Carvec?

[loewermx]

Anybody have any pricing info on a Carvec system? What are the pros and cons of this system? I cannot find much info.

[z11355]

the guy I know that has one (cyber-flyer on RR) loves it.

Silly expensive as I recall at around $4000 for the setup.

[DebianDog]

Our moderator has it. He says it is steady in a hurricane. :smokin:

[terje]

Contact John who makes it. He is dead earnest and will be your best sourse of information I think.
I have one in a gasser, and have experianced that a smooth heli is a must. There can be no visible vibrations. When the heli is good enough, the Carvec is a dream to use.

[GGoodrum]

With the GPS hold package, it is more like $10k. Check out the Spartan AP-2000i. With the upcoming inertial sensor option and the altitude hold feature, it will come very close to having the same sort of hold capability as the Carvec, but at less than 10% of the cost.

-- Gary

[Tabbytabb]

Gary, any idea when the inertial sensors will be out? That will be a killer pacakge!

Tabb

[CARVECJohn]

Gary,

That's 3 times you've compared the AP2000 to the '$10K CARVEC system'

Please get your facts straight before posting on a public forum. For $10K, CARVEC has full GPS position hold, altitude hold and a fully integrated camera mount control and stabilisation system - as well as a video overlay system way in advance of anything else I've seen.

An AP2000 WITH the inertial sensors is comparable (on paper) with the $4K core inertial stability system which also has RPM control and extensive data logging/analysis features.

Of course - the point is completely moot as the inertial sensor for the AP2000 has been 'soon' for 2 years now and I haven't seen any firm pricing yet - so where did you get your information from ?. How many CARVEC systems have you seen flying ?. How many inertial AP2000 systems have you seen to compare ?.

Just keeping the record straight : there is a lot of cheerleading going on in this forum and it makes me wonder if Mark Ryder has got it right.

[LoopBaCK]

... and it makes me wonder if Mark Ryder has got it right.
CARVECJohn - What do you mean??

[GGoodrum]

John, you are right. I should have been more specific. Your system does, in fact, do a lot more. I've seen it in action and it truly does allow you to fly to a spot and basically take your hands off the controls, pretty much in an sort of conditions.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I could tell from the information you have on your website, the Core system does not allow you to hold your current position. For that you need to add the GPS-based option, which adds position hold and altitude hold, along with all the other features you point out, including the camera stabilization and video overlay system. What if all you need is "relative" position/altitude hold, where you don't need to command it to or even know what the current position/altitude is? Many of us already have stabilized camera mounts and I use a $59 flight data recorder to record power, temps and rpm, all you really need for an electric setup. I also don't have any use for the video overlay, although I could see how it could be quite useful in a UAV application.

If you had a way integrate the basic hold functions into the Core system, I'd be first in line to buy one. Although even $4-5k is a lot to justify for a 600-700 - bladed helicopter that all up costs around half that, I, for one, would step up, as would many others I think. You can eventually cover that in the savings you would get by not having to have a camera operator, assuming you had a decent volume of business. I can't, on the other hand, justify spending double that just to get the position/altitude hold functions I need to be able to do 360 panos or other type shots without having to have a 2nd person.

I laughed when I got to your comment about MR. :D I think his reputation around these parts precedes him! :lol: Do you know how and why HeliFreak was started?

Anyway, please accept my apology. I did not mean to bash your product. I'm actually glad you have chosen to participate here, and I hope you will continue to do so. I'm also hopeful you might consider offering a "detuned" version of your system for the lower end of the market. I think you might be surprised at how well it could do. I truly believe there is plenty of market room between your full-up, very capable system and the current IR-based attitude hold-only AP-2000i.

-- Gary

[Angelos]

... and it makes me wonder if Mark Ryder has got it right.

I don’t know what John thinks but Mark is simply bitter because we don’t advertise. The fact is that we did advertise for 6 months from around December last year until May. Our web server collects data showing where customers come from together with dates/times which I tried to match to orders. As a direct result of add on RR's home page we got around 10-20 hits a month and occasionally 1 or 2 of them resulted in orders. I thought the amount spent compared to the benefits we get was unreasonable so I asked Mark to terminate our advertising.

