Just found this.
This is how you can do a range test in line with the local laws.

Hello there MySky. Good day and thank you for sharing this video that you have came upon. Nice find and have a nice day.

Interesting but I think without all the systems running who knows what will be going on

Bigplumbs Posted at 6-21 02:55
Interesting but I think without all the systems running who knows what will be going on

Except the motors everything is running, and i don't think that they will interfere that much.

MySky Posted at 6-21 03:26
Except the motors everything is running, and i don't think that they will interfere that much.

I agree, ya cant argue with this test, I'm glad he actually lowered the angle of the RC in the end, it made a difference

Nice find MySky.    Very cool way to do a range test.  

I did  notice that there was quite a difference when he held the RC  properly facing the drone and not towards the sky.

DowntownRDB Posted at 6-21 04:28
Nice find MySky.    Very cool way to do a range test.  

I did  notice that there was quite a difference when he held the RC  properly facing the drone and not towards the sky.

Yeah, for sure, this is what i have been trying to tell some folk, it has to be spot-on for the Mini 3, why, not got a clue, its just the way it is...

Bashy Posted at 6-21 07:12
Yeah, for sure, this is what i have been trying to tell some folk, it has to be spot-on for the Mini 3, why, not got a clue, its just the way it is...

I'm betting it is because the antennas are internal on the RC screened controller and it inhibits a bit of the signal.  You really have to concentrate on aiming the control top directly at the drone.  He kept tilting it upward to see the screen thereby losing signal strength as it was no longer lined up perfectly.

I'm sure you noticed how much better the signal was and how much further the Mini 2 went before losing video feed as opposed to the Mini 3.   

Bashy Posted at 6-21 07:12
Yeah, for sure, this is what i have been trying to tell some folk, it has to be spot-on for the Mini 3, why, not got a clue, its just the way it is...

I have the drone and I can assure you that it does not need to be spot on. When you try one you will understand

It was not to start the 163xxx th which has a better range discussion, it was more the way it was done.

Bigplumbs Posted at 6-21 07:33
I have the drone and I can assure you that it does not need to be spot on. When you try one you will understand

The way it is looking and unless things improve, it ain't gonna happen either...

...and yes, the RC does have to be spot on at distance, the video proves it too, you can see him aligning it up vertically (it was already there horizontally) and getting a better signal, the evidence is there, you cannot refute that.

Both drones were treated the same, only one came out on top. Like it or don't, that's up to you, not skin off my back.

DowntownRDB Posted at 6-21 07:16
I'm betting it is because the antennas are internal on the RC screened controller and it inhibits a bit of the signal.  You really have to concentrate on aiming the control top directly at the drone.  He kept tilting it upward to see the screen thereby losing signal strength as it was no longer lined up perfectly.

I'm sure you noticed how much better the signal was and how much further the Mini 2 went before losing video feed as opposed to the Mini 3.

Yeah, sure did and i have been saying that it's the way folks tilt that RC so they can see the screen better (45º ish) from the get go but get looked at as if I'm a crazy person lol, ya cant argue with what this video shows. Although, it seems like some still want to try lol

Ken is a cracker.  

Bashy Posted at 6-21 18:36
Yeah, sure did and i have been saying that it's the way folks tilt that RC so they can see the screen better (45º ish) from the get go but get looked at as if I'm a crazy person lol, ya cant argue with what this video shows. Although, it seems like some still want to try lol

There will always be a few that will not give up.  I sometimes refer to them as hardliners (or hard heads).  

DAFlys Posted at 6-21 22:56
Ken is a cracker.

No doubt about that.    He always makes you smile during his videos.

DowntownRDB Posted at 6-22 05:32
No doubt about that.    He always makes you smile during his videos.

I was wondering where that video was going for a moment,  I was expecting him to have a number of people as observers along the route but of course thats not allowed anymore.  

DAFlys Posted at 6-22 21:43
I was wondering where that video was going for a moment,  I was expecting him to have a number of people as observers along the route but of course thats not allowed anymore.

Not allowed here either.  FAA rules state your observer needs to be near you and be able to communicate verbally (not using walkie talkie or phone), so basically side by side.

DowntownRDB Posted at 6-23 03:57
Not allowed here either.  FAA rules state your observer needs to be near you and be able to communicate verbally (not using walkie talkie or phone), so basically side by side.

That's exactly what I meant. It never used to be the case but they changed it but not many seem to know that.

Hahahahaha.
Interesting.

DAFlys Posted at 6-23 22:33
That's exactly what I meant. It never used to be the case but they changed it but not many seem to know that.

Don't know that (or don't care that it changed and keep on doing it).  

I had a client one time that said he couldn't be found guilty because he wasn't aware of a particular law.  I had to explain to him that ignorance of the law is not defensible in court.  He didn't like that so decided to represent himself in court.  The judge advised him against doing it but he did it anyway.   Ended up face the maximum punishment allowed.  

I guess he found out that the old saying is true.  "A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client."  

DowntownRDB Posted at 6-24 06:47
Don't know that (or don't care that it changed and keep on doing it).  

I had a client one time that said he couldn't be found guilty because he wasn't aware of a particular law.  I had to explain to him that ignorance of the law is not defensible in court.  He didn't like that so decided to represent himself in court.  The judge advised him against doing it but he did it anyway.   Ended up face the maximum punishment allowed.  

hahaha,   reminds me of a recent case with Navro who represented himself.   


We have the same basic saying here.  Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law.

Thing is, we as hobbyists do not get told about all the in depth rules/laws that have to be read, we get given the drone code graphical page and that's it., But there's the whole ANO and Cap 722, one of the major ones is Cap 241,  not to fly recklessly etc, although, i think that may have changed recently but many may not know about it, here is a lot of what you need to know and i think it should be pushed a lot more than it is or i think that hobbyists should be made to do the A2 CofC to get their pilots ID -  https://register-drones.caa.co.uk/drone-code

DAFlys Posted at 6-25 00:33
hahaha,   reminds me of a recent case with Navro who represented himself.   

I've said it before and I'll say it again...you just can't fix stupid.  Sorry, rant over.  

DowntownRDB Posted at 6-25 08:58
I've said it before and I'll say it again...you just can't fix stupid.  Sorry, rant over.

Stupid somes that up well,   from this side of the pond its more of a laughing stock at the moment.  

DAFlys Posted at 6-25 23:37
Stupid somes that up well,   from this side of the pond its more of a laughing stock at the moment.