Transmitter of P2V vs P2V Plus

[phantomguy]

While the P2V Plus has a 2 watt range extender vs a 1.5 watt Range extender for the P2V, the specs seem to indicate that the transmitter for the P2V Plus is not as powerful as the transmitter of the P2V. But yet the advertised flying range distance is higher for the P2V Plus than the P2V.

anyone else noticed this? If so, how are they achieving longer distance with less transmitter power?

 

[JWDrone]

While the P2V Plus has a 2 watt range extender vs a 1.5 watt Range extender for the P2V, the specs seem to indicate that the transmitter for the P2V Plus is not as powerful as the transmitter of the P2V. But yet the advertised flying range distance is higher for the P2V Plus than the P2V.

anyone else noticed this? If so, how are they achieving longer distance with less transmitter power?

Ummmm isnt 2watts greater than 1.5watts? Re calulate your question..

 

[phantomguy]

Unaware of difference between range extender and transmitter I see.

 

[OI Photography]

I suspect their stated ranges aren't achieved (in real-world testing) so much as estimated in the lab, and they may have just adjusted that estimation or formula for it. In other words, the original published P2V range may have been found to be a little too conservative, and even with the change in power output they're giving a more aggressive (and perhaps more accurate) estimate now.

They may also have achieved some improvement in some other relevant factor such as reception gains on the Rx, signal to noise ratio, or something else that resulted in a bump in effective range.

Either way, I'd say the difference in stated ranges (P2V vs P2V+) is small enough that both may be within each other's margin of error...or within the "take it with a grain of salt" margin anyway.

 

[BenDronePilot]

I suspect their stated ranges aren't achieved (in real-world testing) so much as estimated in the lab, and they may have just adjusted that estimation or formula for it. In other words, the original published P2V range may have been found to be a little too conservative, and even with the change in power output they're giving a more aggressive (and perhaps more accurate) estimate now.

They may also have achieved some improvement in some other relevant factor such as reception gains on the Rx, signal to noise ratio, or something else that resulted in a bump in effective range.

Either way, I'd say the difference in stated ranges (P2V vs P2V+) is small enough that both may be within each other's margin of error...or within the "take it with a grain of salt" margin anyway.

I don't like that they apparently lowered the power of the RC control. It will most likely have less range than the original P2V controller, which for some was over 2km stock. And with simple antenna mod over 4km.

 

[phantomguy]

would be interesting if a person who hasnt sold their P2V yet but has received their P2V Plus to be able to link both transmitters to their Plus and see if there is any distance difference since the P2V transmitter on paper has higher output

 

[BenDronePilot]

While the P2V Plus has a 2 watt range extender vs a 1.5 watt Range extender for the P2V, the specs seem to indicate that the transmitter for the P2V Plus is not as powerful as the transmitter of the P2V. But yet the advertised flying range distance is higher for the P2V Plus than the P2V.

anyone else noticed this? If so, how are they achieving longer distance with less transmitter power?

Actually the range extender is more like 100mw not watts. If the range extender transmit power was actually 1.5 watts then people using 3rd party wifi repeaters such as the 1watt and 1.5 watt docoolers wouldn't be getting increased range. In addition adding a 2watt amp like I have on my range extender wouldn't have doubled my range either.

 

[phantomguy]

THanks Ben.

Here are the specs. Maybe I mistakenly thought "power consumption" had something to do with actual output/distance?

For the PV2:

Range Extender

Operating Frequency

2412-2462MHz

Communication Distance (open area)

300m

Transmitter Power

<=17dBm

Power Consumption

1.5W

 

[phantomguy]

Pv2+


Range Extender



Operating Frequency

2412-2462MHz



Communication Distance (open area)
500-700m
Transmitter Power

20dBm
Power Consumption
2W

 

[akonisiya]

is there a way you can select which channel in wifi the range extender will use?

 

[Hawk Eye]

is there a way you can select which channel in wifi the range extender will use?

Not that I am aware of. I am hoping a future update will allow this. My extender is currently using Channel 1 and is a bit overcrowded where I have been using it. What channel is yours on?