But I do understand that Mark’s reasons… Say X company pays him for adverting; we don’t. So he deletes my posts whenever the X company sees a post they don’t like. After all he needs to support his advertisers.

However you guys may have not realised is that once you become affiliated with a vendor you loose the right to express you personal opinion about anything on RR. With that I mean issues not related to personal business interests. For example… remember crystals Airfoil used to sell on the illegal 72MHz channels? I and a few others tried to make everyone aware why such crystals should not be used. Airfoil didn’t want to accept it and the conversation heated up a bit. If the same thing was to happen again now my posts will be deleted and I will get a PM from Mark “no bashing between vendors”. Everyone else can comment; I can’t! As a result I’ve completely lost any interest posting there in general discussions. I only respond on threads related to our products.

-Angelos

[Angelos]

there is a lot of cheerleading going on in this forum

Of course - the point is completely moot as the inertial sensor for the AP2000 has been 'soon' for 2 years now and I haven't seen any firm pricing yet - so where did you get your information from ?. How many CARVEC systems have you seen flying ?. How many inertial AP2000 systems have you seen to compare ?.

John,
I have not asked anyone to cheer. So the cheering can only mean that we have lots of happy customers! I am sure you have lots of happy customers too but they don’t cheer as much. Maybe we offer a better happiness/price ratio ;)

Cheering = k * happiness / price; where k = cheering factor

There is no doubt that CARVEC is a fine piece of kit and we hope that one day we will be able to match its abilities. Keep in mind that you had about 3-4 years head start and previous experience in this area. You should be pleased that the AP-2000i’s inertial sensor is delayed… after all you get chance to sell more of your systems.

In any case, I never comment it about CARVEC or you before neither in a good or bad way and I would I appreciate if you do the same. Let’s let the customers decide and comment as they please. I am sure GGoodrum didn’t suggest the AP-2000i as direct equal for the CARVEC. He is simply happy with what he has and wanted to recommend it to others.

Regards,
Angelos

[WillJames]

Quote:
there is a lot of cheerleading going on in this forum


Quote:
Of course - the point is completely moot as the inertial sensor for the AP2000 has been 'soon' for 2 years now and I haven't seen any firm pricing yet - so where did you get your information from ?. How many CARVEC systems have you seen flying ?. How many inertial AP2000 systems have you seen to compare ?.


People talk about what works for them and what they can afford. As Angelos says above about commenting on other people's products, if you want to make yourself look bad, go ahead and compare your multi-K product to one that is less than 300. :?: :?: :dontknow

Thank you for taking the high ground Angelos, this paragraph sums is up very well. John needs to read and heed what Angelos says in the quote below.

In any case, I never comment it about CARVEC or you before neither in a good or bad way and I would I appreciate if you do the same. Let’s let the customers decide and comment as they please.

[MLaBoyteaux]

If I had a Carvec, I'm sure I would promote it just as much as I do the AP-2000 :D

I've seen nothing but good things posted by owners of each system. At the moment, I can't justify the cost of the Carvec for the business. If the business takes off in the near future like I hope it does, well.........

[WillJames]

Also John, since you are new here. We encourage people to say what they want, we do not delete what people say. Nobody owns us, and we are free to speak the truth.

Bashers and haters don't last long here, you will see very quickly if you read some threads on HF. The only people from what I can read face value here that are really comparing your system to the AP2000i is you. :arggg:

I do own several of Angelos's products, I bought the first one about 5 years ago, and whether he advertises here or not, I appreciate what he has done for me and all my friends who have used my UltraPac and other products and information we got from him. He has earned the respect of many here and elsewhere for a long time.

[GJestico]

I'll say this for Angelos,
For a few hundred dollars, his AP2000 unit completly changed what my capabilities are, and what I am comfortable with, in AP heli flying. Few products have lived up to the hype.
As with any technology, I am now wanting more. I think about the Carvec. John seems like a smart guy. Its got to be even better, but ,Thats a big jump in $$. At this point the spartan unit fits my budget. Thanks angelos.

Greg

[fitenfyr]

I don't think you can even compare ANY IR sensor unit with the intertial ones.

The CARVEC core system will hold the helicopter upright in any sky condition, urban or suburban enviroments.

I have yet to see an IR unit do that as well.

