G'Day all,On checking some legislation for entry to the 2009 Outback Challenge I noticed that ACMA are amending class license 2000 to specifically exclude the use of video under the provision for telemetry transmitters. (OSD telemetry)The reasoning given doesn't make any logical sense to me, I'd appreciate a review by one of you more technically savvy DIY Droners on the validity of the reason for the change. Quoted below-Quote - Telecommand transmitters are used to transmit signals to initiate, modify or terminate functions of equipment at a distance. Telemetry transmitters are used to automatically indicate or record measurements at a distance from the measuring instrument. To prevent interference with other devices telecommand and telemetry transmitters operating under the LIPD Class Licence must not exceed EIRP limits as outlined in items 25, 26 and 27.Telemetry transmitter classes should not be used as high power video senders, nor can higher power telecommand channels be used for transmitting computer programs. To carry out such activities would require a breach of the maximum EIRP limits stated. ACMA therefore proposes to include a limitation on the use of telemetry and telecommand transmitters, to prevent the use of these items for sending video or software downloading. - End QuoteWhy would transmission of video require a breach of the specified EIRP power of 1W?In my view ACMA shouldn't be making rules for the sake of it and should have a reason for the modification. If there have been real interference issues I'm sure they won't mind producing the reports.Aust based FPV flyers feel free to review the change at http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_311727 and send your comments to - regulatorydevelopment@acma.gov.auSUBMISSIONS ON THE CHANGE CLOSE 15 JUN 09
Could you claim that video transmitters are used to automatically indicate or record measurements of the visual spectrum at a distance from the measuring instrument, thereby falling under the definition of telemetry?
This is potentially very damaging for the 2009 UAV Outback Challenge.
If the ACMA rules change to ban video on 2.4GHz Challenge teams still flying analog 2.4GHz video, would be disqualified for spectrum non-compliance.
The organising comitee would have to advise participants to be aware of the ACMAs changes and make sure that teams are abiding by them, and police it somehow.
I imaging they would not want to be seen as fostering a competition that condones breaking the rules of the ACMA.
I know this might be seen as a pessimistic view, and i hope the ACMA gives us an alternative for analog video, but if they dont the UAV Outback Challenge is in trouble.
I have sent a written comment in.
Basically I outlined that these transmissions, if done correctly cause no interference to other users.
However the loophole being used is not and there needs to be a new item defined in the LIPD license for FM video.
Last year there was a large degree of radio interference from these types of transmissions. I suspect this is a bid to address the problems faced by groups trying to control their planes last year.
I agree with Angus - In short, if you are using a "telemetry" device then no video (unless you are a part 58 500-900 range @12uW!)
But you should still be able to use video, just not under this license. What regulations cover consumer hardware like WiFi, baby monitors, security cams? These would still be usable (IMHO)
I also came across this today. I've sent an email to the ACMA regarding this and reccomendations for telemetry and video for the challenge. I also asked Mick what previous teams had used as I noticed some American teams had used 900mhz in the past which technically isn't allowed in Aus.
It is pretty ovbious/logical to see their reasoning, at least from a technical point of view.
Basically, Video is not Telemetry. Telemetry is generally pretty low bandwidth, video is not.
The transmitting of your callsign over the OSD has always been a very "subjective" area.
I often wonder to how much merit it actually has, or how it would hold up in an investigation. It is taking the intended use out of context.
The small cheap camera/transmitter combo that runs off of a 9 volt battery like this runs on 2.4Ghz.
The camera kept blowing out the Bluetooth telemetry link on my quadrotor UAV when ever I tried to use it. I could see it taking out other radio links. Transmitting the video over bluetooth would have no effect except on bandwidth. So this is probably an overreaction to stupidity.
Comments
If the ACMA rules change to ban video on 2.4GHz Challenge teams still flying analog 2.4GHz video, would be disqualified for spectrum non-compliance.
The organising comitee would have to advise participants to be aware of the ACMAs changes and make sure that teams are abiding by them, and police it somehow.
I imaging they would not want to be seen as fostering a competition that condones breaking the rules of the ACMA.
I know this might be seen as a pessimistic view, and i hope the ACMA gives us an alternative for analog video, but if they dont the UAV Outback Challenge is in trouble.
Basically I outlined that these transmissions, if done correctly cause no interference to other users.
However the loophole being used is not and there needs to be a new item defined in the LIPD license for FM video.
But you should still be able to use video, just not under this license. What regulations cover consumer hardware like WiFi, baby monitors, security cams? These would still be usable (IMHO)
Paul
Basically, Video is not Telemetry. Telemetry is generally pretty low bandwidth, video is not.
The transmitting of your callsign over the OSD has always been a very "subjective" area.
I often wonder to how much merit it actually has, or how it would hold up in an investigation. It is taking the intended use out of context.
The camera kept blowing out the Bluetooth telemetry link on my quadrotor UAV when ever I tried to use it. I could see it taking out other radio links. Transmitting the video over bluetooth would have no effect except on bandwidth. So this is probably an overreaction to stupidity.
regards
Matt