i will still use my tbs 900mhz gear, for me its an improvement to the market. tba was waiting a long time for a somehow competitive system, that seems a good thing. i beleive tbs doesnt have to fear their market position i believe its danger for other players, players like frksy which does scam us costumers.
tbs tracer does need a competitor, it needs improvements, its actual not the product or not in the stage i would like to see from tbs, i believe they are forced to improve it and make it competitive...
all my buddies which bought the tracer instantly after launch, doesnt use it anymore... sold or waiting in a box. i believe thats the competition, tracer vs elrs 2,4ghz, we costumers will get benefits out of it :-)

So am I right in thinking I can wire an EP1/2 to the v.common current 3 pin sbus receiver connector on a 2 uart fc and have a working, longish range rc link, minus telemetry back to transmitter, after changing from sbus to crsf in BF?

I think this was very recently implemented in ELRS: Add inverted CRSF output to ESP8266 receivers ( https://github.com/ExpressLRS/ExpressLRS/pull/878 )

For anyone who has one of the Happymodel ES24TX Slim Pro 1W ExpressLRS modules, be aware that there is a hardware defect with it that causes a Lost Telemetry (TLM LOST) issue. See the following post for details of how to fix the issue...

https://intofpv.com/t-happymodel-es24tx-...are-defect

(17-Sep-2021, 03:44 AM)kafie1980 Wrote: I think this was very recently implemented in ELRS: Add inverted CRSF output to ESP8266 receivers ( https://github.com/ExpressLRS/ExpressLRS/pull/878 )

Nice one, useful link and this all looks positive for all of us 'goofy' fc users out there!
I have tyro89fc and a couple of Darwin F411 with just the two UARTS and don't fancy picking up the TX/RX1 floating pads on the FC for full duplex so this is a nice feature to allow me to implement. My slightly better Skystars F405 FCs with 6 UARTS also has the SPI receiver connector so I can do the same despite loads of free UARTS.

I'm sure it won't be as simple as I've suggested but does look like a goer which is good as I've already plumbed for this as my frksky xm+ experience has been poor to say the least and think I've avoided the bullet by not taking the Tracer route.
I didn't want to go crossfire and very, very much like the price points of these elrs receivers and got my first yesterday and they are tiny tiny tiny.

Have the nano module for my Jumper T-Lite so just need to feel brave enough to take the back off and fiddle!

New offering of opentx vtx (300 qand 303 on BG) developed by ELRS lead that I'm going to pursue also as you can fit out receiver and vtx pair for £28 per craft and fit them in the oddest small spaces for good measure.

Comparing the cheapest combination of ELRS + OVX300 (USD 40) vs TBS Crossfire Sixty9 (USD 50) or vs IRC Ghost Hybrid (USD 50) still does not break even considering that the OVX300 only outputs 300mW vs Sixty9 or Ghost Hybrid that outputs easily double the mW.

Paying USD 10 additional in favour of a product from TBS or IRC vs HappyModel is a no brainer in terms of product quality and support.

I am not saying TBS or IRC hardware is the best out there but compared to any ELRS RX/TX manufacturer, TBS or IRC have a better track record.

Sad to say I do not agree with the “buy 3 for the price of 1” calculations.

Don’t get me wrong, ELRS is great and cool and awesome for what it does being opensource firmware but the hardware is not at the same level yet.

(17-Sep-2021, 03:29 PM)kafie1980 Wrote: Comparing the cheapest combination of ELRS + OVX300 (USD 40) vs TBS Crossfire Sixty9 (USD 50) or vs IRC Ghost Hybrid (USD 50) still does not break even considering that the OVX300 only outputs 300mW vs Sixty9 or Ghost Hybrid that outputs easily double the mW.

Paying USD 10 additional in favour of a product from TBS or IRC vs HappyModel is a no brainer in terms of product quality and support.

I am not saying TBS or IRC hardware is the best out there but compared to any ELRS RX/TX manufacturer, TBS or IRC have a better track record.

Sad to say I do not agree with the “buy 3 for the price of 1” calculations.

