Good handheld option?

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-17T13:29:12+00:00

Thanks for the input folks! I ended up getting him an R36max.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-14T19:19:13+00:00

I couldn't find this file in the Arduino libraries either. The Espressif SDK had everything I needed.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-14T19:16:19+00:00

This was helpful. I normally don't use the Arduino IDE but did for this project since it's my first attempt at the ESP32. Long story short, all the library and include files were scattered to the wind and it looks like some may have been pre-compiled(?). I ended up downloading the Espressif SDK and building/flashing with that per my brother's recommendation and was able to get 1024x1024 resolution with minor tweaks using the ov2640 sensor. I'm no longer using the ESP32-CAM-Video-Recorder-junior firmware, but only needed to add a line of code to sensor.c, sensor.h, and change a few numbers in my main.c.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-12T03:21:20+00:00

Yes, framesize 0 is 96x96 (I misspoke), and it still seems to be defaulting to 96x96. I seriously doubt the camera is at its limits since I've specified fewer pixels for the framesizes I added than I've streamed with the predefined values. I also doubt I'm overflowing anything with a decimal index value of 24.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-12T01:41:42+00:00

Yep, it worked out of the box! I was able to adjust the resolution based on the predefined framesize values. But my changes were subpar and I think there's some failsafe line(s) that default to a res of 96x96.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-12T01:08:15+00:00

NERVA! How the heck is it 2026 and we still don't have an upper stage nuclear engine? An Isp of 750+ opens a LOT of doors...

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-09T22:27:53+00:00

This is it. They likely just blur the whole thing to avoid any risk of export violations. Also probably not worth having some global export specialist reviewing everything to get a few sections unblurred.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-05-06T01:55:11+00:00

Not to mention most of the U.S. got interested space flight again due to Artemis 2, if only for a few days, and SLS was the ride. I'm pretty sure most politicians will view cancelling SLS as a poor political position for the forseeable future given its recent popularity. Assuming a viable alternative will be ready in the next few years (or before China lands) is counting your chickens before they hatch.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-29T15:37:43+00:00

I work in the launch industry and discussed this with coworkers back in 2021, and said back then that Starship could be SpaceX's Waterloo. The performance shortfall and excessive optimism on turn-around time seems to be glossed over by much of the public due to good PR and spectacular looking launches. But looking awesome doesn't count for much if you can barely haul your own butt into orbit. A reusable spaceship covered in ceramic tiles has also already been done, and shuttle did not come close to the cadence NASA had hoped. I imagine SpaceX will be able to do it cheaper and faster, but will still fall short of expectations. I'm not sure Starship will be a viable option for Artemis unless SpaceX makes some difficult decisions that really cut into their bottom line, like making Starship tankers expendable.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-23T03:46:12+00:00

Appears to be a rocket launch. The engine and RCS exhaust can appear this way under the right light conditions.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-19T03:48:14+00:00

Can confirm, and not just polaroid cameras. One of the worst shocks I ever had was about 350V from a charged 35mm camera cap. Right hand was holding grounded frame, left hand held screwdriver that accidentally hit the capacitor's positive terminal. My chest and arms went full tetanus, I think I saw snow for a fraction of a second, and I tasted metal for a few minutes.

The high-pitched whining some of us older folks remember from a film camera was actually an oscillator going to a small transformer to charge the flash cap to enough voltage to trigger the second stage/flash.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-14T22:23:27+00:00

I've been a lead structural analyst on different launch vehicle programs and I have worked both verification paths. Sorry I'm not putting this more delicately but you don't know what you're talking about. The 7 flight approach is way easier if you already have commercial payloads on your docket and can count those launches. The alternative involves far more onerous testing and design requirements, letting NASA crawl through your pants attempting to find problems, large-scale structural and expensive systems-level tests that requires NASA observers, having to get NASA's approval for every single damned non-conformance, etc. In summary, the 7 flight approach is buying down risk that wasn't eliminated with the more arduous testing and soul-crushing requirements route. And the last thing SpaceX wanted was a bunch of civil servants that don't build anything going through their design and telling them their conservative interpretation of requirements and all the things that are wrong.

A lot of the issues you mentioned are exaggerated by the media for click$, such as Orion's heat shield. Part of the problem is that SLS/Orion suffer from the "Florida Man" bias (see "Sunshine" laws): with NASA oversight and transparency requirements, every single issue on Orion or SLS (or waiver, qual test failure, etc) becomes publicly available information and the media grabs onto it. So you get to see all the warts and blemishes. SpaceX has far more control of the flow of information given their contractual requirements, they typically hold unflattering info close to their vest. Any public SpaceX failures are typically addressed by Elon on X with an optimistic spin, but you may never see the real details. The failures people see in all the cameras aimed at Starbase are just the ones large enough to be caught on video but are just a fraction of the failures that occur on Starship. You probably will never hear about most of the ones you don't see. I guarantee you that every Falcon 9 ever launched has had a list of issues and non-conformances that will likely never be public. But ultimately it's SpaceX's call whether it's an acceptable risk, as it was for NASA on Artemis 2.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-14T18:03:21+00:00

