No Problem! I'm just trying to do my best to relay my findings for people that are interested.

There was no significant difference in lap times between the modules or the module modes (in the earlier testing). 11.3 wound up being my fastest at the end of the day with Legacy mode, but I was seeing 11.4 and 11.5 times with the True-D and RapidFIRE mode earlier.

The area he flew in wasn't bad rf environment, In a race with more people and more static I think he would appreciate Rapidfire more. The only thing bothered me was the saturated picture... I hope it will be fixed. Anyway, interesting points on the rapidfire module, when will it be available again? I have to get my hands on 1. A review dom V3 vs hdo would be lovely.

I don't think it'll impact the freestyle guys much. They tend to fly very slowly around those environments compared to racing.

John E Fly I was thinking more of the multi path interference

I know, crazy right? I didn't see that one coming...

For what it's worth I love my rapidfire now. Batch 1 has an issue with mode 1, but if you get batch 2 you should be good. It really does hold on to the signal better than a true d. That doesn't necessarily mean it's worth $100 to everyone though.

If you watch this video, I'm using the same quads with the same cameras through all of the testing. I never would have expected lighting conditions to matter either, yet there it is. Try flying the RapidFIRE in RapidFIRE mode just after the sun goes down at a high rate of speed. Then try it in Legacy mode. You may find the same thing I did...

I also run 48 khz pwm rate but I wouldn't expect that to matter. What min throttle are you running? I run 4. Perhaps yours is too low? You could also try auto timing. I've had no desyncs since going to demag high.

If I have the time I like to use rebar and pvc. If I don't have the time I use quaddiction gates. The rebar is 2 ft x 1/2 in

I'm using 2 different frames. 1 is a prototype frame from Detroit Multirotor which will be available soon for sale (if it's not already), and the other is a Mode 2 Ghost. The Mode 2 Ghost frame is the one using the canopy. I did not print that one, it was ordered from Brain3D. I printed one in TPU before but it didn't protect my electronics well enough, this one is made from Nylon and is AWESOME. I would say the RapidFIRE is probably better than the True-D. I still like the look of the picture from the True-D more, but I do notice less breakup using the RapidFIRE instead of the True-D, even when running in legacy mode. The issues with blacking out still make me very nervous with the RapidFIRE, while the True-D has always been rock solid for me though. I think in a few firmware updates there will be no comparison between the two, the RapidFIRE will be significantly better, but for now the True-D may be the safer buy.

I would be extremely surprised if there is an issue with the module socket. These HDO goggles are basically brand new. Before the RapidFIRE only a single module was ever put in there, the True-D. There is no discoloration on any of the pins. The quad in question actually has 2 caps. It has a large 1000uf on the main battery leads and then a smaller 330uf on the vbat/gnd pins of the FC where the VTX connects to (as recommended by Serge from Piroflip). If you look at the about screen of the RapidFIRE it shows 5V power and low-power mode is off. So I would be extremely surprised if anything like this is happening.

yeah i dont think its you kwad and i forgot you just got new goggles. try redoing firmware if you can maybe a few 1s and 0s got mixed up for the rapid fire program

Haha. There is no publicly available firmware yet btw. Your only option is what ships from the factory. I will say I'm very curious for more RapidFIRE customers to do this sort of testing. I know it's the sort of thing you're probably only going to notice at a very high speed with the quad, and that may not be relevant for a lot of pilots, but I really really don't like that I'm the only one that seems to see this so far... I'm sure there has to be others that will see it too...

yeah thats why i say you might need a new one everyone else seems to be happy with their unit. mass production can have the 5 in a 100 that get past cause they seem to pass test in house but after you can tell there is an issue. maybe reach out to a tester channel who has a rapid fire to see if they can get same situation.

yeah I need to reach out to some more people. But to be fair, have you seen many others flying at a very high rate of speed in relatively low light situations like this? I'm wondering if either people aren't going very fast, or they're flying with more light? I'm really curious now if it's just me...

The biggest thing is that they are 4-1. Much lighter. Not awkwardly placed on arms. My racing frames are really optimized for 4-1 escs. The AK32 is also blheli32 while the es30 were blheliS

Yeah, that's a portable UPS. Here's a link for it: amzn.to/2BG7m7D. Basically it's a lithium ion battery with 288Whr of capacity and it's also an inverter. I can charge about 10 6S packs from it and maybe 15 of my 4S packs. I mostly use it to power my laptop and timing system for a day out flying. In this video I was using it to power the timing system that was letting me know my lap times.

thanks!

Thanks Stu!

No. No concernable difference

To be fair it is a receiver module that is combining the images from two receivers, so there is a possibility of there being issues depending on the algorithm used to combine the frames.

I'm just going to assume Ponyboy didn't watch the video... I never would have expected this to make a difference either, and why I didn't mention it at all in my first video.

If this was digital then yes it would be silly but your talking about combining signal from two very different signal paths. 1. linear patch 2. circular polarized pogoda. In analogue everything in the signal path changes the signal to some degree when you try to combine two signals with very different paths your bound to get problems.

No pressure at all, I must just be an idiot! Thanks for watching!

John E Fly You are not, but testing maybe 10 - 20ms diference in latency with a "i feel like" test is not a good idea.

I'll be honest, I don't care about 10-20ms. I care about getting the fastest lap times possible. If something makes me slower, that's what I want to know. In this testing the RapidFIRE was clearly making me slower, and I mistakenly assumed it was latency causing that to happen at first. I think this testing shows it's not latency, but under certain conditions there is still something which does make me slower. So oddly enough, I care more about the feel than the straight numbers for stuff like this.

Its not idiotic at all he noticed something with a hyped product that people don't want to believe hence the hate.

Stephen Gibb i was meaning the test method, to be precise. Ofcourse hyped products must be checked properly. How do you imagine to test latency with a lap times? Humans are not that consistant, to test this kind of issues.