LiPo for DFIII
I'm looking to dust off my Draganflyer III. All four of my NiCD packs have aged to the point that they can't get it off the ground. I'd like to power it with LiPo, but I suspect there are less expensive options that the pack/charger combos from the manufacturer. Any suggestions?
Posted on: 3/16/2012 8:30 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Walkera Helis - Dragonfly, etc.."
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11002634

Rotor and battery upgrades for DF III
My DF-III has been in storage for a few years, and I got it out flying today - a whopping 30 seconds of flight time on the NiCAD battery... Haven't charged up the other three packs yet to see what kind of shape they are in. So that begs the question, is the DF-III compatible with the newer Draganflyer Lithium batteries, or is a board upgrade required? On to my other question... The reason I unpacked the DF-III was I saw that DFI now has solid rotor blades - the whole reason I stopped flying it regularly was that the foam blades just don't last - even with no crashes they tear themselves apart after enough flight time. So my question for folks that use them - how are the folding rotors? Folding on impact, or for storage sounds nice - but how stable are they in terms of keeping them true and inline?
Posted on: 11/23/2008 5:44 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Draganfly Innovations Products"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8176043

RE: Draganfly keeps turning after crash
It sounds like one or more of your rotors may be slightly damaged. All four rotors are for lift. The Draganflyer moves by adjusting power to the four rotors (watch the video that came with it. If your crash slightly damaged a rotor, or tilted a motor mount out of level, that will cause you to yaw depending on how much power is going to that rotor, or the other rotors at a given time (every time you move the controls, or the gyros sense movement, the power distribution changes - this means it changes many times a second.) Check to make sure all the rotors and motor mounts are level. To a certain extent though, as blades wear and become less perfect in their shape, this is normal. Flying on a fresh set of rotors, while not an inexpensive thing to do all the time, is definitely easier.
Posted on: 2/15/2005 7:27 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "RC Helicopter Beginners Forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2660207

RE: Draganflyer yaw problem
When flying in a direction, the downwash interacts with the rotors differently, because you're moving off the column of downwash. I've found it not uncommon to have to make yaw corrections after/during lateral movement.
Posted on: 7/18/2004 11:52 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Electric RC Helis"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2001145

RE: do you still qaxu?
In 2003, Qaxu Technologies of MN, was trying to raise venture capital. There's always a possibility that they've simply lacked the financial "umph" the get things rolling, and were a bit too optimistic, spending as much mony on vague advertising before things were in place. http://www.collaborative.net/venture_conference_2004/past_companies.cfm As for the wisdom of running an ad campaign to market a product that isn't yet available, their PR agency is/was Haberman and Associates. Eric Davis handles their account. http://habermaninc.com/pages/storytellers/eric.html
Posted on: 7/2/2004 11:44 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1955104

RE: Which software for analog video
What do you mean by "work with analog video?" I assume you have video from an analog source - camera or tape. You can mix it with other analog video sources - like multiple cameras - that can all be done analog - with an analog mixer the way sporting events are produced live with multiple cameras. If you want to edit the video, and you want to edit staying analog, you need to set up multiple analog sources, like VCRs, and editing is basically playing one while recording to the other - that's the old-school way video was edited from the 70s through the mid 90s. If you want to edit the video in your compter, your computer can only store the video in digital form. You need an analog video capture card for the computer (it will likely have capture software included) that will let you record an analog signal into a digital file in your computer. Then, most any video editing package on the computer can be used to edit.
Posted on: 4/11/2004 2:23 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1712512

RE: DRAGANFLY IV -SUB PAR VIDEO
I've had similar effects on CMOS cameras that were light leaks from where the lense assembly mounted to the circuit board. Try the hood around it first - from black construction paper or something similar. Make sure the area where the lense mounts to the board is protected from light.
Posted on: 3/21/2004 7:01 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1646464

