartinez1584 I saw Andy's video. Seems people in Europe tend to do patches on bottom, while Americans put the patches on top. Try both ways and see how you like it. I prefer patches on the top for any mid-range or higher penetration needs. The top ones receive AND transmit, the bottom ones just seem to receive and supplement the feed from the top ones. Nowadays, mostly fly with Singularity stubbies on all four. When I go for longer ranges, I put TFP Mini's on all four, using short custom flexible adapters focusing them all generally forwards.
