RTM return to moon

Kris, my name is also Kris!!😀😂

@@some169 awesome! I had a skin-check appointment recently .. they had me down as "Khris" 😑😪

@@WilkieaSt bruh

@@henrykidman4364 🤘😑🤘

Yes it is

it's the KWADashians

ummagawd lol

Thats what I said

Yeah, throw in a $45 Flysky i6 at least. I'd also like to know if the included 2 antenna receiver (AFHDS 2A) is better than the older single antenna from the Turnigy 9x(AFHDS protocol), and how much better those are than the sub 1 gram micro receiver (seems to work fine on my 250mm quad, with the 600mW 5.8 Ghz VTX with clover antena the limiting factor). However, I'm planning on trying out some high powered 1.3 Ghz VTX and a ground station for quads (I have a HAM licence). Receivers I use: www.banggood.com/IRangX-Tiny-2_4G-6CH-Flysk-Receiver-Compatible-with-Flysky-PPM-Output-for-Eachine-QX80-QX90-QX95-p-1089802.html?rmmds=detail-top-buytogether-auto__9&cur_warehouse=CN www.banggood.com/FlySky-FS-iA6-2_4G-6CH-Receiver-For-RC-Airplane-p-985684.html?rmmds=detail-left-hotproducts__1&cur_warehouse=CN hobbyking.com/en_us/turnigy-9x-2-4ghz-8ch-receiver-v2.html

I'm curious as well I have never failsafe with any of my AFHDS 2a receivers but I have failsafe with the AFHDS system

Me too, I can go 1 km with the fs-i6x and could probably go a bit further, just don't like to search for my quad. Maybe the afhds2 protocol gets more attention when the Dark Knight controller comes out.

I have tested fs-i6 + fs-ia6b to 450 meters at 40cm above ground (on r/c car) and to 2300m at about 100m above ground level, both in low noise areas. Looks like in this test they are about 2m or so above ground and with some road traffic, and another transmitter right nearby. So I would estimate in this test the flysky would probably get about 400-500 meters.

Andrew Allen I'm on flysky and I've got very good range without any mods. I would like to see flysky i6 vs frsky qx7

sold mine for the taranis, dang it

and it outranges all of their others too 😂

It kinda is www.banggood.com/-p-1092053.html

Snorkl FPV, hahahaha! It kinda is...

Banggood has all that shit they are testing

I seriously cracked up on that too.

zactly!

Bring back Chad Nowak!

Is this reality tv now it felt like u was watching the Kardashians

Actually you should... This is a DJI product flaw, not a Bardwell induced problem. So... DJI you're gonna learn something today! :)

I’ve never kicked any of my quads over to pick it up

Bruuuh, I just got so mad for him when he did that. Mother of god.

I feel bad for you if you have a $1200 quad that can't handle being kicked over.

it's not so much that it can't handle it. It's more so the feeling of someone kicking of 1200 dollars worth of flying camera equipment. I just got the Mavic pro 2, and that ends up at around $2000 with insurance. It's super cringy to think of handling expensive equipment so nonchalantly, if that makes sense.

ISFTOMMY except for dji

everyones got an "achilles heel" lol

I have flown radio link for years, I love it. I've had frsky and spectrum and tbh no comparison, at altitude I've never, ever, not once failsafed with radio link

@@matthewnoblejordan3555 yes, I also have one, Radiolink AT9S

radiolink at9 was my first hobby grade rc before moving to frsky. the range test surprise me.

He's been busy 3D rendering all the cool 'flight footage' the Rotor Riot guys do... :D

Busy animating Dreamworks movies

Bardwell belongs on Rotorriot

Can't stand the guy full stop. Just my personal opinion.

He’s animating

i guess it was a natural reaction for a DJI product :)

Eric-Jan van den Bogaard dji hate is I guess out of jealousy for owning a product far more expensive than most racer quad owners are willing to shell out. It’s completely different communities behind both drones... dji is more about areal photography and incredible stable videos and range. and racer quads are all about fun aspect of it all. Mavic Pro is a masterpiece of technical engineering. Nearly 30 minute battery life, 4K video, multiple fail safes, GPS , obstical avoidance, and beautiful range. I was on vacation few weeks ago and took my mavic Pro and my GF took her mavic air and we both decided to see how far we can push our drones over open ocean water. Because we rented a boat it wasn’t a big deal to ignore return to home. My mavic Pro got 6.37 miles on a single battery... the wind was not ideal either, 10mph cross breeze. My GF on her mavic Air managed to get 4.35 miles and was running on fumes landed on the boat with 4% power and was fighting the drone because it was slowing down and reducing its altitude. Interms of wireless range.. testing from the island, I managed to make it to mainland which is just over 3 miles... was a cell Tower causing interference, but it got all the over there. Entire time 5/5 bars of signal until I go around 150 feet of the tower. Then dropped to 1/5 bars. My GF on her mavic Air which is WiFi based only managed little over 2 miles before combo of battery life and low range hit and she panic initiated RTH. 2 mile mark her WiFi signal was 2/5 bars... and dropped to 0/5 bars and flashing weak signal/interference just as she noticed was below 50% battery remaining after she clicked cancel on RTH alert at 60%. with the wind stiring up she was panicking

By the time you factor in goggles, transmitter, the quad and the countless repairs and upgrades you will be doing, racing drones unfortunately end up being much price-yr in the long run.. Its pretty rare to crash a video drone if you know what you are doing. As for the hate I think a lot of it comes from the fact that most mini quad pilots tend to be much more electronically smart/experienced as building, tuning, flying etc isn't really something you can just go out and understand quickly. when an average joe can just go to Best Buy and purchase a DJI they usually suck at flying resulting in a lot of the regulations that are now in place. If you go and look at all of the drone mishaps that get on the news pretty much all of them are DJI Joes. The quads themselves isn't what brings hate its the people who fly them.

