I'm a big fan of my PhantomV2+   Will most likely upgrade to the V3 or Inspire 1 in the next six months.

Had a question or two about the Inspire...  I read the range on that craft is just over a mile.  Does that have to be an unobstructed view/line?  I can't imagine flying a craft that I lose site of.  How many of you Inspire users do that?

Also...it seems the V3 has basically the same camera now as the Inspire.  Aside from the Inspire being heavier and handles better in strong winds...what do you see as being worth the extra 1500 dollars?   I find my PV2 does pretty well in winds.

Sell me please. :-)

Thanks

They are two different machines, and should be use for different purposes, for example, i use my P3P when i am going places with long walks and hard to access, and weak winds, but i don't have the liberty of movements i have with the inspire, the props shows in the videos, stable but n to as much as te inspire.

If i am going to a beach or windy places, if i want more movement liberty with the camera, and with strong winds up to 20mph, i'll stick with the inspire, you could do a 360 view and not show the props, it's a very professional bird!

Personally i'll buy the inspire 1, even though there a few issues, but soon enough they will be addressed and solved!

The inspire 1 listed max control range is just over one mile.

FPV as substitute for line of sight is unacceptably dangerous, IMO.  And will be completely illegal in the U.S. as soon as the rulemaking process is complete (it already is illegal in a number of countries).

For any flying you do in the US, you need to maintain line of sight, which is well under a mile, so range is not really much of a factor.  

Same camera.  Save some bucks and go with the P3 unless you work with a separate camera operator.

I personally use a dedicated camera operator with a separate controller, and have even modified the Inspire 1 with a separate, fixed FPV camera for the pilot.  The results are marginally better than a skilled pilot/camera operator flying alone.  The only shots I can do significantly better with an I1 than a P3 are forward movement shots where the P3 platform would place propellers in the frame.  Any marginally experienced aerial videographer would tell you that particular shot would be better in every respect if you simply flew out rather than flew in, and reversed the video in post (doesn't work when motion is a significant factor, like traffic or wave action).

daver/m Posted at 2015-6-1 13:00
Actually I've read where immersed fpv is being reviewed more closely by the faa again and may be ac ...

If two of these aircraft are flying intersecting courses via FPV, one of them will not see the other until they are struck broadside.  There is no actual way to see-and-avoid if you can only look dead ahead (unless you are constantly yawing the camera back and forth, but that's impractical for its own reasons).  The FAA's concern of course is that the same is true if the intersecting aircraft is big enough to carry humans.  Although the two should never share an altitude I think the idea that they COULD, legal or not, still plagues the FAA.

ultraturtle Posted at 2015-6-1 06:06
For any flying you do in the US, you need to maintain line of sight, which is well under a mile, so  ...

so tell me this...on the PV3...will I see a notable difference in IQ of the both video and pictures than that of the PV2?  Or just in the video?

PeteGould Posted at 2015-6-1 13:57
If two of these aircraft are flying intersecting courses via FPV, one of them will not see the oth ...

Agree that immersed fpv has some risk which will most likely end the immersed part of RC piloting ..
(Immersed RC fpv flight on wikipedia) has a little history on fpv , who started it in 2008 , some of the record flights ,some AMA RC rules and FAA rules old and new so far in the u.s. and some other countries.  interesting read with lots of info on the subject ..

Immersive FPV is illegal in Canada...You lose peripheral vision and cant see whats going on around you...Actually, FPV is also illegal  as well even with VLOS  here under our exwemption rules.

Correct...Transport Canadas regs if you are flying under a weight exemption.   That would also go for any  tablet , phone or Immersive technology you are using for FPV. Also the use of any electronics  products in the immediate area is illegal. This is very confusing as in my mind to monitor telemetry you need a tablet to run the  Pilot App which is a Safety issue. Does this mean that you are not allowed to use a device as you suggested or does it mean other devices that are unlicensed in the ISM band??? You are supposed to always maintain visual line of sight using the RC.   However, it only states the pilot cant use FPV but what about a person controlling the second controller? It doesn't say anything about this person???   I agree with most of their rules but not all.  Im old school and am conditioned for VLOS and keeping an eye on the bird while briefly checking the telemetry...If you want to fly FPV you need to write an SFOC which is a 135 page document and convince them of the need for FPV. I think they are afraid of BVLOS which is also illegal unless you write up another SFOC. Presumably, at some point you can kinda, sorta, maybe fly somewhere. It currently takes 44 to 66 days before they look at your SFOC...Not an ideal situation, but it is law and they are looking for public input to try and make it better.  Hopefully it will get better but this will take time...

Wildcat Willie Posted at 2015-6-2 00:45
Correct...Transport Canadas regs if you are flying under a weight exemption.   That would also go fo ...

You talk about electronic interference issues with the IPad running Pilot App. The answer is to switch it the iPad to Airplane mode. This stops all possible interference on the control/light bridge frequencies (2.4GHz).