I would love to see Angelos produce a product as well designed and durable as the CARVEC.
I subscribe to the theory that more competition only makes products better.

With that said though I think those are mighty big shoes to fill. :D

The core CARVEC is worth EVERY penny John ask's for it and you would find that the information it provides is far superior to what any data logger will give you.
John can tweak a profile via the internet if there is a problem and will spend countless hours working with you if you have a problem.
It will even record vibration levels on your aircraft that you or John can visually graph.
That can be a good/bad thing. :D

I know this first hand as John has quite a file of questions from me. :D

So to get back to the original question.....

If you plan on flying in areas of the country that have generally grey and "heatless" :D skies like the Pacific Northwest or in mostly urban (big buildings) enviroments I would recommend the extra bucks for the CARVEC core unit.
The core unit itself will take you WAY beyond your current limits for stability and piece of mind at altitudes above 300' in my opinion.

Then once you find the need for the position holding you can upgrade with a few simple steps to the GPS unit.

That option is just AMAZING to watch.
Your eyes will fool you long before that helicopter will move position.
It literally will go up and down within feet of the place you set it on the ground if you wish. Regardless of the wind, within reason of course.

The video overlay solves all the issues of "how high", "how fast", "how far".
It will display the GPS position, altitude, verticle/horizontal speed (based on GPS) all in a small light package that uses information stored in the CARVEC system.

If you want something that works and is proven to work then start saving
the pennies, pounds, franc's what ever for the CARVEC. :D

Con's.....
Well I can't really find any except maybe the complexity of the system while you are doing the initial install.
There is a pretty steep learning curve to get over as to how it works.
The interface for the computer is full of information and it takes some time to "wade" through what you really need and what is "fluff" for now.
That took me about 20 hours or so of working with the system.

I don't look at the cost as a Con at all.
If you are serious about aerial photography as a business it is just one more expense to budget/plan for.
If you are a weekend warrior then the IR units are probably a better investment.

[Menno]

John,
I have not asked anyone to cheer. So the cheering can only mean that we have lots of happy customers! I am sure you have lots of happy customers too but they don’t cheer as much.


I'll cheer for my Carvec :thumbsup2: .The price of the unit scared me of at first, but I have been using my unit for over a year now and couldn't have done my AP business without it. Looking back I would say it was well worth it.

John was really helpfull with answering my questions, even on a Sunday. The level of personal assistance and support given by him was unknown to me compared to other vendors. If have no personal experience with the AP-2000 and I'am sure that it's a great product, but I don't think Angelos can give this level of personal attention with the price the AP-2000 sells for.

If you are really serious about doing AP as a business, and are flying in the surroundings of multi million dollar properties, the price of the Carvec is a small investment compared to the extra safety and comfort the system gives.

Apart from that I think that there is (more than a year after my purchase) still no unit on the market with the same performance for a better price.

Thank you John!! :thumbsup2:

Menno

[Menno]

Angelos,


In any case, I never comment it about CARVEC or you before neither in a good or bad way and I would I appreciate if you do the same.


I'am sure John did not mean to be negative about the AP-2000. Heck, it's a good thing that multiple companies are trying to achieve the same thing. It forces yourself to innovate your product even more and gives you great ideas for your own products, which is a good thing.

I can imagine howeve that it is frustrating that people compare your product to one that is not even on the market yet. Or as John said,
the point is completely moot.

Now get back to work the both of you, I want so see newer and better products. :mrgreen:

Menno

[WillJames]

WOW there seems to be a lot of carvec cheerleading on this site, maybe Mark has it all wrong.... :arggg: :lol:

[cbergen]

I'am sure John did not mean to be negative about the AP-2000.

I tend to agree here also. Comparing a $250 system to a $10,000 fully GPS hold position system is a little much, and why John's panties could get all bunched up. I've had mine bunched for a lot less :lol:

Both systems certainly have their place, and it's up to the customer to decide which one he has to have. I'll be puting the AP2000I on my Observer, and really would like to put the Carvec onto the Turbine Observer.

And you don't want me to comment on the care and feeding of vendors on RR.... :twisted:

[Menno]

WOW there seems to be a lot of carvec cheerleading on this site

Bill me :mrgreen: LOL :mrgreen:

Just expressing my joy.

give me a C :happyd
give me a A :happyd
give me a R :happyd
...
...
...

