- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 47
- Age
- 48
If I had the cash I would do the same setup as you have, can't really think of a way to improve it.
Flying from inside house or car anyone?
- Thread starter Jeremiah Nelson
- Start date
-
- Tags
- phantom 4
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 47
- Age
- 48
It depends how far you want to go
You can get an itelite antenna for around 100
If you want amps, external car mount antenna's it can go much higher
All the answers are in this thread
Haha they probably saw a spike in sales after this thread
Although I don't fully agree with some of the posts on here I have to commend you for an exceptional job in getting stronger signal strength without breaking the bank. I'm thinking about adding a similar system to our Search & Rescue IC trailer to help penetrate deeper into the woods. Of course no one ever gets lost or hurt in a wide open field where range is awesome LOL.
I may pick your brain on this in the future. Fly safe
I may pick your brain on this in the future. Fly safe
Although I don't fully agree with some of the posts on here I have to commend you for an exceptional job in getting stronger signal strength without breaking the bank. I'm thinking about adding a similar system to our Search & Rescue IC trailer to help penetrate deeper into the woods. Of course no one ever gets lost or hurt in a wide open field where range is awesome LOL.
I may pick your brain on this in the future. Fly safe
Sure just let me know what you have questions about. Also, What do you mean you don't agree with the post in here? Is there something in particular that stands out?
37 mph OVERALL, including take off, landing, turning around, etc is very fast. We know top speed is 44mph but any wind, etc will cut down on that, at least in one direction. I get that you can make up for it with a tail wind but overall that is very fast, all things considered.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2016
- Messages
- 97
- Reaction score
- 91
- Age
- 32
I think it's about time we start banning all the thread hijackers... it's seriously getting boring. Get a life and stop wasting yours and other people's time with your pathetic posts 
And if drones get banned, oh well, self fulfilling prophecy for y'all
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And if drones get banned, oh well, self fulfilling prophecy for y'all
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So you are admitting its not to fast to be true? Or you think it is true? It doesn't really matter this is of no relevance
I think it's about time we start banning all the thread hijackers... it's seriously getting boring. Get a life and stop wasting yours and other people's time with your pathetic posts
And if drones get banned, oh well, self fulfilling prophecy for y'all
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's truly become an epidemic on this forum and it seems to be infecting nearly every thread.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2014
- Messages
- 289
- Reaction score
- 104
People are getting excited because of the potential for increased range using this huge car mounted antenna, but its usefulness is questionable if not limited.
Antennas do not amplify the signal. They just focus the energy in a particular direction. So an omnidirectional antenna like this will achieve a much longer range, but at a much reduced vertical angle of coverage.
Best is to look at the following image to get an idea:
The 9dbi antenna has a much bigger horizontal reach, but at a 100 ft distance, it can fly only at an altitude of max 22 ft! If the antenna is angled backwards 12.5 degrees, then the max altitude is 44ft. Anything above that, it will get outside the radiation zone and lose connectivity. Since the car antenna is mounted in a fixed position, hence cannot be aimed, the phantom will be able to maintain connectivity only within the 25 degree cone.
In that sense, a flat antenna, or a windsurfer is better because it does not have any radiation going the opposite direction of the phantom and has an increased cone of transmission. (BTW, the 2dbi antenna radiation pattern, is incorrect. It is not a full 360 degrees. It does dip at the poles. All omnidirectional antennas do. The actual 3D shape is of a doughnut.)
Antennas do not amplify the signal. They just focus the energy in a particular direction. So an omnidirectional antenna like this will achieve a much longer range, but at a much reduced vertical angle of coverage.
Best is to look at the following image to get an idea:
The 9dbi antenna has a much bigger horizontal reach, but at a 100 ft distance, it can fly only at an altitude of max 22 ft! If the antenna is angled backwards 12.5 degrees, then the max altitude is 44ft. Anything above that, it will get outside the radiation zone and lose connectivity. Since the car antenna is mounted in a fixed position, hence cannot be aimed, the phantom will be able to maintain connectivity only within the 25 degree cone.
In that sense, a flat antenna, or a windsurfer is better because it does not have any radiation going the opposite direction of the phantom and has an increased cone of transmission. (BTW, the 2dbi antenna radiation pattern, is incorrect. It is not a full 360 degrees. It does dip at the poles. All omnidirectional antennas do. The actual 3D shape is of a doughnut.)
Last edited:
What ever dude I've been using for a year. I've broke the rules a few times 1600ft np with these
Foosy,
This is complete nonsence and while on paper these points are valid in the real world everything you said is trash. 22ft? While I try to stay in the height limit ive been over a 1000ft high directly over my head and even with 50ft antenna extension. I also get miles of range in all directions and don't have to orient my body to the craft. I would NOT fly through the woods like in this video with windsurfers it wouldn't work. The 9dbi antennas penetrate like crazy. Why? I have no idea. For distance I started with fpvlr but at long distances I would lose connection and really have to concentrate on aming. With the onmies ive been farther 7 miles so far. I don't lose connection ever. Until you try for yourself you are doing a disservice speaking as if you have actually used them and can attest to their performance! I am flying low in the video because I like to skim the ground btw.
This is complete nonsence and while on paper these points are valid in the real world everything you said is trash. 22ft? While I try to stay in the height limit ive been over a 1000ft high directly over my head and even with 50ft antenna extension. I also get miles of range in all directions and don't have to orient my body to the craft. I would NOT fly through the woods like in this video with windsurfers it wouldn't work. The 9dbi antennas penetrate like crazy. Why? I have no idea. For distance I started with fpvlr but at long distances I would lose connection and really have to concentrate on aming. With the onmies ive been farther 7 miles so far. I don't lose connection ever. Until you try for yourself you are doing a disservice speaking as if you have actually used them and can attest to their performance! I am flying low in the video because I like to skim the ground btw.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2014
- Messages
- 289
- Reaction score
- 104
So engineering is nonsense to you?
1000ft high? 50ft antenna extension? Really? You want us to believe that ********?
Your numbers don't make any sense. I'm starting to think you are a troll.
As to your video, you are exactly proving my point: flying low with such an antenna will work, and will get you the extra range.
It is obvious you know nothing about antenna theory nor practices. Obviously, when you are in the cone you will observe at any distance X from the controller a higher signal than that of a flat antenna, and hence better penetration, but the downside is that it has to be aimed more accurately. I had tried with my p2v+ an 8dbi antenna and observed exactly this behavior: while it went farther, I had to keep the antenna perpendicular to the phantom, or I would lose connection a lot faster than with my regular antenna. I had better results with a flat antenna because it had a 70 degree cone, especially as it was getting outside my LOS.
Note, I am not debating you are getting that range. Just the effectiveness of such a setup.
Similar threads
