FPV HUB

Coming in May, more info here:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2652377 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2652377)

Looks to be focused on miniquad but surely can be adapted to bigger frames?

no prices yet.

If it's aimed at mini quads there must be zero lag otherwise it will be useless

Interesting but will hold off judgement for now. The Connex system already exists but it is really expensive ($1600 I think) -

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2383334 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2383334)

HD will be the future, no doubt, just may take a while to become widespread and affordable. With Hobbyking backing them it should speed things up a bit maybe, but I'm sure many will be wary of Hobbykings claims!

So, is it this http://connex.amimon.com/connex-mini (http://connex.amimon.com/connex-mini) ?  Which interestingly uses the 5.8 band

Obviously, any HD zero latency system would be amazing - especially if it's nice and cheap :)

I think that might be the one!

Nice and cheap it is not...

http://www.globe-flight.de/Amimon-CONNEX-Mini-Latency-free-5GHz-Full-HD-Wireless-Video-System-with-SBUS-for-Gimbals (http://www.globe-flight.de/Amimon-CONNEX-Mini-Latency-free-5GHz-Full-HD-Wireless-Video-System-with-SBUS-for-Gimbals)

At over £1000 I shall remain not vaguely interested :)

Stuff miniquads.

If this thing gets cheap enough to be affordable it will change fixed wing FPVing as we know it. Bring it on, I'd love to fly in HD cheaply and if it's plug and play so much the better.

Only 3 years ago we were paying £400 for a Naza...

I guess the price will come down, especially given the Chinese copies tend to appear pretty quickly, but yeah at £1000 I'll just keep hitting the tree branches I'd be able to see in HD and fix stuff.

Of course, with an HD downlink, does this mean the image in the normal SD goggles is going to be crap and we'll need HD goggles, or is the thought that a cleaner, higher resolution signal will still give way better picture even on SD goggles?

I'm with Steve W on this, don't care too much about mini quads but if they can make it small enough for minis than it should be great for planes.

The message they're using suggests mass marketing intents and for that to work I expect (or hope) for prices ~£250 or lower.

I think this could transform the whole FPV experience... how about 3D FPV with VR goggles?

PS: I've added a poll to the thread.

I'm not bothered about mini quads either, but if its low enough latency for them then it will be ideal for a 100mph wing at low level

The other thing to note is with it being promoted with mini quads in mind you can be certain that range will not be high on the priority list as well. So using the same said system in a plane may not be as clean cut as just fitting it.

Quote from: Coyote on April 26, 2016, 03:37:05 PM
The other thing to note is with it being promoted with mini quads in mind you can be certain that range will not be high on the priority list as well. So using the same said system in a plane may not be as clean cut as just fitting it.

I did notice it was saying "up to 500m" but I didn't know if that was a range thing, or them trying to be legal.  With DJI saying unto 5km, it's probably a range thing.

Quote from: Coyote on April 26, 2016, 03:37:05 PM
The other thing to note is with it being promoted with mini quads in mind you can be certain that range will not be high on the priority list as well. So using the same said system in a plane may not be as clean cut as just fitting it.

This is exactly what I was thinking.

OK just gonna repeat what I said before, 0 latency = bollox.

The £1500 Connex unit is "Zero Latency" - still has a total latency of around 100-150ms when you measure end to end.

Digital camera (latency) ---> HD-VTX----> Digital Output(latency)

Even if your HD-VTX is 0ms, there is still latency on the input and output ends. Top end gaming monitors have a HDMI input latency of 10ms, your average top end TV, 20-30ms. Your average FPV digital display? God knows. As for cameras, well we all know what the digital output on a GoPro is like.

Great if you want to float around like teaser video, but as for quad racing, forget it.

What do you think the maximum lag could be before it becomes a game to keep flying due to oscillating between what you see, and the inputs you give...

We recently switched from PPM to SBUS which reduced the control lag from around 80m/s to around 10m/s.

In real-life terms this is massive - ask anyone who has flown SBUS to go back to PPM - its horrible!

With 50m/s of delay a 60mph quad can travel 1.4meters - that's the difference between making & hitting a gate!

If this new system is around 10m/s or less lag then it will def change FPV racing.

new short video, mainly typical mini quad crashes:



Broadcast quality seems to be 720p 60 frames.

I'm really looking forward to seeing what Amimon have come up with.
I'm hoping it really is a game changer, but at the moment I remain skeptical. If there's one wish I could have for FPV flight it would be better picture quality.

My main questions are...

What is the range? And will we be able to improve with better antennas etc?

Does the system use/include its own HD camera?

What is the form factor and weight?

What aspect ratio is the image?

And of course... How much £££?

Guess we just have to wait til next week. Hope this is the beginning of the future.

Quote from: Spookfish on May 02, 2016, 01:47:00 PM
I'm really looking forward to seeing what Amimon have come up with.
I'm hoping it really is a game changer, but at the moment I remain skeptical. If there's one wish I could have for FPV flight it would be better picture quality.

My main questions are...

What is the range? And will we be able to improve with better antennas etc?

Does the system use/include its own HD camera?

What is the form factor and weight?

What aspect ratio is the image?

And of course... How much £££?

Guess we just have to wait til next week. Hope this is the beginning of the future.

  +1

I got another question... will it have it's own display/goggles? That will surely push the price right up.

I'm thinking it will also be useless if you are using an OSD, so kinda rules out most fixed wing flight. Hmmmm :+

So for the moment, it's only real use would seem to be what they're pitching it for... Mini quad racers. Really hope the latency is not gonna be an issue then.

Quote from: Spookfish on May 02, 2016, 02:38:28 PM
I got another question... will it have it's own display/goggles? That will surely push the price right up.

I'm thinking it will also be useless if you are using an OSD, so kinda rules out most fixed wing flight. Hmmmm :+

So for the moment, it's only real use would seem to be what they're pitching it for... Mini quad racers. Really hope the latency is not gonna be an issue then.

Don't some mini quad FC's have basic OSD's ???

Quote from Amimon on another popular RC Forum;

Size and weight

Getting the HD link is just the first step, one of the key factors was to keep it small. at 45gr. for the Tx+ HD camera we were able to keep the size to the minimum.

The size of the camera is: 28x20x27 mm and the transmitter is at: 70 x 36.5 mm

[I was editing the post as spookifsh beat me to it...]

here are the info links and latest video

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=34639083&postcount=29 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=34639083&postcount=29)
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=34671407&postcount=101 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=34671407&postcount=101)

Ha ha I nearly posted that vid also. ;D

Cool more footage of poodling around doing piss all. Oh look a roll LOL. No offence to people who poodle around but it's hardly a test is it.

If I had a system as good as they claim it is, I'd at least have someone semi-competent try and put together a decent video. Fly around a course faster than walking pace would be a good start.

Quote from: dogzilla on May 03, 2016, 02:40:48 PM
Cool more footage of poodling around doing piss all. Oh look a roll LOL. No offence to people who poodle around but it's hardly a test is it.

If I had a system as good as they claim it is, I'd at least have someone semi-competent try and put together a decent video. Fly around a course faster than walking pace would be a good start.

I agree. Although the signal looks remarkably good given the location. A video by someone like Skitzo FPV flying the sh1t out of it would be better to put the latency woes to bed.

I know HD links will eventually be the thing but I think I'll quite miss looking forward to seeing the HD footage when I get home.

Quote from: Loopdreams on May 03, 2016, 02:54:00 PM
I know HD links will eventually be the thing but I think I'll quite miss looking forward to seeing the HD footage when I get home.

I think it'll be quite some time before we're flying FPV with a gopro quality downlink.

Some more details

Features:
- Uncompressed 720P High-Definition over a Digital-Link
- Support range of up to 1000ft/300m LOS
- Keeping zero latency, real-time video at all ranges
- 30 available HD channels over 5.8GHz (5.1GHz-5.8GHz) with easy to set options
- Offering solution for the novice racer as well as high-end racing
- Providing a spectators mode
- Built-in OSD capabilities
- Region-less Tx compatible with any Rx
- Mobile App configuration tool over bluetooth

Amimon New FPV Zero-Delay Camera features:
- HD 720P camera
- FPV optimized for indoor&outdoor flights
- Advanced hight-dynamic-range supported
- Dimensions-28x20x27mm
- 105 degree FOV with fixed lens
- Compatible with vision transmitter only
- Power up from vision transmitter
- Weight is 13g, 6g for the camera and 7g for the lens

Amimon New FPV Zero-Delay Transmitter specifications:
- Power consumption: 3.5W
- Power input: 6V-15V, 2S-4S battery supported
- Antennas: two external MMCX connectors
- Weight: 30g
- UX: 2 LED- status indication only
- Interface: Power in (4pins)
Power out to the camera&recorder
Micro USB-connection to application; wired pairing
Proprietary MIPI(14pin right-angle,JST SM20B-SRSS)-HD video input
- Environmental: Operating temperature: -10°to 50℃
Operating humidity: 10%-90%
Storage temperature: -10°to 75℃

Receiver specifications:
- Power consumption: 3-3.5W
- Power input: 6-28V, 2S-6S battery supported, reverse polarity protected
- Antennas: 5 antennas(5 external short SMA connectors)
- UX: 2 LED-status indication only;3 push button-for OSD control
- Interface: Power supply jack
Micro USB-connection to application; wired pairing
HDMI out- type A female
Bluetooth for application management control
- Environmental: Operating temperature: -10°to 50℃
Operating humidity: 10%-90%
Storage temperature: -10°to 75℃

Management application:
- Android & iOS Applications
- Bluetooth connectivity from mobile APP to vision ground unit
- Setting your device easily: Manual frequency setting
Regulatin&regional setting
Race mode for setting up races
- Built-in OSD-provides full functionality of OSD menu&buttons:
recording
choosing who to watch
Configuration of recorder, wireless setup&OSD

Your purchase includes:
- 1*Camera
- 1*Transmitter
- 1*Ground unit
- 1*Package of accessories

They keep saying zero latency, I'm not sure they know what it means?

Here's hoping though!

Also... 3.5W on the VTX?

:o

Quote from: Steve W on May 07, 2016, 03:57:44 PM
Also... 3.5W on the VTX?

:o

I think thats power consumption rather than output power.

300m is disappointing :/ but let's wait for full final disclosure tomorrow...

Price for VTx+VRx+Camera seems to be ~$500.

Perhaps we will have to wait for other alternatives like https://fpv.red/ (https://fpv.red/)? quite like the modular idea..

I'd be all over an HD system with low latency.

Just as soon as it's fifty quid on banggood.

Predict < 18 months.

Quote from: FlyingRock on May 09, 2016, 01:35:33 PM

Perhaps we will have to wait for other alternatives like https://fpv.red/ (https://fpv.red/)? quite like the modular idea..

Now that's more like it - I'll wait for fpv.red !

Word on the street is this will be around £350  ;)

Not too sure myself, will wait till I've seen one first....

I've just noticed this in the HobbyKing 'Coming Soon' section.

HD 720p camera with tx -
http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__99171__COMING_SOON_Mini_FPV_Camera_W_32_Ch_5_8_Ghz_Transmitters_600mw.html (http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__99171__COMING_SOON_Mini_FPV_Camera_W_32_Ch_5_8_Ghz_Transmitters_600mw.html)

What's this then - $499

   http://www.connexhd.com/?utm_source=E-blast%20acton&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ProSight%20acton%20 (http://www.connexhd.com/?utm_source=E-blast%20acton&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ProSight%20acton%20)

500 quid to us then :+

I'm not trolling here, honest... but can someone please tell me, what's the point in having a HD downlink for piloting purposes? Surely a good quality board cam with WDR and actual zero latency would be more useful to a pilot.

Quote from: wgt40w on May 10, 2016, 06:45:36 PM
I've just noticed this in the HobbyKing 'Coming Soon' section.

HD 720p camera with tx -
http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__99171__COMING_SOON_Mini_FPV_Camera_W_32_Ch_5_8_Ghz_Transmitters_600mw.html (http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__99171__COMING_SOON_Mini_FPV_Camera_W_32_Ch_5_8_Ghz_Transmitters_600mw.html)

That item confuses me... why would it have AV out pins if it has it's own built in VTX?

Quote from: BlueFlyer on May 11, 2016, 09:27:25 PM
I'm not trolling here, honest... but can someone please tell me, what's the point in having a HD downlink for piloting purposes? Surely a good quality board cam with WDR and actual zero latency would be more useful to a pilot.

I suppose it depends what you want to get out of the hobby really. I think if you're into racing or proximity, actual zero latency would be top priority. If you like to cruise around taking in the view then a HD downlink is more appealing (latency will not be such an issue).

Not sure where this system fits in really though. Bit too expensive for racing and proximity. But not really enough range for cruising the skies.

There were discussion today about using it as the live feed for spectators rather than racing pilot feed.

Spectators don't like watching the grainy video break ups. We are more used to it than the average Joe.

Hopefully we will have a couple of units to test soon.

Won't it use basically the entire 5GHz band with one set though?  I just read that it is "digitally connected" - so presumably it uses hopping or something? But even so... 4 or more aircraft?

