EDIT (23rd September 2020): Updated the thread title following FatShark's announcement of an October 2020 release date.

It looks like technical problems are plaguing the new Shark Byte HD FPV system. FatShark posted the messages below on RC Groups (HERE and HERE) in the past few days.

There is still a few hours left to get the DJI FPV System before the Father's Day Sale ends later today  

Fat Shark Wrote:This is an update that I was really hoping I wouldn't have to give; despite an incredible effort, the final transmitter has some heat issues that are proving challenging to solve. I've seen the performance benefits of higher RF output but its requiring a lot of heat dissipation. Although we could immediately release a slightly lower power TX, I really want the final product to deliver exciting performance. It's been a solid two years of work and a ton of awesome feedback from the Byte Frost Beta testers that have allowed us to get to where it is and I don't want to let anyone down by rushing out a product that we know we can do better on. Unfortunately I can no longer say how long it will take to finish. It could be one month - it could be four. I can say that I will still share information and updates as things happen, and that I will not ship a product until I believe in it 100%. Anyway, I'm going to invoke my powers as a Canadian and say I'm sorry.

Fat Shark

Fat Shark Wrote:

Mad_angler1 Wrote:It’s amazing how much of an issue heat is for digital systems and you not alone with this that’s for sure.

I’m intrigued is it the video processing that’s driving most of the head output rather than the actual radio final end as we have had 600mw analog for years with out too many issue. It’s not only FPV that’s been seeing difficulties but all the digital systems have struggled in this respect. Is the increase output simply pushing it over the the thermal edge so to speak.

It's cumulative. In addition to the obvious source of heat from the PA, the processing chips require a lot of power which in turn puts huge demands on the switching regulator. The latest attempt to improve efficiency of the voltage regulator resulted in some issues that required yet another board spin. My experience says not to change a proven power supply design (as used in the beta release) but it was contributing too much heat and we had to risk improving it.
Serious respect to the engineers at DJI for pulling off what they did. Their design does prove it's possible though!

Fat Shark

Updated Byte Frost is apparently going into production.

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost...count=2647

This is what I am waiting for. I am waiting no matter how long it takes. DJI killer is coming !!!.

I have high hope that the Byte Frost is good. But I really doubt it will be a DJI killer. Rooting for the underdog though.

I don't think the FatShark system will ever be as good as the DJI system purely because of the vast amount of money that DJI pump into R&D, but if Shark Byte is "good enough" and much better than analogue then that is all that some people really care about. And if it ends up being a smaller more compact system then that would also be a bonus because at least you can then still fit everything in your backpack. I really hope the final production units turn out to be what people are anticipating.

Does anyone know if the Shark Byte unit itself is still the same design as per the original images? I'm not sure if they made any changes to that or if it was just the VTX unit that needed some redesign work done on it.

For me to even consider it then it would have to a) come as a goggle module, and b) have third parties making VTXs.

If I'm going to have to buy new goggles anyway, then I may as well make a deal with the DJI Devil. And it might require new goggles, since we'll be butting up against the limits of the screens in the existing Fatsharks. My HD3s have a resolution of 800 x 600 and the HDOs are a bit higher at 960 x 720.

And I want third party VTXs because I don't trust Fatshark to make them right first time, and they sure as hell hate coming out with new products. I want someone who actual makes new things and updates their firmware.

(05-Aug-2020, 09:58 AM)Banelle Wrote: And I want third party VTXs because I don't trust Fatshark to make them right first time, and they sure as hell hate coming out with new products. I want someone who actual makes new things and updates their firmware.

This is a very good point. None of the FatShark goggles have ever had any firmware updates released for them. It's like they just shove them out then forget about them. There must be bugs and improvements that can be made over time. Just look at Orca. They are regularly releasing firmware updates for their goggles. Granted that the Orca goggles are more of mini computer rather than a dumb pair of goggles, but there are surely still some improvements to be made via firmware.

There was been a frame drop issue on the FatShark DVR like forever, and it took an incompatibility with RapidFIRE for that bug to actually get fixed, after something like 5 years. I'm sure they could also improve the quality of the DVR recordings with firmware changes so it records all of the lines rather than just half of them which is why FatShark users end up with  DVR footage. The only hope we have is that it is Divimath who are doing all of the hard work and heavy lifting. FatShark are really just the project manager/sponsor, so in reality it's not really a FatShark product, just branded as one. Maybe this gives some hope in that Divimath will be more pro-active going forward, unless the project manager holds them back of course.