Wildcat Willie Posted at 2015-6-2 00:10
Immersive FPV is illegal in Canada...You lose peripheral vision and cant see whats going on around y ...

Not recreationally it isn't. Who told you that?

Wildcat Willie Posted at 2015-6-2 00:45
Correct...Transport Canadas regs if you are flying under a weight exemption.   That would also go fo ...

Sfoc is not a 135 page document?  I write applications.

Shadrack Posted at 2015-6-2 02:09
Sfoc is not a 135 page document?  I write applications.

Your Right. I stand corrected the Staff Instruction for the SFOC which is the guide that you use is 125 pages and not 135.

Shadrack Posted at 2015-6-2 02:08
Not recreationally it isn't. Who told you that?

You need an SFOC for Immersive Technology like FatShark or any other type of Goggles otherwise it is illegal.

Staff Instruction (SI) No. 623-001
Review and Processing of an Application for a Special Flight Operations Certificate for the Operation of an Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV) System
Issuing Office:        Standards        Document No.:        SI 623-001
File Classification No.:        Z 5000-32        Issue No.:        02
RDIMS No.:        9946240-V1        Effective Date:        2014-11-19

First Person View (FPV)
6.2 Separation and Collision Avoidance


9. A FPV device generates and transmits a streaming video image to a ground station display or monitor giving the pilot who is viewing this video, the illusion of actually flying the aircraft from an onboard pilot's perspective.
FPV on a UAV does not constitute an acceptable solution for providing a sense and avoid capability nor is it considered to be a suitable substitute for the use of a visual observer during VLOS operations. As such, FPV devices shall only be operated as specifically approved in an SFOC for a particular UAV operation. The use of FPV technology must adhere to paragraph 6.2(1) and 6.2(3)(b) of this SI.

On private land, for recreational purposes, not for commercial.  Transport doesn't get too involved with recreational.  What you are listing is from an SFOC application info and in speaking to TC, and asking specifically "do you need an SFOC to fly with goggles on, mini quads, on private land" I was told "no".

PeteGould Posted at 2015-6-1 05:55
FPV as substitute for line of sight is unacceptably dangerous, IMO.  And will be completely illegal  ...

Hey Pete , if you go to the dji main page and see FlySafe , go there scroll to the bottom video where you'll
find DJIs ad for using the movero fpv glasses for precision flying used with their products....

daver/m Posted at 2015-6-11 04:51
Hey Pete , if you go to the dji main page and see FlySafe , go there scroll to the bottom video wh ...

Hmmmm... I don't see it.  The bottom video is about flying safely - it contains no commercial and I didn't see how to navigate to one.  Guess I need a little more navigational detail...

daver/m Posted at 2015-6-1 04:48
The inspire 1 listed max control range is just over one mile.

I can confirm 1+ mile.

of course you need unobstructed view for that range. I tried to land at my cousins backyard which is up the hill, but his place is surrounded by tall buildings and trees, which will eat up the signal. He lives 300ms from me. I couldn't land, lost signal multiple times.

On the other hand, I video some castle ruins which were 1800m away from me. No problem at all... Sometimes the video was choppy for the second controller but overall good video feed.

tonycorsoimages Posted at 2015-6-1 22:56
so tell me this...on the PV3...will I see a notable difference in IQ of the both video and picture ...

Answering your question , on photo there is not a great difference, but the video is another thing. Besides that, the image in your tablet will be in hi resolution so is much easier to take a perfect shot

PeteGould Posted at 2015-6-11 05:18
Hmmmm... I don't see it.  The bottom video is about flying safely - it contains no commercial and  ...

It's a video link at the end of the dji safe flying video at the bottom of the page showing the guy wearing the Epson moverio fpv glasses which you can see through line of sight and a cam view but only work with the phantom visions , these have been around for awhile now but didn't get great reviews as they only work with android and have no hdmi in port. An attempt to keep some fpv legal as things change....

Skywolf007 Posted at 2015-6-11 05:32
I can confirm 1+ mile.

of course you need unobstructed view for that range. I tried to land at m ...

Cool , I watched a record inspire distance run on YouTube guy flying 5 ? Miles from shore to some small islands and back .... Too far for me for the $$$ , but crazy to see if you can find the video.. Also I'm not recommending anyone fly out beyond visual , I've done it a few times testing video range for my own confidence and satisfaction of the video signal out over water all the way and back near a mile very little video loss or glitches ,  the RC control range I never worried about as it's more than enough with upper end tx and rx units anyway usually well over a mile under good conditions , I'll have to sneak out and fly my old p2 with the fatshark goggles again before it gets banned completely ...

daver/m Posted at 2015-6-11 10:26
Cool , I watched a record inspire distance run on YouTube guy flying 5 ? Miles from shore to some s ...

Here is the video of that flight Its uncut so don't expect cinema experience.

At 1:17 I put an annotation in the video, so you can see where I'm standing. It's 1700+ meters(1.1mile)

I can confirm 13,000 feet....still had signal.  I took mine out over farm land so that if anything happened, it would have a flat place to land.