Quantcast

High power video transmitters

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

HyperSpeed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
100
Reaction score
1
I'm looking for a high-power 1.2Ghz or even 2.4Ghz TX which can transmit A/V signals a minimum of 600 yards over a clear LOS.

I just built a 500 yard range and need something to see bullet holes with on the targets. :D
 

troj

Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potent
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
13,962
Reaction score
190
I'm looking for a high-power 1.2Ghz or even 2.4Ghz TX which can transmit A/V signals a minimum of 600 yards over a clear LOS.

I just built a 500 yard range and need something to see bullet holes with on the targets. :D
http://www.boostervision.com

600 yards will be easy with Art's setups.

-Kevin
 

HyperSpeed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
100
Reaction score
1
Here is an article I ended up finding today: http://www.6mmbr.com/targetcam.html

I think now that I know they are available, I would like to get something slightly more powerful, just to be covered over 1000 yards. One of the reasons is because I had the idea that I could set the camera in the woods, about 500 yards away by my deer stand and watch for deer. It won't be direct LOS, so of course it would need to be more powerful.

I have a quick question. Can anyone tell me the transmission properties of 1.2Ghz versus 2.4Ghz?

I was thinking that a lower frequency would transmit better through objects, but I'm not sure if that is true here.
 

troj

Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potent
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
13,962
Reaction score
190
I have a quick question. Can anyone tell me the transmission properties of 1.2Ghz versus 2.4Ghz?

I was thinking that a lower frequency would transmit better through objects, but I'm not sure if that is true here.
I'll have to defer to Art at Boostervision. He knows that stuff pretty darned well.

Me? I'm just a happy customer.

-Kevin
 

JimmyL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Typically the higher the frequency the less penetration the signal will have. This is especially true when you start approaching microwave frequencies. I would not expect a 1.2/2.4ghz signal to do too well in the woods. If you have a ham license you could do ATV (amateur television). The most popular frequency band for that is in the 400mhz range. This does allow for use of UHF tv equipment. It is very easy now to get a ham license with no more code required and then you could use the ham ticket for all sorts of rocket projects. Just a quick thought.

JimmyL
 

n5wd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,030
Reaction score
2
I have a quick question. Can anyone tell me the transmission properties of 1.2Ghz versus 2.4Ghz?
Despite the doubling of frequency, the two bands are remarkably similar in propagation - the signals are stopped by metal, water (the water in the leaves of trees will attenuate signals at that frequency), and solid objects like hills. With relatively high gain antennas (easy to do at those frequencies), you should be able to easily cover 500 yards, IF it's line of sight, with any of the 2.4 GHz transmitters you can find online, or through Boostervision (you've already been given the URL).

BTW - best check with your local game wardens - remote spotting/target aquisition is not legal in all states (thanks to some jerks that did an internet accessible "big game hunt" where the "hunters" remotely manipulated a video camera that was sighted in on a hunting rifle and were able to remotely "shoot" the weapon).
 

FROB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
389
Reaction score
0
In general, you get better range at lower frequency, and narrower bandwidth.
Video is inherently wide bandwidth, which doesn't help either. It just means you need a more powerful transmitter.
 

HyperSpeed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
100
Reaction score
1
In general, you get better range at lower frequency, and narrower bandwidth.
Video is inherently wide bandwidth, which doesn't help either. It just means you need a more powerful transmitter.
Does this mean that a 2.4Ghz video on a screen will look any better than one at say 900Mhz? Is there a point of reduced quality in the frequency range below a certain level?
 
Top