minor correction: For rx-> tx, RX sends data which contains mavlink. TX receives signal, decodes it, sends CRSF telemetry via CRSF to rc radio. For tx-> rx, TX sends data which contains mavlink and RC channels. RX receives signal, decodes it, sends mavlink via UART and sends RC channels via CRSF to flight controller. :)

@@OlliW42 Thanks for correction. This is so cool!

One of the issues that we confront in the hobby is that long range it’s being killed by laws and regulations so our only hope is LR under 250g it will be ilegal too but the chances of creating a major issue are greatly diminished.

yes, hardware is an issue. And yes, regulations is also an issue.

what you see in this video works with vanilla OpenTx or Edgetx, doesn't need any special OpenTx firmware. It needs however mLRS.

yes, that's possible. See github.com/olliw42/mLRS-docu/blob/master/docs/SETUP_SIK.md :)

@@OlliW42 Thanks to you I just now understand that documentation is in another repo ;).

:+1:

pl consider joining the rc groups discussion thread or discord channel. Yt isn't a good place for this. The 915 MHz FCC band has only 43 channels but the FHSS needs to use 25 of them according to FCC, so there is literally no space for two mLRS system to not step on each others toes. Using different bindphrases will ensure that the units don't read wrong packets, but since both systems neccessarily have to overlap frequency-wise some level of interference is unavoidable. mLRS has templates for an "ortho" mechanism, which is however not yet officially supported and also only for 2.4GHz. It could be extended to 915MHz FCC. You can do that yourself in code.

Hallo Daniel, yo, weis ich, müsste ich mal reparieren, habe aber wneig Motivation dazu. Dementsprechend ist es auch nicht einfach den inhalt mal eben zu Teilen. Sorry. und viel Glück mit eurem Projekt.

you could do wifi at whatever huge rate, but it would not push more mavlink bytes through the Lora link, it's the Lora link which is the weak link in the chain you could go to the 31 Hz mode, with the E22/sx1262 setup I've shown, or to even the 50 Hz mode for a 2.4 GHz setup, and then it's really much faster

@@OlliW42 I guess would be faster at 50Hz, but it's not really "much" faster. I'm struggling to understand why such slow communication speeds are considered acceptable?

depends on what you rate as "much", a factor of three I consider much. Which rates are considered acceptable certainly depends on your application. If you need higher rates, you need a different RF technology than Lora. I myself find the data rate at 19 Hz not sufficient and hence use it just for stress testing, but I find the data rate at 50 Hz more than sufficient, even with all the gimbal and camera stuff I'm usually doing. I know however that some others are happy enough with the data rates also for 19 Hz. There sure will be folks who don't find the data rate at 50 Hz acceptable. It's obviously subjective.

@@timtheplaneman I doubt people much liked dial up speed, but in the early 2000's they just had to "accept" it 'cause that's what the technology could do. I.E. It's not so much "considered acceptable" as it's pretty much the only way to get telemetry without adding a separate telemetry module. Personally I'd prefer to just add a WiFi or Bluetooth dongle for fast telemetry, but if people rarely need telemetry and fly small quads where the extra weight is a bigger problem, then this is an alternative option.

@@michellerossouw if ELRS can put a wifi hotspot on a receiver that's smaller than the fingernail on my little finger, why can't they put BT and/or wifi on a FC board?

github.com/olliw42/storm32bgc/tree/master/firmware%20binaries%20%26%20gui

@@OlliW42 thanks a Lot 🙏🙏 thats great