# Fact-check: PASSED

Source: https://research.dreamlab.institute/wfb-video-links/  
Rounds: 2  

Cited sources (claims may quote these as well as the tracker page):

1. [Capacity and interference management of wfb-ng Links for drone fleets · svpcom wfb-ng · Discussion #425 · GitHub](https://github.com/svpcom/wfb-ng/discussions/425)
2. [WFB-NG — WiFi Broadcast for FPV | OpenFPV](https://openfpv.com.ua/en/software/wfb-ng)

## Round 1: 2 issue(s), sent back to the writer

- line 2 "The maintainer says CSMA/CA, basically listen-before-you-talk, is still active. But there are no retransmissions, so lost packets stay lost.": Because there are no retransmissions, lost packets stay lost. — not supported by the page (suggested: "[B] The maintainer says CSMA/CA, basically listen-before-you-talk, is still active. But there are no retransmissions, though forward error correction can recover some lost packets.")
- line 3 "So it's polite, not reliable. And we'd guessed 3-4 cameras at 1080p60 per 20MHz channel, based on that blind premise.": The 3-4 cameras at 1080p60 per 20MHz channel guess was based on the blind-injection premise. — not supported by the page (suggested: "[A] So it's polite, not reliable. And we'd guessed 3-4 cameras at 1080p60 per 20MHz channel, from bitrate against estimated capacity.")

## Final claims

| line | claim | verdict | page quote |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The tracker assumed wfb-ng had no collision avoidance (fully blind). | supported | wfb blind-injects with no collision avoidance, so this is an airtime question. |
| 2 | The maintainer says CSMA/CA is still active but there are no retransmissions. | supported | CSMA/CA is still active but there are no retransmissions. |
| 3 | The 3-4 cameras at 1080p60 per 20MHz channel guess came from bitrate against estimated capacity. | supported | ESTIMATED from ~8-12 Mbps per camera against ~30-40 Mbps practical capacity, not measured. |
| 4 | The maintainer says wfb-ng is for long-range links and a reasonably small number of drones, and that ordinary WiFi is preferred for dense areas. | supported | wfb-ng is for long-range links and reasonable small amount of drones. For high-density drone areas ordinary wifi (with retransmissions) is preferred. |
| 5 | The 3-4 camera figure is design intent, not a measured limit. | supported | This clarifies that the standing 3-4 camera estimate is a design intent, not a measured limit. |
| 5 | The capacity is still unmeasured and no one has published numbers. | supported | No one has published measurements of multicam throughput limits |
| 6 | Multicam with wfb-ng should be planned small and low-density, and the capacity verified by the builder. | supported | wfb-ng is for long-range links and reasonable small amount of drones. |
| 7 | The 3-4 cameras per channel figure is an unverified estimate, not a measured spec; the full tracker is at DreamLab Research. | supported | the standing estimate is 3-4 at 1080p60 per 20MHz and it is unverified. |