 

[KG4MXV]

Is it me but does it seem that people are confusing the wifi extender spec's and the transmitters (Controllers) spec's


The wifi extender is 2.4ghz there isn't a CE and FCC mode on the wifi extender that I know of.

The transmitter (controller) is 5.8ghz but there is a switch on the back of the transmitter for CE 300M and FCC 1000M operation and I think the default is CE from the factory. The easy way to tell is when you first turn it on, you will hear one beep for CE and two Beeps for FCC.

one thing to keep in mind when flying in residential and city flying that many wifi access points are now both 2.4 and 5.8Ghz
so a quick site survey with a app that will show all networks and their types would be a good thing to do pre-flight.
I would avoid heavy areas that have over 70-80% of the wifi N band covered or your phantom will have a hard time finding a open and clear channel to operate.

I use a application called iStumbler and it gives me a tone of info.

 

[Hawk Eye]

Is it me but does it seem that people are confusing the wifi extender spec's and the transmitters (Controllers) spec's


The wifi extender is 2.4ghz there isn't a CE and FCC mode on the wifi extender that I know of.

The transmitter (controller) is 5.8ghz but there is a switch on the back of the transmitter for CE 300M and FCC 1000M operation and I think the default is CE from the factory. The easy way to tell is when you first turn it on, you will hear one beep for CE and two Beeps for FCC.

one thing to keep in mind when flying in residential and city flying that many wifi access points are now both 2.4 and 5.8Ghz
so a quick site survey with a app that will show all networks and their types would be a good thing to do pre-flight.
I would avoid heavy areas that have over 70-80% of the wifi N band covered or your phantom will have a hard time finding a open and clear channel to operate.

I use a application called iStumbler and it gives me a tone of info.

Thanks for the tip and I agree most in this thread do not know the difference between the extender or remote. On my regular Phanton Vision as very common to lose first person view and I realize that much was do to the camera firmware but also the wi-fi traffic on channel 1. I actually was able to improve lost packets on my home PC by changing to a channel that nobody else was using. I used Xirrus WiFi inspector and is free with no adware or malware.

 

[johnbowen]

Postby phantomguy » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:55 pm

Power Consumption
2W

Power consumption is NOT the same as power output. I'd be impressed with a transmitter that put out the same amount of power as it consumed. Then I would start work on my perpetual motion machine.

 

[phantomguy]

Postby phantomguy » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:55 pm

Power Consumption
2W

Power consumption is NOT the same as power output. I'd be impressed with a transmitter that put out the same amount of power as it consumed. Then I would start work on my perpetual motion machine.

Understood. Per DJI the P2V transmitter is 125mw output and the P2V+ is 100mw output. Consumption is 1.5W for the P2V+ transmitter and 2W for the P2V transmitter.

Per those numbers, that's 25% difference in higher output and 25% difference in higher wattage power consumption for a stock P2V transmitter over the new P2V+ transmitter, correct?

 

[DBS]

The 1.5w and 2w ratings in the specs are power consumption on the wifi extender... not transmitter... and not watts of output on either.

As for the range question...

The P2V had less extender power and worse antenna placement on the camera sides... so P2V overall advertised range was determined by "when you lose video"

Now the extender is upped by 3dBm and the antennas on the plus are placed better so "loss of video" is now pushed out farther... and transmitter power was probly reduced for better battery life as "loss of control" wasn't the issue with the claimed range anyway...

Wifi was increased
tx was decreased
Now they have more of a matching range before failure of either.
So advertised range has been increased due to better video feed and transmitter power is still sufficient to match that wifi signal range.

 

[phantomguy]

my mistake in that post for confusing the extender with transmitter re: wattage.

Your explanation makes perfect sense, although still unfortunate that the control transmission power is decreasing with an upgrade.

 

[DBS]

Well... at least it's easy to boost that with a cheap antenna swap? :ugeek:

 

[phantomguy]

Well... at least it's easy to boost that with a cheap antenna swap? :ugeek:

true but it will still not be as powerful as the P2V transmitter with the same cheap antenna swap.

 

[DBS]

Well... at least it's easy to boost that with a cheap antenna swap? :ugeek:

true but it will still not be as powerful as the P2V transmitter with the same cheap antenna swap.

Dammit.... I'm tryin to make some good come from all this :lol: