• Because that's not how it works. I have nothing the prove. I'm not claiming anything. He made a rather outrageous claim about harmful RFI. I asked him to show us. He refuses. He's posted other totally unrelated things like cameras, which is the opposite of evidence. He's posted a random graph unrelated to flight and control integrity. Nothing that even eludes to a problem. Just insults and unrelated ramble.

      It is not my job to prove his point for him. All I'm asking is for him to show us how he knows there's a problem with the APM. Support his own statements. Nothing.
      This domain may be for sale!
    • Excuse me? Neither I nor anyone else need your approval to discuss a topic here in the discussion forum. And I think you forgot where you are. This is a scientific group on a scientific website with a scientific discussion forum. So YOU can feel free to stop reading if you're that incensed by asking for evidence of the problem he claims exists.

      Claiming that the APM or any other component causes harmful flight control interference is a pretty big deal. It's a safety issue that is absolutely with discussing. To date, not a single person has reported any such problem with the APM. He makes the claim. I ask him to show us. He either refuses or can't. The onus is on him to show that years of precedent are wrong and he is right. Not me.
    • Wow. Very mature of you. Asking how and why he knows there is this big problem with the APM is trolling now. Is that the best you can do?

    • I was getting at you arguing for the sake of arguing and not sticking to the point being trolling.

      Again, you asked for evidence which he is clearly not going to provide.  That does not make him incorrect nor worthy of being laid into by you.

    • Trololololollllll again!!!!!! You are being incredibly hypocritical here.

      Why should he? He doesn't work for you! Stop getting angry if he says no to your request or doesn't give you what you ask!

    • Not true, he states he has evidence from the Open LRS system he is using.  Why should he have to provide it to you, this isn't a scientific forum.

      So in answer to the question; yes foil will reduce UHF interference and may have an impact on the magnetometer if not calibrated post-foil installation.

      If you want information on the science then private message him rather than starting a huge argument which makes you both look like idiots.  If you don't then move on!

    • So what right do you have to demand proof from the OP if you can't prove anything yourself?

      Just answer the question or ignore it and move on.  Stop being such a troll!

    • For the good of the argument, do you have any evidence of in flight tests to prove that there is no UHF noise emitted by the hardware to support yourself?

    • Nope. Not my problem to prove a negative for him. He says there IS detrimental RFI coming from the APM in flight that reduces his UHF control range. I asked him to show proof. He has none. Just conjecture and assumptions. Very long babbling conjecture....
    • APM Measurement of generated unwanted UHF Noise Signal Floor measured with spectrum analyzer and Measurements of Well Know problematic UHF band noisy electronics components and Comparison of noise floor levels are the facts, which you can measure and prove yourself with measurement. Have a look here, how interference of Mobius HD looks to find out how cut of RC control with interference looks.

This reply was deleted.