[WillJames]

And you don't want me to comment on the care and feeding of vendors on RR


HAHAH Yea, we don't care for or feed you guys over here, but we do try to help keep it positive and respectful and real.

[DebianDog]

If I had a Carvec, I'm sure I would promote it just as much as I do the AP-2000 :D

I've seen nothing but good things posted by owners of each system. At the moment, I can't justify the cost of the Carvec for the business. If the business takes off in the near future like I hope it does, well.........

Sorry for some reason I thought for sure you had one.

[Dakine]

Hmmmm......interesting thread..

[GGoodrum]

Here's what I want, a system that will hold the helicopter still enough that I feel reasonably comfortable taking my eyes off it long enough to take a quick look at what the camera is seeing, and adjust the framing. I also want to be able to do 360 degree panos without the "reference" point for the camera moving all over the place. Obviously, the Carvec system with the GPS hold feature will do this, and much more. My point is I don't need the "much more" and it makes me wonder if maybe an updated "core" system, that could do the basic hold function, but not the GPS-based navigation/reporting, the video overlay and/or the data recording features, might be something John would consider doing.

The current AP-2000i, even with the IR sensors, does a pretty good job of holding attitude, but it requires a bit of trimming. Angelos has now just added a new auto-calibration function that makes this pretty much a piece of cake. :) All you do is get the helicoptor to the point you want to hold it at, in a hover, and then activate the AP-2000i and it will "remember" the current attitude, and then hold it. He added this feature, I think, in response to several requests for this capability, right here in this forum. While this gets the AP-2000i a little closer to my goal of having the confidence to momentarily take my eyes off the helicopter, it still doesn't do anything with the altitude. Andrey (Askman...) asked Angelos about the possibility of a simple addition to the AP-2000i for adding an altitude sensor and using the single pitch channel for controlling/holding the altitude. This is possible because the AP-2000i already does full eCCPM mixing and they way you use it is to set the radio to output standard 90-degree elevator, aileron and pitch values. Angelos is looking into this right now.

It only took about two months for him to implement, test and release the auto-cal function, and that included a lengthy holiday in the middle. :) I'm guessing it's not going to take "two years" to add altitude hold. Once we do have this functionality, I will then have pretty much the whole enchilada, with one exception. With the IR-based sensors, you can't really do stationary piros, as the IR reference will change. Switching to inertial-based sensors would certainly solve this problem but until that happens, Andrey and I have another solution.

If there was a "detuned" Carvec option, at a price point around what the core system goes for, I would definitely be a customer. I would put one on something bigger than a Raptor, like a modified Ion, or maybe a Joker 2. It would take me awhile to "pay it off", as it were, but it would be nice to have a no-compromise capability for those jobs that would be otherwise difficult to manage with the smaller models in my growing AP/AV "fleet". Right now, my Logo 10-based platform is getting the most work. I have my Raptor back in a standard "3D" setup at the moment because I've just converted it over to the new e620SE "eRaptor" configuration (I was lucky enough to get a set of the new frames, etc...) and I need to do some flight tests/videos. As soon as that is done, it will be put back in an AP/AV-friendly configuration, which includes an AP-2000i. I have these in the Logo 10 and in my QJ/EP-8 as well. What I really like about it is that the AP-2000i allows me to fly both of these smaller models higher and farther than I ever would feel comfortable doing without this system. For doing RE work in tight neighborhoods, I just don't feel comfortable flying even the Raptor, so I use the Logo 10, mostly, but sometimes even that seems to big, which is why I did the ep-8 version.

With the advances in camera technology, plus the new and improved power systems we are using, it just doesn't require a 90-sized helicopter anymore to do "real" work, with very professional results. The big stuff will always have their "niche", if for no other reason because you can see them easier so you can do shots higher and farther away. I just think for much of what needs to be done, it can be accomplished with smaller, less expensive setups, with no loss in quality. I am happy to see that companies like Spartan are working on stabilization systems that are appropriately "scaled" for use on these platforms. I hope that Carvec might at least look at a less-expensive version that eliminated some of the features that not everybody can use.

-- Gary