Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

4 Hawks SR

Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
140
Reaction score
32
Age
41
Location
Buckeye Arizona
Been a while since ive posted pretty busy guy these days the Arizona summer heat slowed up my drone flying and pushed me to my secondary hobby working on and racing my car well now the cold season has arrived and trying to get back into flying more decided to bite the bullet and purchased the 4 Hawks Antenna off of Skydronesusa after reading some reviews on here and the websites shockingly enough though there is hardly any video on youtube of anyone using this with the H I got it cause my video feed likes to cut out and just trying to stable that up. I would love to see videos or get any advice I can from those who have used it. If ive dropped this in the wrong area let me know or if im beating a dead horse I saw some feedback on this but it seemed most who were talking about it havent brought it up in a while.
 
Just be aware that the signal is far more directional than the normal antennas. You need to keep the big flat part pointed at the aircraft as much as possible.
That is definitely good to know and thankfully where I fly is completely tree free so that shouldnt be a problem im really hoping it clears up the video issues with it plus its just one step towards upgrading my setup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steve Carr
You'll be hard-pressed to find video of anyone using it, and for good reason: the FAA. I purchased my 4Hawks because I wanted better/stronger signal strength. I also had external antenna installed on my TH, figuring that would further strengthen the signal. However, most people installing external antenna on their drones and/or hi-gain directional antenna on their controllers are typically doing so for an entirely different reason...to increase flying distance...which is a violation of FAA laws.

Now, I will openly admit, I have tested, to a certain degree, the distance capability of my setup...but, 'distance' was not the purpose of what I was doing that day. When I did this, I did it over private land, with permission from the landowner, plus it was also being done for the landowner (I was taking photos for the landowner, for insurance purposes, after the 2017 fires in Santa Rosa, CA). I don't know the maximum distance my setup can go, but, I can confirm that, in the hills just to the north of Santa Rosa, signal was strong enough for the TH to reach 3.5mi, before signal was lost, and the TH started returning "home".
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZflyer83
4Hawks is a good solution here, helps keep the video stable, and I think less delay too, seems to operate just that little bit better. EU firmware gives a few problems, less power and lifting landing gear up can cause video to drop, which may take over 90 seconds to restore because of DFS. So not really extra distance here just making it a more stable flying experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZflyer83
You'll be hard-pressed to find video of anyone using it, and for good reason: the FAA. I purchased my 4Hawks because I wanted better/stronger signal strength. I also had external antenna installed on my TH, figuring that would further strengthen the signal. However, most people installing external antenna on their drones and/or hi-gain directional antenna on their controllers are typically doing so for an entirely different reason...to increase flying distance...which is a violation of FAA laws.

Now, I will openly admit, I have tested, to a certain degree, the distance capability of my setup...but, 'distance' was not the purpose of what I was doing that day. When I did this, I did it over private land, with permission from the landowner, plus it was also being done for the landowner (I was taking photos for the landowner, for insurance purposes, after the 2017 fires in Santa Rosa, CA). I don't know the maximum distance my setup can go, but, I can confirm that, in the hills just to the north of Santa Rosa, signal was strong enough for the TH to reach 3.5mi, before signal was lost, and the TH started returning "home".


There is another reason aside from increasing range BVLOS. FCC Regulation 15.203 specifically prohibits changing the antenna on a Part 15 Certified device. Now, the FCC seems loathe to enforce it, but it does not change the illegality of using a non-certified antenna.
 
There is another reason aside from increasing range BVLOS. FCC Regulation 15.203 specifically prohibits changing the antenna on a Part 15 Certified device. Now, the FCC seems loathe to enforce it, but it does not change the illegality of using a non-certified antenna.
Would be difficult for them to force people into returning it to "original" configuration of said changes we some before the FAA drive roles were created.
 
No idea what you are trying to say. But FCC Rule 15.203 has been on the books long before the first drone ever took off. People think that because the antennas are being sold that they are legal to use. They are not per FCC, not FAA, regulations. But again, the FCC is not very likely to come after you, although if they do the fines can be hefty. $10K every single time the transmitter was turned on.

Where it may cause an issue is if you ever end up in a court case. I can absolutely guarantee you that one of the first things looked at is if the equipment was modified in any manner. I know this from having been an expert witness in several radio control hobby related cases.
 