It is obvious that SharkByte will not be true HD like DJI, but this is not a problem. They also mention that their new system is an another big step from analogue. SharkByte will improve the image quality on our existing FatShark goggles which is awesome standalone. Both analog and digital still exist together without any confliction. For the time being, many people go for DJI because there is no any other competitor in the market which offers high quality image, but after this system, there will be an another option for the pilots. It is nice to have options. I wish best of luck for Fatshark.

For me, if the price is right for original beta testers I will get it. I was actually ok with Byte Frost image quality and the early release video for Shark Byte was noticeably better. Not 480i to 1080p wow factor but maybe 720p to 1080i (and that might be generous). The next biggest draw for me after the beta tester discount would be the goggle module form factor.

Now if DJI came out with an actual in-stock-right-now sale that is at least as good as the Fathers Day sale *or* they come out with a goggle that doesn't make you look like a moth, I'm in.

As for 3rd party ... this whole thing has been one big collab between Fat Shark and HDZero. The camera is Runcam. I think cross pollination has always been the basis for Byte Frost / Shark Byte. It was really the only way to compete with DJI.

Make no mistake and many of you already know this, I can't stand Greg from Fat Shark. He's an arrogant douche bag. That's why I communicate with HDZero instead ... even told him he should strike out on his own his partner is a twat lol.

Quote:We just released a new DVR Capture of the latest edition of the new Shark Byte product.

From our Founder and CEO Greg French, "...I've ran about 10 packs through the latest system. The RF performance is magnitudes better than any of the previous transmitters. I'm giving the go ahead to production! We'll send some of these latest transmitters to a few test pilots and reviewers..."

The raw video was scaled to 1440p so that YouTube compression would keep it similar to show 720p raw capture.

Check it out on YouTube, select 1440p60s for full detail:

A New Flying Experience is Almost Here!

Looks really cool and impressive. I think they have done great job so far

I don't know that I notice that much of a better picture quality over the beta but I do notice two things ...

1) Far less "byte forsting" going on. So much so that I even thought to myself, hmmm no byte forst!

2) The recovery from the "screen of death" was almost instantaneous. Whenever I got that on the beta, it took a while to recover picture.

I hope they post a pic of the vtx and vrx.

At the end of the day, I take these "test flight" videos in the middle of absolutely nowhere with a huge grain of salt. How many of us actually fly in such clean rf environments?? lol

The footage actually looks pretty decent. I don't like that screen of death though. Not enough warning that it's about to kick in IMO. There was a bit of "fleckle" on the screen and then all of a sudden the "TV Test Card" just appeared. They really need to put some kind of video stream bitrate information in the OSD like DJI do so you at least have some idea of when you are getting into the danger zone.

It would also be nice to know what the power output was set to.

I recall there being a signal strength OSD element you could activate in the beta. But I forget if that was rx or vtx signal strength. Either way, there was so much more snow in the beta that you knew full well when video signal was being compromised.

In addition to showing what the vtx (especially) and vrx look like now, they should show all the OSD elements because I recall that was something they put a lot of effort into for the beta. From what I could understand it wasn't as straight forward as voila, all OSD elements work now. They have to program each element in individually. So they were focusing on the big ones like voltage, current draw, and fly time.

I'd say I'm now at about 85% Shark Byte likely and 15% DJI likely barring some massive sale or sneak attack v2 goggle on DJI'a part or a super sleazy tiny discount for beta testers or a vtx that turns out to be not much less cumbersome than the beta on Fat Shark's part.

(06-Aug-2020, 10:23 PM)the.ronin Wrote: In addition to showing what the vtx (especially) and vrx look like now, they should show all the OSD elements because I recall that was something they put a lot of effort into for the beta.  From what I could understand it wasn't as straight forward as voila, all OSD elements work now.  They have to program each element in individually.  So they were focusing on the big ones like voltage, current draw, and fly time.

DJI have to do the same. This is because raw data for the OSD elements is transmitted over the MSP link so the VTX has to decipher that data and then code in the VTX itself has to place the OSD elements on the screen in the correct positions. I would like to hope that FatShark will be a bit more reactive to user requests for specific elements (like warnings and native Crossfore LQ for starters) to be added, unlike DJI who just seem to completely ignore what people ask for and put in what they think would be useful and not what pilots actually want.