Don’t get me wrong, ELRS is great and cool and awesome for what it does being opensource firmware but the hardware is not at the same level yet.

Yeah, get your drift and I was tracking Tracer sixty9 as looking like my goto but have seen enough negative feedback, including this very thread, to put me off for now despite it looking like a nice solution.

It's a difference for me 'tween below 30UKP and 50UKP per over potentially 4 craft if it works well and is a price point to start with that I won't feel overly bitter about if it doesn't work! Also the nano external module for my T-Lite was less than 30UKP so no great outlay needed there either to try it out.

I'm in the UK under a flight path so will never get to use more than 25mW, maybe 100 if I go super rural and no ones looking!
Not so much 3 for the price of one, rather 1 very affordable, open source unit now with potential for more versus 3/4 that I couldn't and wouldn't justify the outlay on.

I know I don't NEED 4 quads but I'm slightly better at building them than flying them (presently!) and lockdown did drag on a bit!
Also have a couple of 1S tiny tings to build that this stuff is ideal for and then maybe I'll stop, maybe!!

If pricing and power outputs is not a sufficient argument then let us look at compliance of the ExpressLRS system for EU customers:

ExpressLRS is not completely LBT compliant:

This is mentioned on their website: https://www.expresslrs.org/1.0/quick-sta...e-options/
“This is a relatively simple one - enable whatever regulatory domain you are in. EU 868 is compliant to the frequency but is not LBT compliant ? . Every other band is near compliant ? but may not be fully compliant for your regulatory domain.”

There is little info whether even the 2.4GHz is LBT compliant.

There is even a EU compliance related request on their github that is still in the open state for almost 2 years: https://github.com/ExpressLRS/ExpressLRS/issues/5

I am amazed that they are so active on github that such a request has no response from the dev’s.

ExpressLRS hardware is also not CE compliant:



So can we run any official races or events with ExpressLRS?

My take on this is that the ExpressLRS hard manufacturers can sell at such low prices because they do not spend any money on firmware development and do not seek compliance requirements/approvals for the firmware/hardware.

Any local store selling ExpressLRS hardware in most parts of the EU and probably other non-EU countries are crossing a very very fine line of regulations.

(17-Sep-2021, 06:31 PM)bobally Wrote: I'm in the UK under a flight path so will never get to use more than 25mW, maybe 100 if I go super rural and no ones looking!
Not so much 3 for the price of one, rather 1 very affordable, open source unit now with potential for more versus 3/4 that I couldn't and wouldn't justify the outlay on.

Regardless of the country being flown in, 95% (probably more) of FPV pilots are probably flying illegally in one respect or another whether that be using excess RF power, flying more than a 200m away (BVLOS), flying without a spotter etc. etc. Due to some of the ridiculous regulations it's almost impossible not to. As long as people fly safely and responsibly then that is what matters the most, and obviously don't fly within 5km of any aerodromes if you are under a flight path with the airport somewhere close by.

So anyone heard of plans for 433MHz ELRS system? I saw an Orange OpenLRS 433TX on HobbyKing, but doesnt look ready for prime time.

So I bought and installed HappyModel ES900 TX and RX on my wing. Couldnt get the TX to flash over WiFi (no ELRS network appeared), so flashed it over UART. Binding complete and maidened it next. It fail-safed from low RF signal at maybe 1/2 mile. Replaced TX and did same. Replaced antenna on RX, same fail-safes. I'm gonna try a new RX and see if that's the issue. Im wondering if my 1.3Ghz Matek VTX is drowning it with noise..... anyone have these issues?

I have no experience with 1.3GHz but I do remember people complaining about 1.3GHz video links not working well with GPS and 900MHz systems because they were fairly closer in frequency and do not play well.

TBS is even selling a notch filter to help the 1.3 GHz be immune to Crossfire noise: https://www.team-blacksheep.com/products...filter_915

There is even a notch filter for your VRX: https://www.team-blacksheep.com/products...filter_1g2

But this will not work in your case because clearly you are the 900MHz rc link completely rather than noise in your video feed.

