DBS vs FPVLR for P3P

DBS vs FPVLR(advanced)

  • DBS

    Votes: 21 80.8%
  • FPVLR

    Votes: 5 19.2%

  • Total voters
    26
@bobmyers They are great add ons Sir, but unfortunately I live in Miami, FL and for me to really test this out I honestly may need to drive almost 2.5hrs north to Central Florida where it's less populated to see my best results. As for now, I achieved over an extra 6,500ft with this add-on. Hey i'm more than happy than some people around here, but I hope we get to see here more and more results of longer range with this mod...
 
@bobmyers They are great add ons Sir, but unfortunately I live in Miami, FL and for me to really test this out I honestly may need to drive almost 2.5hrs north to Central Florida where it's less populated to see my best results. As for now, I achieved over an extra 6,500ft with this add-on. Hey i'm more than happy than some people around here, but I hope we get to see here more and more results of longer range with this mod...
@bobmyers They are great add ons Sir, but unfortunately I live in Miami, FL and for me to really test this out I honestly may need to drive almost 2.5hrs north to Central Florida where it's less populated to see my best results. As for now, I achieved over an extra 6,500ft with this add-on. Hey i'm more than happy than some people around here, but I hope we get to see here more and more results of longer range with this mod...
Wish you luck my friend:)-- thank you for your input-- coming to Miami soon to do some construction site video--
 
Speak for yourself-- they shouldn't be doing long test runs in cities where there is real interference so the bird will lose connection only to crash where it will cause property damage, injury or death. Then the pilot will make the national news again-- to much of that crap going on now. IMHO

Lol @ death.
 
I live in a dense city. I've been busy and it's been too windy for a distance flght. I have plenty of houses schools and freeways to fly over too. I'll post results so all the tin foil hat wearers can get mad.

I don't have anything above 100ft tall in my area also. I usually fly around 400. Hopefully I don't cross paths with any low flying 747s or f16s.

People need to lighten up
 
A lot of these impressive distance results always seem to be located in the middle of nowhere as in no real threat of RF interference from signals like wifi or radio transmitting towers. I want to see someone doing a long run test but in a regular city that has the typical instances like what i just mentioned.

Absolutely right, you will only get a fraction of those results in a built up urban environment. But as a frame of reference, I flew my P3 in NYC at a Park were I will typically get roughly double the range asI would flying around my neighborhood which has a lot of RF and other interference right next to me, I pushed out to 5k feet at 250ft alt with great signal the whole way through. I could have gone further out but signal became weak at a mile probably because I lost line of site so I would have had to fly up higher. The DBS mod should perform at least as well but most likely a bit better than the Windsufer antenna ad on though it will be more directional making aim at long range a bit more critical.
 
A lot of these impressive distance results always seem to be located in the middle of nowhere as in no real threat of RF interference from signals like wifi or radio transmitting towers. I want to see someone doing a long run test but in a regular city that has the typical instances like what i just mentioned.
you should buy one of each and test that out for us.
 
A lot of these impressive distance results always seem to be located in the middle of nowhere as in no real threat of RF interference from signals like wifi or radio transmitting towers. I want to see someone doing a long run test but in a regular city that has the typical instances like what i just mentioned.


Well a bloke on here called Mohan got a 5 mile+ flight with a DBS in a very RF noisy area. Right past the biggest steel works in Europe and a very densely populated area where every man and his dog has wifi. There are cellular masts all over the place. There is a very busy motorway (interstate) running there as well.
There is also a powerstation with 475,000V main transmission lines feeding an array of pylons.
To be honest I can't think of an area much worse. There are big hills behind the town and the steel works which will push all the noise back towards the beach.
 
FPVLR has a new setup thats suppose to do very well unboosted. Has anyone tried it?
 
I just want to punch through obstructions! Not the long distances...
 
I just want to punch through obstructions! Not the long distances...

Penetration thru obstructions is another thing this panel does well... but there are limits to the obstruction... trees and foliage can be powered thru... buildings are another story.

But you can also use signal reflection.

I flew all the way around the back of the ITELITE Warehouse in Miami recently using reflected signal off the surrounding warehouses... I can fly around into my backyard with no reflective help at all... I can fly around the church across the street by bouncing signal off the church bus in the parking lot.

Just some examples there but going directional definitely helps with object penetration or signal pathing around the object.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phantom13flyer
DBS itelite antenna is a beast. The signal isn't the problem its the battery now. I can not fly out of range now . This little compact antenna is the most impressive antenna on the market period!!
 
anyone tried the new V.2 KIT FOR I-1/P3?
I was going to order but now have second thoughts.
 
Speak for yourself-- they shouldn't be doing long test runs in cities where there is real interference so the bird will lose connection only to crash where it will cause property damage, injury or death. Then the pilot will make the national news again-- to much of that crap going on now. IMHO

It will only crash, even in lost signal, due to equipment or pilot failure.

Proper planning and preparation negate the issues associated with RTH.

The likelihood of RTH equipment failure is about the same as the likelihood of total quad equipment failure.

I suppose it's all about acceptable risk margins. But then again, as a 26 year old, my margin might be a bit different than some of the other folks around here. I try my best to maintain my bird, plan in advance, and not take impulsive "I just need to get that shot" risks, but at the same time I fly over dense residential quite frequently. Likelihood of it falling from the sky is low, maybe 1-100, likelihood of it hitting a human during falling (at least where I fly) even lower, maybe 1-500, so total likelihood of any given day hitting a human, negligible. I have more chance of getting in a car accident on my commute to work. Doesn't stop me from driving.

That all said, when I test new equipment, flight modes, or fully autonomous features, I do so over parks and other "green space" around me, not over houses or people.
 
Sorry, and that OT rant aside, I love my Itelite. Have one for my P2 as well.

With the P3 I get just over a mile in my Boston metro west subarb, which I can assure you is not LoS, has tons of interference, and I pilot from an area surrounded by trees.

The FPVLR might actually be the better antenna, but for me, given the balance of cost, size, and functionality, the itelite is better.
 
I've gotten no improvement with the DBS antenna over stock. But in all fairness, I'm in suburbia.

It's easy to say "go into the middle of nowhere" or "use the the 32 channel hack" but that doesn't help my situation where I am.
 
It will only crash, even in lost signal, due to equipment or pilot failure.

Proper planning and preparation negate the issues associated with RTH.

The likelihood of RTH equipment failure is about the same as the likelihood of total quad equipment failure.

I suppose it's all about acceptable risk margins. But then again, as a 26 year old, my margin might be a bit different than some of the other folks around here. I try my best to maintain my bird, plan in advance, and not take impulsive "I just need to get that shot" risks, but at the same time I fly over dense residential quite frequently. Likelihood of it falling from the sky is low, maybe 1-100, likelihood of it hitting a human during falling (at least where I fly) even lower, maybe 1-500, so total likelihood of any given day hitting a human, negligible. I have more chance of getting in a car accident on my commute to work. Doesn't stop me from driving.

That all said, when I test new equipment, flight modes, or fully autonomous features, I do so over parks and other "green space" around me, not over houses or people.
I guess as a 73 year old my margin is quite a bit different from all those younger than me-- I wont fly my in areas of dense population and people if a failure of the aircraft flying into a building or person or falling onto a building or person. Nothing good comes from a failure, pilot or equipment, but if I am going to fail or the equipment fails, I want it on the ground in a place other than in populated areas.

Rc drones have failed and hit a baby in a baby carriage, flew into people in crowded areas-- crashed at the US Tennis open, crashed in Manhattan , etc, etc, --maybe not a lot world wide compared to the number flying -- but probably more than has made the news---- and when something bad happens-- in this day and time-- it will make national headlines in the US. If one person that gets injured because the pilot was flying where they shouldn't be, then that is one too many-- IMHO -- the whole hobby will pay the price of these "accidents" in more and more regulation, stiff fines, and more and more "no fly zones. The FAA, and other agencies in the US government can create no fly zones "at will" and they already are.

If there were only a few quads flying then we wouldn't be hearing about these stories, but I would surmise with the popularity of the hobby, that there are well over a million in the air at sometime every day and probably many of those in populated areas around a lot of people. How much experience does most of these pilots have flying quads? No much, I suspect -- the hobby for the public---- who has no experience-- has just become fully available in the last year and with the added range, a whole new dimension has been added which increases the risk for no experience flyers. Most of these accidents can probably be attributed to pilots with few flying hours. Many experienced flyers probably wont take those chances-- except for the thrill seeker.
 
I guess as a 73 year old my margin is quite a bit different from all those younger than me-- I wont fly my in areas of dense population and people if a failure of the aircraft flying into a building or person or falling onto a building or person. Nothing good comes from a failure, pilot or equipment, but if I am going to fail or the equipment fails, I want it on the ground in a place other than in populated areas.

Rc drones have failed and hit a baby in a baby carriage, flew into people in crowded areas-- crashed at the US Tennis open, crashed in Manhattan , etc, etc, --maybe not a lot world wide compared to the number flying -- but probably more than has made the news---- and when something bad happens-- in this day and time-- it will make national headlines in the US. If one person that gets injured because the pilot was flying where they shouldn't be, then that is one too many-- IMHO -- the whole hobby will pay the price of these "accidents" in more and more regulation, stiff fines, and more and more "no fly zones. The FAA, and other agencies in the US government can create no fly zones "at will" and they already are.

If there were only a few quads flying then we wouldn't be hearing about these stories, but I would surmise with the popularity of the hobby, that there are well over a million in the air at sometime every day and probably many of those in populated areas around a lot of people. How much experience does most of these pilots have flying quads? No much, I suspect -- the hobby for the public---- who has no experience-- has just become fully available in the last year and with the added range, a whole new dimension has been added which increases the risk for no experience flyers. Most of these accidents can probably be attributed to pilots with few flying hours. Many experienced flyers probably wont take those chances-- except for the thrill seeker.

Average Number of Deaths per Year in the U.S

Lightning strike 35
Bee/Wasp 53
Dogs 31
Spider 6.5
Rattlesnake 5.5
Mountain lion 1
Shark 1
Alligator 0.3
Bear 0.5
Scorpion 0.5
Centipede 0.5
Elephant 0.25
Wolf 0.1
Horse 20
Bull 3

Deaths Caused By Drones Ever 0
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,359
Members
104,936
Latest member
hirehackers