No idea what you are trying to say. But FCC Rule 15.203 has been on the books long before the first drone ever took off. People think that because the antennas are being sold that they are legal to use. They are not per FCC, not FAA, regulations. But again, the FCC is not very likely to come after you, although if they do the fines can be hefty. $10K every single time the transmitter was turned on.

Where it may cause an issue is if you ever end up in a court case. I can absolutely guarantee you that one of the first things looked at is if the equipment was modified in any manner. I know this from having been an expert witness in several radio control hobby related cases.
You seem to have forgotten...or purposely ignored...the fact that, if the "alternate" antenna are Section 15 compliant, they CAN be used to replace the original antenna. A perfect example of this would be when Yuneec, themselves, moved the internal antenna on the ST16, from an internal, to external, antenna. There's are a large selection of antenna, for all sorts of devices, that are Section 15 compliant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZflyer83
A component may in and of itself be compliant but when used as part of an assembly become non compliant. It’s the assembly performance as submitted to the FCC that establishes compliance. If later substitution of a component occurs the original compliance submission is voided until new testing establishes the component did not alter original test performance.

A truck load of compliant individual parts does not assure final assembly compliance. I’m not going into the right or wrong of things but learning you’ve tested out to 3.5 miles established your mind set, regardless of the location or who owned the property. The land owner could not legally provide airspace permission, and in that area I seriously doubt any individual entity outside of government owned 3.5 contiguous miles of property.

Non of the above suggests the antennas Yuneec uses are as good as they could be, or could have been for submission purposes. They’re not. They just happened to be economical for Yuneec. What the 4 Hawks and other after market assemblies do is no different from what you can obtain for less than half the cost using individual antennas that simply screw on to the transmitter outputs. You just have to spend a little time learning about signal propagation, wave lengths, antenna design, and visit a few parts suppliers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: John Hennessy
A component may in and of itself be compliant but when used as part of an assembly become non compliant. It’s the assembly performance as submitted to the FCC that establishes compliance. If later substitution of a component occurs the original compliance submission is voided until new testing establishes the component did not alter original test performance.

A truck load of compliant individual parts does not assure final assembly compliance. I’m not going into the right or wrong of things but learning you’ve tested out to 3.5 miles established your mind set, regardless of the location or who owned the property. The land owner could not legally provide airspace permission, and in that area I seriously doubt any individual entity outside of government owned 3.5 contiguous miles of property.

Non of the above suggests the antennas Yuneec uses are as good as they could be, or could have been for submission purposes. They’re not. They just happened to be economical for Yuneec. What the 4 Hawks and other after market assemblies do is no different from what you can obtain for less than half the cost using individual antennas that simply screw on to the transmitter outputs. You just have to spend a little time learning about signal propagation, wave lengths, antenna design, and visit a few parts suppliers.
Like mobile phone repeaters to improve signal. Legal to own here in UK, but illegal to use.
 
Like many other things, with law the devil is in the details, even the smallest detail.

Using the automotive sector as an example, I could remove an 800hp engine from a Dodge, remove all the smog equipment, install in it a ‘34 Chevy and be street legal in California. To remove the smog equipment in the Dodge would render the vehicle illegal to operate. The differentiation occurs with the vehicle model year.

Same situation with having or not having a front brake on motorcycles in CA. Pre 1970 they aren’t required but ‘70 and later are. If you’re building a custom it’s something to know.
 
You seem to have forgotten...or purposely ignored...the fact that, if the "alternate" antenna are Section 15 compliant, they CAN be used to replace the original antenna. A perfect example of this would be when Yuneec, themselves, moved the internal antenna on the ST16, from an internal, to external, antenna. There's are a large selection of antenna, for all sorts of devices, that are Section 15 compliant.

Please read Part 15.203

§ 15.203 Antenna requirement.
An intentional radiator shall be designed to ensure that no antenna other than that furnished by the responsible party shall be used with the device.


Then 15.204:

(c) An intentional radiator may be operated only with the antenna with which it is authorized.
 
You'll be hard-pressed to find video of anyone using it, and for good reason: the FAA. I purchased my 4Hawks because I wanted better/stronger signal strength. I also had external antenna installed on my TH, figuring that would further strengthen the signal. However, most people installing external antenna on their drones and/or hi-gain directional antenna on their controllers are typically doing so for an entirely different reason...to increase flying distance...which is a violation of FAA laws.

