fatshark 1gz vrx instock

mark1975 · June 02, 2015, 10:24:10 AM

be quick not cheap shipping but not bothered I've ordered one

http://www.uavworks.nl/webshop/fpv-components/video-goggles-and-accessories/detail/562/fatshark-nexwave-1g3-module.html

Coyote · June 02, 2015, 10:34:07 AM

Too expensive to be the first. I'll wait til it's a bit more reasonable I think.

mark1975 · June 02, 2015, 10:39:14 AM

it is ian your right im just inpatient depending on the results
if its good ill sell my laser vrx
and my 5.8 dom module too brandnew that

mark1975 · June 12, 2015, 02:10:19 PM

mine has just arrived today very nice quality as expected I guess ..

Coyote · June 13, 2015, 04:35:56 PM

Just watching Dmerc`s revierw here I`m not really sold on it anymore.

It looks to be having the same problem that you had wirth DragonOSD displays. The video level when black is used screws the picture up. From what I see there I wouldn't be using one with a Vector OSD. Yes you can drop the black outline, but then you struggle to read the OSD, not great, especially when the Laser version does not do this.

The audio also seems to not be working as well.

! No longer available

g4uvz · June 13, 2015, 05:06:45 PM

I may have got it wrong..It wouldn't be a first ! As a radio amateur I can use the 1.3GHz band legally as a secondary user on a non-interference basis. What I can't do is use an airborne transmitter.
The Offcom chart here http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/spectrum/map.html shows no allocation in the UK for video transmissions by the public and worryingly an awful lot of Aircraft associated applications. Given the hysteria associated with 'drones' and air safety it may be just a matter of time before a pilot claims that his radar or other system was 'blinded' by an FPV transmission in this band. This is just an observation ...but interestingly the BMFA won't allow 1.3 GHz kit in the members ads!

jkishan16 · June 17, 2015, 03:02:27 PM

Aparently, they're having a recall (in the US atleast) due to 'performance issues' :P

mark1975 · June 17, 2015, 03:12:57 PM

gregs words below I have one already and another on preorder

Well, I did a flight test yesterday and I can confirm the receivers are absolute crap. Production units were nothing like the pilot units. Trying to work with the vendor now to figure out what went wrong. I will have an update by Friday (my vendor is telling me its the antenna I'm using - nevermind I have an antenna tester and a pilot unit to compare them to). Don't concern about getting stuck with bad receivers; they'll either be replaced or refunded.
Will have an update Friday.

mark1975 · June 17, 2015, 03:15:06 PM

Quote from: g4uvz on June 13, 2015, 05:06:45 PM
I may have got it wrong..It wouldn't be a first ! As a radio amateur I can use the 1.3GHz band legally as a secondary user on a non-interference basis. What I can't do is use an airborne transmitter.
The Offcom chart here http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/spectrum/map.html shows no allocation in the UK for video transmissions by the public and worryingly an awful lot of Aircraft associated applications. Given the hysteria associated with 'drones' and air safety it may be just a matter of time before a pilot claims that his radar or other system was 'blinded' by an FPV transmission in this band. This is just an observation ...but interestingly the BMFA won't allow 1.3 GHz kit in the members ads!

I hear what your saying matey tbh the fact we are only broadcasting for short periods of time, and the fact the power levels of military radar can swamp 1.2 (ask me how I know), its hard to triangulate a moving target but I understand what your saying Ofcom do not have the resources like caa do ......so for me im not worried doubt the rest of the 25000 uk members flying on it will be lol............. ;) ;) ;) ;)

Coyote · June 18, 2015, 06:57:32 PM

If Greg is saying that then it's very clear something beyond his control has gone wrong with the manufacturing. I'd put money on a wrong value component or cheaper components out of the tolerances required have been used.

Now that's all good for us, it will get found and fixed. Poor Greg though is going to be left with bucket loads of deffective items that will if possible need repairing and reselling. Good luck with that task Greg you poor sod.

mark1975 · June 18, 2015, 10:29:39 PM

I actually feel, for the guy as this will cost him a bit of brass. Business is business at the end of the day and it needs to make money..😕

Sheldon Holy · June 18, 2015, 10:59:24 PM

This does surely mean though that the statement on the front "factory tested to -90dBm" is totally untrue? If all these defective units were actually tested, assuming that the point of the testing is to weed out any dodgy ones, then none would have left the door?

And yes I agree that likely a dodgy component was used. Could be only one capacitor on the RF input, that's all you will need to screw it up. These caps often need to be very low value, and thus high tolerance so are quite pricey. I know first hand that getting stuff made in China is brilliant when they do it properly, but when they don't you don't want to know...

bignose13 · August 01, 2015, 09:04:37 PM

Anyone know whats happened to this ? toying with going to 1.2 for my gear, where I fly my quads is a bit rubbish on 5.8 and tried a mates 1.2 and was like wow behind trees and stuff
Cheers

Coyote · August 01, 2015, 09:21:52 PM

I have not heard of a fixed batch coming out yet

Coyote · August 16, 2015, 01:06:36 PM

Dave in the USA received the replacement V2 receiver.

! No longer available

To save you watching the whole thing unless your very interested, not a thing has changed, its absolute crap lol

The Laser Brushless Gimbal version receivers his picture just fine. The Fatshark is horrible blown out and too bright. It is exactly the same as it was in the first place lol.

He looks inside to find nothing has changed at all at first glance, after testing it looks like nothing has changed lol.

Steer well clear of this product if I were you. Its garbage.