RE: Anyone seen this CCD board camera
Yep, a neutral density filter. The problem comes in finding one built to slip onto a microcameral lens mount - I've never seen one. You can get neutral density filters at camera stores, that are larger in diameter - key it that the camera is looking through it to the outside world, when you mount it, and that there's no light source behind it to reflect light back to the lens. Basically the concept is like putting sunglasses on your camera. It goes black when it sees the sun directly because it is being overloaded with light. The neutral density filter reduces the amount of light that gets to the camera. As long as the light when not pointed at the sun is enough for a good image, then you're in great shape. Professional video cameras typically have an internal filter wheel with a selection of neutral density filters in different densities, to limit the light going into the CCD to optimal levels.
Posted on: 3/13/2004 9:07 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1620207

RE: Would this work?
From the product description: [quote] Size & Weight (LxHxW): 0.5" X 4.8" x 1", 3.0 oz [/quote] Perhaps 1 pound was the shipping weight - considering packaging, and that their shipping system probably has a 1 pound minimum in the pricing structure.
Posted on: 3/12/2004 1:51 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1617931

RE: Using a helmet cam for in flight video?
[quote]ORIGINAL: xvwdvw01 I may be misunderstanding your post, but the advantage of wireless is not quality, it is weight. [/quote] I always thought the big advantage was that you weren't dragging that long cable behind the plane. Plus if you try to d 3d pattern flying you end up tying the cable in knots. [:D]
Posted on: 3/12/2004 1:48 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1617921

RE: Anyone seen this CCD board camera
Pretty decent price for a color camera like that. For comparison, lines of horizontal resolution is the way the horizontal resolution in video is measured - it's as close as there is to an analog equivalent of the width in pixels in a computer image - though it's not exactly the same - it still allows for fading of brighness between the lines which pixels do not. 330 lines puts you right at the resolution of UHF/VHF/Cable broadcast video. For comparison, VHS video can handle only 280 lines, and Hi8 tapes can usually go a bit over 400.
Posted on: 3/12/2004 1:44 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1617905

RE: DEEP WATER: Transmission?
Radio waves propagate [b]very[/b] poorly through water. That's why ROVs and underwater communication equipment are set up to communicate through cables our acoustic signals. If you're going to seal the camera, eliminating all voids with silicone, you might want to just pick up a cheap camera for the job - a black and white (if you're illuminating with IR this is your best bet) microcamera can be had for about $30, for a bit more you can get one with an array of IR LEDs on the same board. mpja.com carries lots of surplus microcameras and the like - this camera would do the trick well: http://www.mpja.com/productview.asp?product=11691+ST If you can build a good housing you can save a bit of money over commercial products like this: http://www.jwfishers.com/dv1.htm Even land based, you're better with a cable than RF if you want to get the cleanest signal you can. Even worrying about signal propagation through coper - the resistance on a couple hundred foot run, is competing with the waveform resolution lost when encoding over a carrier signal, and further when you take into account interference. -Bill
Posted on: 3/12/2004 1:34 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1617882

RE: 2.4GHZ or 900Mhz Which is best?
[quote]ORIGINAL: VULTCH I don't need a ham license as I have a General Class Radiotelephone license. I could suggest everyone to get this license but it is a little harder to obtain. [/quote] What do you need for that license? Does that license allow for commercial applications (i.e. it's illegal to operate for financial gain under the HAM license, so arial photography for media/news/adversiting is right out.)
Posted on: 2/19/2004 12:47 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1543821

RE: Best indoor blimp cam?
[quote]ORIGINAL: yb2normal Sorry for the OT question, but what is helium used for in welding? [/quote] It's used to displace air in some types of arc-welding. Arc welding with many metals will cause the metal to boil and pop if it's exposed to air during the weld, due to rapid oxidation of the metal. The He2 displaces the oxygen away from the arc. In typical steel arc welding CO2 is used for this, I think helium is primarily used in aluminum welding (though why the different gasses, I don't know.)
Posted on: 1/28/2004 6:26 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1476490