I flew Frsky for years you should have way better range then 300feet..

@@Trumpethon Yeah, I know. That's why I feel like something is definitely wrong.

could you sleep afterwards ? :)

Rotor riot has never claimed to be scientific. It's just a test based on a real world scenario. Just enjoy. If someone states that it is a scientific test like bardwell then it's understandable to question the methods to eliminate variables like the goggle module video.

.... plus they were flying under power lines, that's a massive source of randomness :)

Yes. We said that in the video.

correct, a high frequency TX should not be such a great problem for a RX with a lo(wer) frequency. but..... the other way round should be more of a problem.

Sup

amen love my radiolink ,,, has never failsafed on me ,, ever

at9 ftw

alan sage iBus only has lower latency at short range. As you get further away it's latency goes way up but since everybody tests on the bench this always gets missed.

This is true for Crossfire too. Mine (Micro TX and Nano receivers) switches to 50Hz about 75m away so on a big racetrack you are back to 50Hz update.

If you are super concerned about latency, this is one argument for using the 2 watt module even at shorter range.

It goes miles.

williwonti Yeah we all know it doesn't and it seems to be quite inconsistent. I've never had any problems even with quite some range but i've heard from failsave after 10 metres

This guy seems to have good luck with his: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gcCReJSiqtSth6c.html

None of us has a Flysky device. We only "tested radiolink" because somebody happened to have the transmitter and we were curious about its range claims.

oh kk, but you should test it because of it's economical price and decent features. fingers crossed for a review in the future!! :-D p.s - Also, flysky supposedly has less latency because it has less algorithms, or something like that. link : www.propwashed.com/community-spotlight-flysky-vs-frsky-radio-latency/

z it's the newer 2a protocol. So how is it out dated? Why do all the plane guys use flysky then? Either way, they should have included flysky over radiolink that no one has ever heard of? Unless they knew it would make all their overpriced crap seem like overpriced crap? Pretty sure they knew what the results would be before the video was made. Clickbait for the masses.

I still prefer my Evolution/X6b setup over my heavy clunky Taranis. When FrSky finally release their copy of the Evolution form factor I will probably switch back though.

Fred F ya I'm waiting for it too. Just gotta sell my house so I can afford one.

FPV Beach Racer the l9r is the worst rx frsky put out. I've used frsky for 2 years now in quads and 3d planes ... the taranis is a great radio. Frsky make great stuff but the l9r I put in one plane and the signal ended up being the worst ... it was laggy ...slow and in range test was worse then the other recievers I use. Just my experience

Josh Finley sorry but I use L9R with tbs unify 800mw on my drone racing and I can go more than 1km at the beach with low flight and min 80% rssi osd, its better than XSR or XM+

I have vídeo on my channel with the drone

FPV Beach Racer well those are supposed to have smaller range... but if you use an x4r or even the x7r ii or whatever it is you'd be in for a surprise I'd say..

Josh Finley FrSky say that L9R have 2x more range because not have telemetry and by my experience I agree, I never have failsafe with it and have some vídeos with 7km range no KZfaq, Rotor Riot can use also frsky 900mhz module, I think will have a nice range, maybe more than crossfire

Maybe, we'll never know.. They should have spent the $45 and bought the Flysky i6 just to know. It seems to have further range with a sub 1 gram micro receiver than I get with my 600mW 5.8 Ghz VTX with clover antenna. However, I've got a HAM licence, so I'd like to know if it would be the limiting factor if I use a high power 1.3 Ghz VTX and ground station.

When you say "they should have bought the Flysky" you are seriously overestimating the preparation that went into this video. Chad happened to have the radiolink with him and we were curious about the range claims. So I put radiolink on my quad and we found a straight length of road and made this video. There was no time to get a Flysky system. The entire video went from concept to completion in under 48 hours.

Thanks for the reply JB. Since A lot of comments are about wanting to see a Flysky comparison, I think that would be a great thing to test on your channel since you do a lot more scientific testing. It would be great to see a rematch with all the antennas in the same location/orientation/quad, that way we could get a more accurate comparison. I'd love to see something like that on your channel. Thanks JB, have a great day!

iforce2d about crossfire? Maybe “proven” means “trying my best not to piss off trappy”. You really can’t compare the gloriously noise free unspoilt terrain of your backyard flying flysky and 25mw 5.8 out to 5km to anything these guys do. I think it’s safe to say that crossfire has earned it reputation for long range and equally you’ve earned the respect of the community for blowing our minds with the extremes of what our gear can do in the right hands.

Clynikal stole my exact thoughts:)

You think LOL

ahh i loved that part! it was like vh1 behind the scenes!