Quote from: Ratty on May 11, 2016, 10:04:44 PM
There were discussion today about using it as the live feed for spectators rather than racing pilot feed.

Like you get watching the F1?

That would be good, but in this case latency wouldn't really be much of an issue would it? even if the feed to the big screen was 1 second late the crowd would hardly notice that as they're not relying on it to pilot the quads.

Even in military UAV applications, local analogue control and video systems are preferred when taking off and landing because there is no such thing as zero latency in digital transmissions. Only once the UAV is airborne and at a safe altitude do they then "hand off" to a crew operating back home who then carry out the mission via a low (not zero) latency digital satellite link.

Yeah really good for live drone racing but you will have to fly big fat 250 sized H type frames just to fit all the gear on.

Yup, like watching F1. We used that comparison quite a lot actually. Ideally they would all be feed back to a director/editing sweet so can get live replays and cut from action to action ect. That is a long way off and needs funding yet tho, but it was discussed.

I am not entirely sure how it will work with the freqs, wont be sure until we get them to try.

Hopefully the unit is small enough to mount easily. I have plenty of space on my race quad if I don't use a Gopro. Pilots will obv have to make sacrifices to help make it more enjoyable for spectators and further the "sport".

Quote from: BlueFlyer on May 11, 2016, 09:27:25 PM
I'm not trolling here, honest... but can someone please tell me, what's the point in having a HD downlink for piloting purposes? Surely a good quality board cam with WDR and actual zero latency would be more useful to a pilot.

I'd like it so I can blast around at low level and spot those thin branches and power lines that currently are invisible

Quote from: Ratty on May 12, 2016, 12:36:00 AM
Yup, like watching F1. We used that comparison quite a lot actually. Ideally they would all be feed back to a director/editing sweet so can get live replays and cut from action to action ect. That is a long way off and needs funding yet tho, but it was discussed.

I am not entirely sure how it will work with the freqs, wont be sure until we get them to try.

Hopefully the unit is small enough to mount easily. I have plenty of space on my race quad if I don't use a Gopro. Pilots will obv have to make sacrifices to help make it more enjoyable for spectators and further the "sport".

Right now there's a bit of attention around it because it's new and people are curious but I just don't see it gaining traction as something for spectators, because there's no spectacle.  In the flesh it's like a flea circus and it's not really a lot better in the replays.  Nothing like as engaging for spectators as motor racing etc.  Fully prepared for the fact that I may be massively wrong but I just don't see it as anything other than a niche pastime like RC car racing.

Quote from: Brucey on May 12, 2016, 08:33:26 AM
I'd like it so I can blast around at low level and spot those thin branches and power lines that currently are invisible

You forgot goalposts.   :D

Is half the fun not in thinking "how the  :censored:  did I miss that??" :D

Quote from: Loopdreams on May 12, 2016, 09:32:51 AM
Right now there's a bit of attention around it because it's new and people are curious but I just don't see it gaining traction as something for spectators, because there's no spectacle.  In the flesh it's like a flea circus and it's not really a lot better in the replays.  Nothing like as engaging for spectators as motor racing etc.  Fully prepared for the fact that I may be massively wrong but I just don't see it as anything other than a niche pastime like RC car racing.

Quite a few people agree with you, but there are people willing to try and push it to bigger things. So I say good luck to them and I hope they succeed. You never know unless you try.

At the press show yesterday (for Farnborough air show) there was quite a bit of interest in the quads and the sim. The BBC did 3-4 interviews with us. Then on the news there was a 3 second clip and they just breezed past it. So it certainly isn't big news yet.

Being at the air show will tell a lot. There is a huge public presence there, and lots of money. If it goes well and people enjoy it, maybe someone will invest. If it flops and no one cares, we will just continue racing for fun anyway.  :D

Quote from: Steve W on May 12, 2016, 09:41:48 AM
Is half the fun not in thinking "how the  :censored:  did I miss that??" :D

Even if I could see more clearly with an HD system - that does not mean I will "miss that". My problem is when I see "that", it seems to be magnetic in attracting what I am flying to hit it - rather than miss it !!

                                        :D

A good trick I'm trying to master is to stop focussing on obstacles because your brain tends to hone in on them if you do.

The same thing applies on a racing track, rather than looking at the corner, you need to force yourself to look past the apex and look beyond it.

Try it, seems to work for me when I can do it, just takes a lot of willpower to stop your eyes wondering and fixating on something.

dogzilla - good advice - thanks.

Thing is - can you teach an old dog new tricks ????