Target Video Transmission

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Matt304

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Messages
653
Location
Utica, IL
I have begun shooting long-range at 400-1000 yards on my property, and the trip out to the target is a bit of a task due to the terrain.

I remembered reading about small video cameras for model rockets, that would transmit a color video pretty well from the air down to a receiver and TV on the ground.

This got me thinking, why not place a wireless camera at the target, and have it transmit video to the bench?

I figured that it has probably been done quite a few times, and someone around here might have more info on setting up a system. I know that signals transmit a lot better from high above, so I don't think certain systems would work all that great at ground level without being very high power.

Can anyone offer some advice or point me in the right direction for a 1000-1500 yard capable wireless video transmitter?
 
My experience with these wireless video cameras is that the range is grossly exaggerated in the ads -- can barely cover the ~20 yards from my pool to my computer room. I think 400-1000 yards is out of the question without spending a good deal of time and money aligning high gain antennas.

--wally.
 
Ok, here is something I just found. 3W, 8W, 10W, and 20W transmitters. http://www.vfmstore.com/tr24.htm These aren't the little cheap units found everywhere it would appear claiming 1000ft.

They state some very far line-of-sight claims. Heck, if the 3W model at a claimed 7 mile range even works half as good as it says with LOS transmission, I'm sold.

The biggest issue is converting the power input from D/C to A/C, which I assume they run on. I'm not sure how big of a battery would be required for 2-3 hours worth of shooting.

I guess I will have to contact these people to see if they have actual field experience with such models.
 
IMO, the biggest issue that I see is when you are at (or have to use) a public or private range as opposed to your own back yard. Not all folks are serious when they shoot and are just happy to throw lead down range and not be concerned about accuracy...which is where the camera or any electronic device would be.
 
I have a tactical training center near me that has cameras on the rifle range out to a 1000 meters. The cameras are in front of and below the ground level and the image is put on a 27" flat lcd panel at each shooters position. Running the wires was the hard part they said. And NO one has shot a camera yet.
 
A few things to consider:

1) The 1.2G transmitters may need a license for you to operate. That could be anywhere from $20 to several hundred.

2) If you change the antenna from the "rubber duck" they supply to a beam (4 element will suffice) it will triple the effective range for a given power output. We did one with a 10 watt transmitter and a 10 element beam and it overpowered the receiver at 1.5 miles. The 3W unit will be fine.

3) It might be less expensive were you to use a cable rather than broadcasting the signal. It also means you do not need a license to operate. The el-cheapo Radio Shack cable is not very good for the distance you are thinking about.

The biggest issue is converting the power input from D/C to A/C, which I assume they run on. I'm not sure how big of a battery would be required for 2-3 hours worth of shooting.
Click to expand...
Most of them run on 12V, so a small car battery will give you almost all day service. The 3"x4"x9" 12V batteries will provide about three hours run time. The smaller batteries are rated in amp-hours so with a 12V battery and 3 watt transmitter it is about half an amp-hour per hour of operation. (That's a bit of over simplification, but the values will not cause you heartburn :D ).

Oops: The display could easily need 110V. You can get an inverter that connects to a regular car battery and supplies 110V output. They run from about $40 on up, depending on the current draw your display needs. Check with the display unit and see what current it needs. If the rating is in watts, read it from the inverter unit. If it is in amps, divide the inverter capacity (400 watts - for example) by 110v (standard house current) which gives you the current capability (3.6 amps in this example).
 
Last edited:
Use a portable DVD player for the display & you get on-board battery power as well as the ability to run off 12vdc ...

Nick
 
A couple of things to keep in mind:

1) The cheap imported transmitters that operate on 1.2 GHz may actually be in the middle of a band dedicated to aircraft navigation. Some vendors have been busted by the FCC for selling them, and the 1W plus versions, if they are on nav frequencies, are probably a bad idea.

2) Those "line of sight" range figures are, of course under "ideal" conditions, which among other things means "a much better antenna than comes with your cheap receiver".

Suggestions? Get a good 2.4GHz unit and build a good antenna, for instance something like this: http://www.rc-cam.com/gp_patch.htm. Making a good antenna is an exercise in geekdom and precision, but for a "hand's on guy" is a great way to extend the range of these systems without the extra expense of a high powered TX. While directional, a patch antenna isn't as tricky as some other high gain antennas....but even with a very directional antenna on the RX, it's no big deal. Mount the RX to a $20 camera tripod, adjust for best picture, lock it down.
 
meade folded optics telescope with a terrestrial converter. been using a 4" schmidt-cassegrien for years at ranges out to 600 yards with .223 and 1000 yards with .308. hook a camera to it also. carry case with a lot of accessories is 8"x12"x15", weight under 15 pounds, cost under $300. DO NOT point it near the sun
 
meade folded optics telescope with a terrestrial converter. been using a 4" schmidt-cassegrien for years at ranges out to 600 yards with .223 and 1000 yards with .308. hook a camera to it also. carry case with a lot of accessories is 8"x12"x15", weight under 15 pounds, cost under $300. DO NOT point it near the sun
Click to expand...

Really? This is even more interesting. I had assumed that a scope would be hard to see from due to light gathering at the power required.
 
Ok, if I can find a 90X 100MM spotting scope, that would be interesting.

At 63X, a 1000 yard target will appear almost 16 yards away. Probably alright for 50 cal. At 90X, it would appear to be 11 yards away, which I assume would be better for 6.5mm.

But at 1500+ yards, I think it would be hard to use one of these spotting scopes, which are the distances I will be firing to. The holes at those ranges will be .416 and .510. I also wonder how much mirage will effect the image at such ranges. Can anyone comment on clarity or use at such ranges?
 
Try an amateur radio nerd. Chance are they know of another who can help you with the setup. Wifi services can do it also.
 
It sounds like these ranges are not likely to be visible, even with a large spotting scope.

JesseL, good find. I figured somebody out there has played around with the idea.
 
A part of the 2.4 gHz band is a primary allocation for amateur radio. According to (paraphrased) Part 15, any devices emitting there cannot cause interference to a licensed service and must accept any interference to it by a licensed service. It looks like channel 1 and 2 of the units mentioned here: http://www.vfmstore.com/tr100424.htm are in the upper end of the 2.4gHz amateur band (2.390 to 2450 gHz). The web page claims 1 watt. Now, 1 watt doesn't seem like very much, but at those frequencies, it is a lot of power. I wonder how clean the transmitter is? The amateurs using those frequencies nearby will be pretty annoyed at the interference and we can and will report them to Uncle Charlie (the FCC). The range estimates are optimistic at best and will depend heavily on the terrain, the receiver and the antennas used. The current record (IIRC) is >130 miles for a WiFi connection. A group of amateurs using ~15db gain antennas (each 3 db of gain approximately doubles the signal strength - to the other amateurs and EEs out there, yes, I do know...) The fines can be pretty exciting. They will also interfere with any WiFi in the area.

A spotting scope that will resolve at those distances is expensive but buying the unit and then having to throw it away is also expensive. The scope will be cheaper than the coaxial cable and the camera systems as well.

Russ - kf4wxd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
video camera for target shooting?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
4K
brickeyee
B
S
  • Locked
Remote Camera
Replies
13
Views
744
Sam71N
S
B
  • Locked
Expanding on the video camera dealie...
Replies
8
Views
632
odysseus
O
Load Master
  • Locked
Spotting Scope or Baby Monitor?
Replies
18
Views
2K
Reloadron
Reloadron
G
  • Locked
Smart Bullets
Replies
2
Views
630
buy guns
B
Back
Top