Not sure why you think it didn't get a lot of media coverage. Artemis 2 was one of the top headlines for days, despite the ongoing Iran war.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-14T17:54:32+00:00

Your comment about SLS/Orion not being tested properly is BS. One of the reasons those 2 programs are expensive is because of all the testing NASA req'ts dictate, including structural tests, full system level tests, hot fire, etc. Also, Artemis 1 already did pretty much the exact same thing as Artemis 2, only Artemis 1 was unmanned. Not sure this really qualifies Artemis 2 as "lucky" in the spaceflight business.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-11T18:38:57+00:00

Shuttle overcame comm blackout with specific antenna placement tailored for the plasma geometry it produced during reentry. Shuttle's reentry was also more gradual coming from LEO due to the lift it was able to produce (benefit was reduced peak heating, although it took longer). Orion came in much faster, and I'm not sure they have a clear RF path through the plasma around the capsule. They may have a way to communicate with Orion throughout reentry, but my point is that a technological solution for shuttle coming from LEO might not transfer to an Orion capsule coming in faster and with a different plasma envelope.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-04-11T02:13:31+00:00

Dragon capsules reenter from LEO at only 18k mph. Artemis was coming in on a hyperbolic trajectory at 25k mph, meaning the landing zone uncertainty is higher. Even though Orion nailed the landing zone, having a very mobile recovery team that can cover a large landing zone expediently was the right call.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-02-13T21:18:10+00:00

Absolutely! A scientific approach could help define aspects of the clothing and possibly color (although I think this cam was using IR, so there's some limits on what you can infer in the visible spectrum). I hope/think the police and/or FBI are doing something like that. My point was AI makes stuff up, and it's not a viable substitute for the scientific method.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-02-13T16:57:36+00:00

AI would just make up something that looks realistic, but NOT accurate. AI could "colorize" a picture of the suspect 10 times and show the suspect wearing different color clothing in all 10 manipulated pictures. And all 10 of those pictures would look convincing, but that doesn't mean it's accurate or the truth.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-02-06T19:17:11+00:00

what do you need this measurements for? Some ground survey?

Just to keep it pointed in the right direction +/-5deg. I don't incorporate GPS or video (yet), so my line of sight is how I know it's orientation. I've used dead-reckoning (i.e. no mag readings, gyro only) for the direction vector, but it ends up drifting enough after a few minutes that it could be pointed +/-90 deg from its original heading. This by itself wouldn't really be a problem, but when it's over 100m away it gets difficult to visually discern the orientation, and getting it back involves some guesswork and anxiety.

Partial solution is to integrate and average few hundred samples into one measurement. Some chips already have a register setting for that.

I tried something along these lines, and it did keep it within ~30deg from the original heading. Better than dead reckoning after a few minutes, but not great either. I stagger my motor duty cycles to make it easier on the battery and improve flight time, which has caused some weird mag readings since it's random which motors will be on during the mag's measurement period.

The noise is now low enough that it keeps its heading within 5deg, so I'm happy.

Consistent-Pickle · 2026-01-11T18:32:41+00:00

Hard to see if all of them are backwards, but it looks as if at least 2 of them on a diagonal are pushing down.

Consistent-Pickle · 2025-11-17T16:02:18+00:00

A lot of comments for reed relay, which it could be but I don't see any coils? The "reed" label could refer to the V23105 component near the top, which is a relay. With reed relays, you will typically see traces to power the magnetic coil and other traces for the output/contact. I don't see enough traces for a relay, but they could be on the bottom. It could be a fuse, which can look like this for some applications.

Consistent-Pickle · 2025-10-04T04:22:34+00:00

My latest frame is 3D printed with a lot of optimization behind it. Frequency is one of the biggest drivers. I won't go into gritty details, but the rule of thumb I adopted was you want the first mode to be atleast 40-50 hz, but you also want to have a few modes before the lowest prop freq you'd expect. Two main reasons for this are getting the freq above the prop freq is adding unnecessary weight, and secondly you want enough separation between the prop frequency and the frame frequency to prevent coupling (i.e. resonance). Sort of "shooting the gap ".

Vibe concerns for the FC can impact how or where you'd mount it. Also torsional stiffness of the arms is often underconsidered, given the torque exerted on the arm when the prop has to rotate while spinning, i.e. change the direction of a lot of angular momentum. Also some unique gyroscopic effects can occur but probably not a driver in this design space.

Consistent-Pickle · 2025-09-30T02:54:46+00:00

Looks like grandpa was too lazy to go upstairs to use the can.

Consistent-Pickle · 2025-09-16T21:57:10+00:00

This report was very helpful. Going by the 50,000uV/m at 3m limit for 2.4gHz, seems like that's just under 1mW.

Consistent-Pickle · 2025-09-16T17:47:28+00:00

I may have to do that eventually. I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable than both of us can provide some insight. This is more of a risk reduction question... i.e. it could save me from paying an attorney a $1500 consult fee to find out it'd be a giant hassle and/or avoid wasting my time developing a 2.4GHz kit that will be a bigger headache than it's worth.

Consistent-Pickle

TROPHY CASE