RE: Your thoughts on a field cam?
Nope, static IP would only be needed if the webcam computer were to be the web host, which is not necessary. If it were to be streaming video (more than is needed for security and flight conditions) it can be streamed to a web server that acts as a repeater, or reflector for the video stream. Kind or pricy and tricky to set up. If you are going to have it as a still camera, that's very easy, and easily done over dialup or wireless Internet access. There are web cam programs that will, at preset intervals, grab an image from the attached video device, overlay text and graphics on the image, then ftp to a web server and upload the image. Then on the web server, you have a web page with a JAVA script that uploads the picture to the user's web browser at a similar time interval. There's no need for static IP with either set-up. With a land-line you can set up the web-cam package, and use an autodialer for windows to automatically reconnect to the ISP if you get dropped. I've done this a number of times at indoor sporting events, all the gear fits in a ventilated briefcase, with the webcam coming out of the case on a cable, and power and phone lines going into the case. Also, of note, there are computerized weather stations available for a few hundred dollars that can be set up so that they will take temp, humidity, windspeed, wind direction, etc., and similarly ftp that data to a web server via any type of Internet connection. If there's a building with the ability for power and a phone line within wireless video range of were you want the camera, and either power for the camera on the field itself, or you can rig a solar/battery supply for it, this would be a very do-able project. -Bill
Posted on: 9/11/2003 11:53 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1128699

RE: Your thoughts on a field cam?
What you'll need: A PC: - pretty much whatever you can get your hands on the cheapest. An old 160 MHz notebook for a couple hundred dollars would do the job fine, and not need much power. A webcam - probably the easiest lowest hassle part of the project. Power - hopefully you can get it from the water tower, I expect that a solar array adequate for the job, battery array and inverters would be rather pricy though I don't have direct experience there. I've seen foldable solar arrays available for notebooks for a few hundred dollars, but they don't have the ability to drive the notebook, In a day of good sun they can put enough charge on the battery to run for a couple of hours. Internet access: if you can get a phone line out there, things are happy. If you need to go wireless, they get tricky. I'm a traveling journalist who lives by his wireless internet access. AT&T and Verizon consumer packages will run you $100 or so a month (Sprint will do it for $30 but has a problem with dropping connections frequently in my experience.) Both AT&T and Verizon have less expensive packages, but for a web cam you'll need unlimited data transfer per month. Problem here is that running a continuous web cam, at least in letter of the law, I believe violates their user agreements. You'll need to check with these companies to see of they have a commercial service rate to do what you want. You will also need a building or structure to house, contain, and protect the equipment. There are also dedicated web cams that can connect straight to a dial up line, or other internet connection, but these usually cost more than a typical web cam and an old computer. You might also consdier a wireless surveilence camera rig, if you can mount the receiver at a building within range that can get a phone line to it practically. Then you just need to worry about power (not as bad as trying to power the computer and wireless internet gear) and have protection for the computer end of things. -Bill
Posted on: 9/10/2003 10:46 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1125736

Need advice on wirelessvideo system.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jaywebguy [/i] [B]So would I only be required to obtain the "Technical class" licenses then to broadcast wireless video from my plane? [/B][/QUOTE] I do not have the Technical license, but when I looked into it for the purposes of wireless video, some of the stipulations (i.e. the license identification requirements that have to be done at regular intervals) looked to me like being legal would also require having a text generator on board to overlay your license number on the video, or at least display it as a slate at regular intervals. I'm sure a HAM that's current on Amateur TV requirements could fill in more details. -Bill
Posted on: 8/23/2003 12:27 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1073729

Pal/ntsc
PAL does better color encoding - hence the video engineering joke that NTSC stands for Never Twice the Same Color (it's actually National Television Standards Committee.) Elevator_Up has covered the most important part though - you'll want to use a camera that uses the same format as the rest of the gear you will use with it (monitors, computer digitizers, VCRs, etc.) and if you live in North America that's going to be NTSC. A lot of European video gear, especially higher end consumer VCRs are dual system units, allowing them to work with PAL or NTSC, because of so many video products going from the US to Europe. And to confuse things a little more, most of the former USSR nations use SECAM. -Bill
Posted on: 8/23/2003 12:24 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1076796

