Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi there. This has probably been covered before, but I can't find it.

Recently, I went FPV-ing but forgot my tripod (for mounting my 8dB patch antenna on). My flying site is some farmland with a cellular 'phone mast near one corner. I usually find (with my antenna sensibly mounted a couple of feet off the ground, facing away from the mast) that as range gets extreme, I get interference flecks.

Anyway, I just laid my patch antenna on my rucksack, pointing up and slightly away from the mast, perhaps 6-8 inches (max) off the ground. To my suprise, range was fine (10mW 2.4GHz Tx), even when Dierdre (my war-torn Easystar) unexpectedly snorted sod some 200+m away. And no interference flecks...

I expect some of you have experimented with receiver aerials close to the ground - and I'm confident someone can make sense of this (apparent) improvement in performance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm interesting. Could it be the evil mobile tower signal is getting eaten by the grass/bounced away before it gets to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, very odd.

Guesses include, patch was outside the the strong beam of the phone mast. The ground was reflecting more of your signal into your patch, luck or something as yet unknown :)

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never flown with my patch antennaes more than 2 feet off the ground, and would prefer to keep them as low as possible. I think that the chance of multipath interference would be much less with them on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never flown with my patch antennaes more than 2 feet off the ground, and would prefer to keep them as low as possible. I think that the chance of multipath interference would be much less with them on the ground.

Indeed, the closer you have your receiver's antenna to the ground the better. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard that too, it's better to have the antenna on the ground than above on a tripod. Personally I always have it at ground level, on one of those little 20cm tripods just to hold it in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW, looks like I just learned something !

I must be the only guy that did'nt know ?

Dose anyone know the reason for this ???

I would guess that close objects like trees would soon get in the way as you fly out.

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knowotchermean, Terry - I find it really hard to fly low at distance with the aerial like this - no problem with the picture, it just seems 'wrong' somehow(!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never flown with my patch antennaes more than 2 feet off the ground, and would prefer to keep them as low as possible. I think that the chance of multipath interference would be much less with them on the ground.

Yes I tend to agree with Rob. I have flown VR FPV with diversity and standard RX's with 14 DBI patch antennas Horizontally polarized. Only 18 inches off the ground facing about 70 degrees up. The reason not straight up is that your signals will be received while taking off and landing. Here is a video I have. This one though could have been better on the ground If I had ground checked the plane taxi first, and finding the right spot for the RX box of diversity. This video is not using the diversity, because the camera and TX not compatable with. Headset is from future hobbies.com. email; wade[AT]futurehobbies.com. Other planes I have has future equipment is great!! :)

If you like check out video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe someone with the Oracle could do a test if they have 2 identical receivers and patches. One mounted at ground level and the other at head height, any takers ?

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I already read that, but did not beleive it...

I will try it too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been thinking about this while I was walking the dog, I can only think that by putting the aerial at ground level it misses most of the background noise that would otherwise reach it. Your plane however is at a higher angle and so its signal still reaches the aerial with no problems, result is less interference and longer range. :)

If this is correct then the more sensitive receivers will be effected most, anyone with a poor receiver may not even notice the difference !

Also if you intend to fly at less than 500ft and over a mile away then putting your aerial on the ground is probably not an option.

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought comes to my mind, regarding the fresnel zone.

In the Online Range Calculator (http://www.compex.com.sg/home/WDC.asp) you can see in the last two fields the minimum height clearance and the Fresnel Zone clearance. So maybe the point of better reception is related to the angle at which you put the receiving antenna regarding to the ground. Maybe that clears the Fresnel Zone, better than the positioning on a high tripod with a more flat angle. Just a guess...

Edited by Hartwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×