Home made Target CAM video

Caesium

Member
So I turned my considerable skill to make target shooting and zeroing easier and made a wireless target camera system.

Operating Range = over a mile.

Excuse the accuracy of the shooting, I don't use my air rifle much any more and it needs zeroing - Shooting left a bit.


 
Hi Guys,
When I had some spare time I made a couple more for some guys I know, so out of respect for their purchases I'm afraid I cannot share the build plans with anyone.

I may knock up a couple more at some point in the future ad-hoc but I cannot produce them commercially as I literally don't have the time or the money to buy all the parts as it soon adds up!

Sorry.
 
Operating Range = over a mile.[/QUOTE]

My first thought was - that's some air rifle!�� Then read it properly...
Sell some to Bisley as quick as you can - looks cool, but might need a bulletproof bunker to hide in.
 
I am in no doubt the 1mile is achievable, as thsi looks very Similar to the Bullseye Camera Systems - The Ultimate Target Camera, Shooting Camera and Long Range Shooting Camera

being sold in this country by Buy Bullseye Target Camera Sight In Edition Target Camera - shop at suppliers Scott Country

there is a market for them, you could possibly do well out of it.

yeah I saw that one but I didn't fancy taking my iPad out to shoot. Too much risk of busting it and that's £900 gone..
 
How big an aerial do you need for 1000 yards then?

Ian

Most omni-directional (rubber duck) antenna will be OK up to 300/400yds, the semi-directional antenna (which look like a thick plastic, oblong, side plate) and have a 30 degree spread and can manage circa 750 yds, above that you need a point-to-point/directional antenna the smallest of which look like a medium sized pizza box and do up to 1000 yds over that you get into antenna that look like big Sky dishes.

http://www.l-com.com/wireless-antenna-24-ghz-wifi-antennas
 
Hi system is 5.8GHZ which has a much longer range. The antennas you are showing are 2.4.

Physics gets in the way of that statement ... the higher the frequency the greater the path loss (FSPL) or the shorter the range.

(Plagarism is mans best friend, fresh from google :-
Free-Space Loss

As the radio signal travels through space, it deteriorates for two reasons:
  • The signal spreads out in space, proportional to the square of the distance.
  • Some of the signal is absorbed by the atmosphere (especially on a rainy day; the microwaves will heat up the raindrops, and that energy comes right out of your signal!) The higher the frequency, the greater the attenuation.
The free space loss can be calculated according to the formula
-L = C + 20 * log(D) + 20 * log(F)
where D is the distance, and F is the frequency in MHz. The constant C is 36.6 if D is measured in miles, and 32.5 if D is in kilometers. The following are some examples of free space losses:


DistanceLoss at F=
in milesin km900 MHz2.4GHz5.8GHz
1.6 mi2.5 km99 dB108 dB116 dB
3.1 mi5 km106 dB114 dB122 dB
5 mi8 km110 dB118 dB126 dB
6.2 mi10 km112 dB120 dB128 dB
10 mi16 km116 dB124 dB132 dB
) :cool:

-3dB is half, so 108dB to 111dB means 1/2 the signal at the same place
-6dB = 1/4
-9dB = 1/8
-10dB = 1/10th of what you started with
 
Last edited:
Well, you have out physiced me :) All I do know is that this is basically the tech that drone pilots use for FPV. They can transmit pics miles depending on the kit. So I am inclined to believe it works, if he went to Diggle and bobbed it on the 1000 yard range I am sure that would solve a few queries :)
 
Back
Top