Altitude limit is back to 400ft

[skyscraper]

the point is who is going to pay for it?
nothing is impossible but someone has to foot the bill.

There are a lot of potential benefits to "Drones" flying around.
If the commercial sector takes off there will be a demand for policing and ultimately we will pay for it ( e.g in our drone curry delivery charges etc) Meanwhile no change...

My engineers use handheld directional antennas to work out where the signal is coming from and it takes time to do it especially in city centres because of the multipathing issues and signal reflections.

It is easier tracking an aircraft than something on the ground, but doing it by hand seems pretty crude I must say!

[...] for excessive wattage is never going to happen, after all it is not like we aren't allowed to use the frequency so it isn't going to interfere with the big companies, spot testing transmitted power would require silly resources, so we end up back with the simple statement we need to do it ourselves.

Well thanks for the confirmation coming from someone close to OFCOM.. Its business as usual then  :)  There is so little interest in or concern about  using legal gear on FPVHUB that I was planning to put some "long range" gear  myself on the next one. The recent collison has made me think twice about it though. Ive taken down my long range" 25 mW video off youtbe.. flight was illegal after all even if gear wasnt. That is something I can do!

Why am I interested in the issue? Because I can see the whole hobby being banned ! But I dont see self policing working.  I'm too old to believe in that  :laugh:


regards
Andy

[stevec]

I am not close to ofcom but I know my guys repeatedly deal with the same people in ofcom so that to me says staffing issues.

I agree that Drones and their use will increase exponentially in the coming years, My boss has asked me to do the necessary to be able to get CAA approval for aerial work. so I am going to be doing my BNUC-s soon.

there was someone on facebook recently sharing a printable 25mw sheet of labels for you to add to your vtx... after all how many people actually know what their kit is putting out anyway? you can get a rough idea from the MAH it consumes but there are probably only a handful of people in the country who actually know if they are legal or not. (tested on an anlyser)

if you can think of a better way to track down interference in a city then I am all ears !! it might save me a lot of money! flying solutions are a no-no for now though as we can't fly BVLOS or even LOS until I get certified to fly. and even then London is so touchy about SUAS that we may never get permission there and that is where the majority of our jobs are.

/Steve

[electrotor]

2) Legal RcTx power on legal frequencies is also limited. To use a high gain antenna on the RC Transmitter is illegal ( since it is the EIRP that is measured)  Until you get a directional RC receiving antenna on the aircraft (raising the bar again) there is an effective limit on range there.

Slight misunderstanding here. I was meaning a high gain receiving antenna (steerable, helical type) in the base station for VTX from the model. Perfectly legal and very effective. Can't find the article but it was about the few milliwatts NASA used for Moon - Earth data comms. OK they have collosal parabolic reflector receiving antennae but you get the jist - surprisingly low power over 250,000 miles.

[Brucey]

Yeah I have to agree, hunting for signals is hard, rf is an odd thing!

[skyscraper]

[...]
there was someone on facebook recently sharing a printable 25mw sheet of labels for you to add to your vtx... after all how many people actually know what their kit is putting out anyway? you can get a rough idea from the MAH it consumes but there are probably only a handful of people in the country who actually know if they are legal or not. (tested on an anlyser)

regarding finding signal strength. It should be easy at a meet. Use a 25 mW Vtx as a reference. Measure the signal strength using a simple rf meter. Anything putting out more than (say) 2x the reference  is deemed illegal.

But yeah if you are racing and cheating you are a cheat.. If found out.. expose and shun!

regards
Andy

[skyscraper]

Yeah I have to agree, hunting for signals is hard, rf is an odd thing!

Not so hard high in the sky. TommyD's RSSI tracker does it after all!

regards
Andy

[skyscraper]

2) Legal RcTx power on legal frequencies is also limited. To use a high gain antenna on the RC Transmitter is illegal ( since it is the EIRP that is measured)  Until you get a directional RC receiving antenna on the aircraft (raising the bar again) there is an effective limit on range there.

Slight misunderstanding here. I was meaning a high gain receiving antenna (steerable, helical type) in the base station for VTX from the model. Perfectly legal and very effective. Can't find the article but it was about the few milliwatts NASA used for Moon - Earth data comms. OK they have collosal parabolic reflector receiving antennae but you get the jist - surprisingly low power over 250,000 miles.

I see.. So there is no reason for high power Vtx's at all anywhere .. ever. In this scenario those of infinitely low power work fine .. also great as the batteries on our cell phones last for ever.   :laugh:

regards
Andy

[Brucey]

Yes, in the sky it is much much easier, but that is only giving you a bearing, you still don't know how far away it is. Steve is talking about hunting signals on the ground, totally different ball game!

[FPVSteve]

skyscraper the horse has already bolted ... there are thousands of high powered vtxes out there, so it's a pointless endeavour to get wound up about it - people are using them, and always will.

One problem is, if someone uses a legal vtx, they'll be at a disadvantage against someone who choses to use their high powered one ... so they ultimately also have to use a higher powered one to avoid being swamped.


If we were all using 25mw 5.8GHz vtx's then yea ... but we're not. So what do you do?

[skyscraper]

Yes, in the sky it is much much easier, but that is only giving you a bearing, you still don't know how far away it is. Steve is talking about hunting signals on the ground, totally different ball game!

No offence Brucey, but hunting signals on the ground is surely OT. I am arguing specifically that tracking an FV aircraft high up isnt that difficult.  If you have 3 receivers placed around a site of interest, e.g airport, then once one has detected a Video signal, it sould be easy for the others to get a lock too using RSSI. At that point you have the position of the aircraft and the signal frequency.  Next step would be to put up your own Police drone and follow the aircraft back to where it lands. then Film the pilot as they drive home.. ee I'm likin this idea.. can see the $$$s when I get it working  :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

regards
Andy

[skyscraper]

skyscraper the horse has already bolted ... there are thousands of high powered vtxes out there, so it's a pointless endeavour to get wound up about it - people are using them, and always will.

One problem is, if someone uses a legal vtx, they'll be at a disadvantage against someone who choses to use their high powered one ... so they ultimately also have to use a higher powered one to avoid being swamped.


If we were all using 25mw 5.8GHz vtx's then yea ... but we're not. So what do you do?

I have just proposed one item on the way to prevent mid airs between model and full size aircraft.. But seeing as nobody else gives a Flying  :censored:  its prob time for me to get the  :censored:  outta here  :santa:

regards
Andy