How far away have you mounted the VTX and Crossfire and their antennas?

its a nano goblin (very small wing), and the VTX 1.3 antenna is within 6 inches from the RX 915 antenna. I wonder if the notch filter would stop the VTX from spewing noise in the 915 band if I place it between the VTX and it's antenna. And maybe wrapping the VTX in foil for a faraday cage. Ive heard VTX's are noisy so I think I may try both ideas.

I'm also wondering if there's a bunch of noisy towers where I fly (suburban environment).

First I'll try a new ELRS RX just to rule that out. Then Filter and foil.

I am surprised ELRS could failsafe. It must be the noisy VTX or the RF noisy environment.

Try flying in another location and try wrapping the vtx with copper/brass foil (usually a guitar shop will have some) or try food grade aluminium foil if you have some in the kitchen .

Frankly, I have never played with 1.3GHz and so I can only make assumptions.

(18-Sep-2021, 11:00 AM)SnowLeopardFPV Wrote: Regardless of the country being flown in, 95% (probably more) of FPV pilots are probably flying illegally in one respect or another whether that be using excess RF power, flying more than a 200m away (BVLOS), flying without a spotter etc. etc. Due to some of the ridiculous regulations it's almost impossible not to. As long as people fly safely and responsibly then that is what matters the most, and obviously don't fly within 5km of any aerodromes if you are under a flight path with the airport somewhere close by.

I have wondered about this as can't see 25mw getting you very far in even ideal conditions. Anyone have a general rule of thumb for distances in ideal conditions, attenuation of air n all that?
UK dunces have made it really difficult to operate in the UK at all, thanks to the ghosts of Gatwick and a hasty sale going on at the same time!

I'm willing to push the envelopebut the 787's cruising overhead at minimum alt do scare me from being to reckless.
There is a long established RC club flying from the same racecourse and often have weekenders over an adjoining lake, I'll have to go and get some local info from them.

EDIT: Apologies to other readers of this thread for temporarily going off topic.

(21-Sep-2021, 10:43 AM)bobally Wrote: I have wondered about this as can't see 25mw getting you very far in even ideal conditions. Anyone have a general rule of thumb for distances in ideal conditions, attenuation of air n all that?
UK dunces have made it really difficult to operate in the UK at all, thanks to the ghosts of Gatwick and a hasty sale going on at the same time!

I'm willing to push the envelopebut the 787's cruising overhead at minimum alt do scare me from being to reckless.
There is a long established RC club flying from the same racecourse and often have weekenders over an adjoining lake, I'll have to go and get some local info from them.

It depends on where you are flying. You won't get far on a 25mW 5.8MHz video feed in an urban area where there is a high noise floor. It's about enough for a close proximity racing course or a small park away from residential areas, but that is all.

The height limit for drones is 120m (400ft) and no manned aircraft is legally allowed to fly lower than 150m (500ft) unless they have a special waiver which is usually police and ambulance helicopters, so that gives a 100m buffer gap between normal manned and unmanned aircraft. Commercial aircraft certainly shouldn't be flying anywhere near that low unless they are literally just coming into land at the end of the runway, but you shouldn't be flying within 5km of the end of a runway anyway. The rules for no-fly zones around airports in the UK are HERE. If you are directly under a flight path then you might be better off travelling to another location to fly so there is then literally zero risk of straying into airspace that you shouldn't be in.

Sean put out the following video yesterday which goes over the Visual Line Of Sight rule in the UK. The CAA may as well just say that flying a drone in the UK is illegal and be done with it. As soon as you take off and fly 100m out or 50m up it's impossible to see that tiny dot with your own eyes, and even less so if you aren't the person at the controls who can see on a screen through the camera where it is in relation to other landmarks. Most camera drone pilots will be concentrating on the screen and FPV pilots will be wearing goggles, but even with a spotter present, if that spotter happens to take their eyes off the drone for just one second they will never find the drone in the sky again (grey / black dot against a grey or bright blue sky - no chance).