Quantcast

older telemetrum

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

watermelonman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
2,597
Reaction score
7
I got an older Telemetrum, hardware v1.2 I think, for cheap. Awesome, I thought! Then a friend expressed some concern at the older units, said the newer hardware was much better overall and more reliable.

I do not mind losing some features, but accuracy and reliability are important. What should I expect from this unit? I was planning on using it in a minimum diameter rocket intended for baby M motors.
 

ksaves2

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
5,981
Reaction score
294
I got an older Telemetrum, hardware v1.2 I think, for cheap. Awesome, I thought! Then a friend expressed some concern at the older units, said the newer hardware was much better overall and more reliable.

I do not mind losing some features, but accuracy and reliability are important. What should I expect from this unit? I was planning on using it in a minimum diameter rocket intended for baby M motors.
Why don't you email B'dale or Keith Packard at the Altus Metrum site too? I think they would be willing to be objective to you. You could weigh all the responses then.
Are you sure the device you bought is in flyable shape? Heck, one can't know for sure. If you bought it from a buddy who's up front or someone who "never" flew it, should be O.K. Kurt
 

watermelonman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
2,597
Reaction score
7
Yes, definite buddy and definite never flown. I will hit up the guys, thanks.
 

keithp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
387
Reaction score
7
I got an older Telemetrum, hardware v1.2 I think, for cheap. Awesome, I thought! Then a friend expressed some concern at the older units, said the newer hardware was much better overall and more reliable.

I do not mind losing some features, but accuracy and reliability are important. What should I expect from this unit? I was planning on using it in a minimum diameter rocket intended for baby M motors.
Of course the newer hardware is better in almost every way; newer sensors, more powerful radio, more features. However, the old units are rock solid flight computers with a great feature set and a good track record. The major differences between the two are:

* Digital vs analog accelerometer and pressure sensors. The old analog sensor is rated to 10km, the new digital one to 30km while also being far more accurate. The digital accelerometer is four times more accurate.
* 33mW vs 10mW radio. More power == more range. The new radio also supports APRS.
* uBlox vs Skytraq GPS. Both are great for recovering your rocket, the newer uBlox is rated for TRA record attempts.

There's more information about the differences in our system manual http://altusmetrum.org/AltOS/doc/altusmetrum.html#_altus_metrum_hardware_specifications.

We still fully support the v1.x TeleMetrum boards. Our ground station software will continue supporting them, and we will release new firmware to fix bugs as necessary.
 

ksaves2

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
5,981
Reaction score
294
There you go. Sounds like you have a gem there. 33mW might be more desired for something extreme but a 7 element Yagi and a Tele-BT would be an optimal ground station to push the limits. If I remember correctly the earlier versions weren't capable
of APRS if just wanting to track. If that's the case, you'll need the dongle or the BT. Maybe you purchased the receive hardware with the device? Perhaps Keith could elaborate. Kurt
 

watermelonman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
2,597
Reaction score
7
Even better! Thanks gentlemen.

I do have a stack of receive hardware and many antennas along with the computer itself, still need to make sense of it all. Great to know about the GPS limitations for altitude records, as I was toying with a big L after the baby M.
 
Top