Now, I will openly admit, I have tested, to a certain degree, the distance capability of my setup...but, 'distance' was not the purpose of what I was doing that day. When I did this, I did it over private land, with permission from the landowner, plus it was also being done for the landowner (I was taking photos for the landowner, for insurance purposes, after the 2017 fires in Santa Rosa, CA). I don't know the maximum distance my setup can go, but, I can confirm that, in the hills just to the north of Santa Rosa, signal was strong enough for the TH to reach 3.5mi, before signal was lost, and the TH started returning "home".

Unless you use your drone commercially in controlled air space I wouldn’t worry about it. The FAA rarely, like almost never, ramp checks GA aircraft. Odds are much closer to zero of a FAA guy being in a field where you are flying. Just don’t hit a flying aircraft with it though!
 
The FAA’s primary function is assuring flight and public safety, so design and performance standards for any aircraft that can impact the public is within their mission statement. As our country initiates certification standards for C2 and airframes I expect nothing less. The closer we get to legalized BVLOS and flight over people the closer we get to seeing equipment certification introduced.

Our FAA indicated their desire for drone component certification as far back as 2014-2015, and named the ASTM, in conjunction with U.S. commercial drone manufacturers, as a Pathfinder agency as a means to initiate development of certification standards. As drone operations are expanded we should anticipate STC, PMA, and other engineering certification mandates for any drone that can function as a commercial platform.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AZflyer83
You'll be hard-pressed to find video of anyone using it, and for good reason: the FAA. I purchased my 4Hawks because I wanted better/stronger signal strength. I also had external antenna installed on my TH, figuring that would further strengthen the signal. However, most people installing external antenna on their drones and/or hi-gain directional antenna on their controllers are typically doing so for an entirely different reason...to increase flying distance...which is a violation of FAA laws.

Now, I will openly admit, I have tested, to a certain degree, the distance capability of my setup...but, 'distance' was not the purpose of what I was doing that day. When I did this, I did it over private land, with permission from the landowner, plus it was also being done for the landowner (I was taking photos for the landowner, for insurance purposes, after the 2017 fires in Santa Rosa, CA). I don't know the maximum distance my setup can go, but, I can confirm that, in the hills just to the north of Santa Rosa, signal was strong enough for the TH to reach 3.5mi, before signal was lost, and the TH started returning "home".
Thank you first for the reply for myself with this one im really just hoping for a more steady video signal as on some of my previous flights once I hit the 400 ft cap I was having lag issues and the feed would cut from time to time not sure id ever be able to do a distance test due to my location plus I make every effort each time I fly to one avoid even being near people ive actually cancelled flights due to having to many people at the location I had chose for the day. 2nd I try to follow the guidelines as best as possible I don't get to fly go often so when I do I want there to be no issues. Another reason I purchased the 4 Hawks was simply to add to the accessories of my H.
 
4Hawks is a good solution here, helps keep the video stable, and I think less delay too, seems to operate just that little bit better. EU firmware gives a few problems, less power and lifting landing gear up can cause video to drop, which may take over 90 seconds to restore because of DFS. So not really extra distance here just making it a more stable flying experience.
Would it be advised to hover for the 90 seconds after lifting the landing gears just to let the feed pull back in.
 
No idea what you are trying to say. But FCC Rule 15.203 has been on the books long before the first drone ever took off. People think that because the antennas are being sold that they are legal to use. They are not per FCC, not FAA, regulations. But again, the FCC is not very likely to come after you, although if they do the fines can be hefty. $10K every single time the transmitter was turned on.

Where it may cause an issue is if you ever end up in a court case. I can absolutely guarantee you that one of the first things looked at is if the equipment was modified in any manner. I know this from having been an expert witness in several radio control hobby related cases.
Okay so from what im seeing is take extreme caution when using these question though is why aren't they regulated on the websites or the sale of them even prohibited.
 
Would it be advised to hover for the 90 seconds after lifting the landing gears just to let the feed pull back in.
You can, I can see it so I fly it to the position I want, feed comes back eventually and your getting to your flight path, that's a lot of flight time to waste just hovering, that's why I use 4hawks, it virtually eliminates that problem, we rarely get picture freeze or break up, we lose video straight away with little warning, even watching signal strength on controller.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZflyer83

New Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
20,954
Messages
241,586
Members
27,284
Latest member
csandoval