Re: Cheap Cameras at Wal-Mart...good or bad
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jchuston [/i] [B]I am wanting to get some shots from up in the air...I was going to go get one of these Aiptek pencam 1.3 megapixel cameras but saw that they are like 50-60 bucks... Wal-Mart has some (not sure of the brand name) but they are 640x480 max so like 300,000 megapixels...are these any good...they are like $20...actually $19.99 -John [/B][/QUOTE] 300,000 megapixels would be 547,722 x 547,722 (assuming it was square, the aspect ratio could be different. At 24 bit color that would be some 858 Megabytes of memory per picture (too big to fit on a CD-ROM without compression. 640 x 480 is VGA resolution which is 0.3 Megapixels. Note, that anyone using the wireless video cameras and grabbing stills from the video will be limited to this resolution (use that as comparison when looking at people's online pictures to get an idea of what you will be able to get.) If your pictures are primarily going to end up on the web, that's really not that bad, especially if you're most interested in just taking wide scenic type shots. However if you want to print them, or are trying to get detailed shots of things on the ground (i.e. you want to see windows and doors on your house, not just that your house is there, and it's rough shape) you might want to opt for something with more resolution.
Posted on: 6/7/2003 12:23 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=840300

Looking for Wright Flyer planes
Both Arizona Models and Dare Engineering make kits. Sky Hooks & Rigging sells the dare kit in a bundle with RX, motors and batteries. Looks like a fun project - anyone have feedback as to which kit is better and why - the Dare or Arizona kit?
Posted on: 5/26/2003 2:53 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Park Flyers & Backyard Flyers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=584973

Antenna's
The orange discoleration may be light leakage somewhere in the lens mount assembly getting light to the chip (assuming it's a CMOS). The waviness of the image is most likely an artifact of vibration - insulating the camera more from its mounts should help with that.
Posted on: 5/26/2003 2:31 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum "Aerial Photography and Video"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=801668

Cox Engine ID
Fortunately it's still good :-) 9vs can't deliver much amperage. -Bill
Posted on: 1/28/2003 1:53 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=510049

Cox Engine ID
Thanks much for the replies. Good to hear it should work on the 15%. It's still fresh, picked it up locally. I'll give it a cleaning with alcohol and another go. How much voltage/amperage should I use to drive the glow-plug? I'd just clipped on my model rocket launcher (9v battery source) since it was near my workbench and had aligator clips. I've got 3 Dymond pico servos that I picked up for my L-19, and even though my Airtronics receiver isn't the smallest in the world, it's not all that heavy. So... It would be good to replace a 300 size electric in a glider, what about other designs? I ran across a Sopwith Camel .020 in another thread, is that only practical by using a more efficient .020 engine or uber-lightweight components? One of the planes I eventually want to model is the Curtis Jenny, because my grandfather flew one in WW-1. 1/2 A seems particularly appealing to me, due to limited work and storage space in my home. Also - what about throttle? This engine has no throttle, is it common for folks using this sort of engine to fly without a throttle? Also, would it be a practical idea to put a brass sleeve over the cylinder with an exhaust/air intake port in it, so that it could be rotated around the cylinder, choking off the exhaust and fresh air intake to act as a throttle? Thanks again, Bill
Posted on: 1/27/2003 10:59 PM by Author "billmi" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=510047

Cox Engine ID
Hi. I'm a total newbie to this forum (and RC flight in general.) I built a .40 Cub from a kit that was a gift, but decided not to smash it up learning to fly, so I scratch built an electric L19 from plans in Model Airplane News that's had a couple of spectacular crashes, and is presently waiting on a nice calm day with a break in my schedule for the next go. In my attic I found a Cox engine that I'd salvaged from a Cox Sky Copter free flight helicopter I used to own. Since I enjoy building - I want to put it in something. Anyone recognize this and know it's size? [img]http://www.corin.com/bill/rc/halfa.jpg[/img] The tiny little fuel tank was cracked, and I dremeled the pivot mount off the bottom, so it can now act as a firewall. The photo is the engine on a test stand. It fired up, but would not run more than a few seconds on some 15% fuel (I need to find a local source for 24%.) Thanks, -Bill
Posted on: 1/26/2003 1:09 AM by Author "billmi" in the forum ""1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=510042