Which band will give better performance and longer range. Also, which band will cause less inteference with other onboard devices(gps, radio receiver, etc.) I'm using a 2.4GHz radio transmitter,
I've got the exact same problem where I'm using one of those cheap 500mW 1.2Ghz for Video (only in the testing stage at the moment and it's not looking promising), 434Mhz for Telemetry and Control (but that will move to Xbee @ 900Mhz) and 2.4Ghz for the tx radio as backup. I had no idea that GPS is also on 1.2Ghz. Has anyone tried any 5.8 Ghz video transmitters and are they any good in terms of range?
You are pretty much restricted to the bands marked "Amateur" in the following diagram. so if you can find video gear to buy in those parts of the spectrum its possible, though not necessarily suitable for an aerial platform.
Think about antenna sizes, As an indication, the TV antenna on your roof is not practical for a small UAV so anything in the <900Mhz range is out.
For amateur video on an amateur platform, I have only seen examples of people using 900Mhz or 2.4GHz. These work pretty well with the right equipment at a reasonable price.
It would be nice to see a purely digital system that would make it easy to merge some telemetry data with the video data. I'm sure someone has done this, but I don't know of any off hand.
Depends on the application. For myself I decided to use 2.4 ghz for video and 72 mhz for control. GPS uses 1.575ghz & 1.2276 ghz so I would avoid that. 900 mhz is for the xbee if you use one. Depending on the range needed a directional ground ant. greatly increases range and complexity. An assistant can aim the ant at the plane, or you can make it automatic using gps+servos+toothed belt+complexity. Your control is the main, most important thing. The things that make 2.4 good for control also make it good for vid. 72Mhz is a proven teck and works aas far au you can see with good equipment. 2.4 is small and new and uses the vid freq.
Make your choice ?
I think the best option for you is 900mhz and probably 1.2 Ghz (good one with less harmonics only since harmonics are in multiple of 2..you are exactly twice 1.2) I have not seen 426 video gear..
Comments
Think about antenna sizes, As an indication, the TV antenna on your roof is not practical for a small UAV so anything in the <900Mhz range is out.
For amateur video on an amateur platform, I have only seen examples of people using 900Mhz or 2.4GHz. These work pretty well with the right equipment at a reasonable price.
It would be nice to see a purely digital system that would make it easy to merge some telemetry data with the video data. I'm sure someone has done this, but I don't know of any off hand.
Make your choice ?