Hey all, keen on Full HD, head tracking FPV with a wide FOV?

We are currently working on a project for a Raspberry Pi + Oculus Rift based FPV solution. Here are some of the advantages:

  • Full HD video feed
  • Head tracking built in from day one
  • Wide FOV on the high quality Oculus Rift display
  • No significant head tracking latency and target video streaming latency of 100-150ms
  • Plenty of room for hacking and scripting with an open hardware approach

We're live now on Kickstarter! Check us out, let us know what you think and maybe even back us :) .

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/267372731/fly-like-a-bird/

Views: 4091

Comment by Johnatan on January 29, 2015 at 12:15am

Personally I like Beaglebone Black over Raspberry Pi because of being open hardware.

Comment by Fly Like a Bird Team on January 29, 2015 at 1:48am

Thanks for your comment, Johnatan!

Yeah, it would be great if we had an open hardware board we can use in place of the Pi (or if the Pi was more open), but, unfortunately, the Beaglebone Black doesn't have a hardware video encoder, or a comparable camera module to the Pi. Nevertheless, the Pi is pretty well supported for hacking and Broadcom is even opening up some of their divers and documentation too, so it's not all bad :) .

Comment by Superwalloon on January 29, 2015 at 3:10am

To use the Rift in FPV there is already a solution on the market called "Transporter3D". While this solution is pretty expensive, it has the advantage to work with standard fpv equipment, ie vtx & vrx. If I don't care too much about the Transporter3D's ability to deal with 2 video sources to get a 3D realtime fpv experience, I do particularly mind over the fact that you seem here to introduce a new vtx system, based on wifi ac (5Ghz band) and need a laptop on the receiver's side. No doubt there will be people finding good use for this, but reading the title I was hoping to see a less expensive alternative to the Transporter3D allowing to keep using the current vtx & vrx systems we already have.

Comment by Fly Like a Bird Team on January 29, 2015 at 3:38am

Thanks Superwalloon, I appreciate your point of view and I'm sorry you were mislead by the title (sadly, it is hard to write titles which are short enough catch people's attention and yet contain enough information to avoid any misunderstanding).

I expect that most people would not need to make a great investment to use our kit, since most people have a laptop and even adding a new WiFi dongle and potentially a DIY helical 5GHz antenna should not cost much more than $60, I would think. That will still keep you well under the cost of Transporter3D and give you the benefit of Full HD digital transmission at the same time.

Of course I understand that, when you have a neat collection of existing equipment, then you want to continue using it, if you can. Think of the advantages, though ;) .

Comment by Mike T on January 29, 2015 at 4:28am

lllllllllaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggg

Comment by Fly Like a Bird Team on January 29, 2015 at 4:33am

That is impressively unconstructive, Mike T. Can you phrase that as a convincing argument that can contradict the material we have provided?

Comment by Mike T on January 29, 2015 at 4:40am

anytime you add processing it will add lag. 150ms isn't acceptable in my opinion.

Comment by Fly Like a Bird Team on January 29, 2015 at 5:04am

Ok, thanks, now we have something we can discuss :) .

You might be surprised by how much latency is in common FPV setups today.

For example, this video concludes that the Gopro hooked up through a traditional analogue vtx/vrx setup, has a latency of about 100ms and is actually quite good for flying a quadcopter. Other cameras in that test range up to 200ms and all of them are used for FPV flying. Our Kit already supports a low latency mode (at 640x480), of about 100ms, matching the Gopro in that test. If you have tried the Gopro setup and find it too laggy, then, indeed, this project is definitely not the right thing for you, but it appears that we are right in the range of FPV setups which are commonly used today :) .

Comment by Bjoern Kellermann on January 29, 2015 at 6:56am

I would appreciate your option for mobile networks (3G,4G,LTE) and opening the link for Mavlink.

With that solution you cound reuse the APM gimbal control and override for headtracking over Mavlink and integrate the video into Mission Planner HUD. Maby your solution can become part/Plugin of DroidPlanner, Andropilot, Mission Planner and APM Planner 2.

Did you considered carrier grade NAT (cgNAT) for your 3G/4G/LTE?

In Germany mobile connection are NATed.  In consequence you cannot open a port on the mobile network on the drone and connect from another computer. You can consider NAT punch through especially for double NAT situations: drone on mobile and notebook on mobile.

If you considered mobile networkin, cgNAT and Mavlink I am happy to support development/testing and will pledge.

I have a Raspberry Pi installed in my Skywalker X8 flying wing and the 3dr Y6 copter is waiting ;)

In a later stage downloading still images from the Pi while flying would be amazing. Though full featured communication needs some channels:

1. Video downstream

2. Headtracking, could be Mavlink

3. Mavlink upload for mission planning 

4. Mavlink dowlink for telemetry

5. Filetransfer downlink

6. Configuration synchronisation between Pi on drone and groundstation, can advise drone to adjust video downlink (framerate, resolution)

For more thoughts please PM.

BR Bjoern

Comment by Matthias Badaire on January 29, 2015 at 8:20am

1 - so no 3d ? or I missed something 

2 - DK1 compatible or only DK2 ?

+1 for Superwalloon: I would prefer to be able to use my existing analog link with no laptop. A matter of choice, I suppose.

Comment

You need to be a member of DIY Drones to add comments!

Join DIY Drones

© 2017   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service