Improved antenna?

Photo · May 30, 2017

Hi, is there a possibility to "improve/modify" the performance of the small cable antenna under the body?
I assume it's used for flight control / telemetry. I can imagine that the performance will decrease when the antenna is hidden from the ST16 when the H body is turned away from the ST16. Or is this tiny cable enough?

Dr Delta · May 30, 2017

There are plenty of vids about upgrading this antennae. This one for instance.

Photo · May 30, 2017

Dr Delta said:
There are plenty of vids about upgrading this antennae. This one for instance.

Thanx! Isn't there an option to just connect a new antenna to the tiny cable?

PatR · May 30, 2017

When I purchased my second H from Carolina I elected to have them install rubber dipole 2.4 antennas, which replace the wire antennas. I also had a PixAero lens installed on the camera. People should understand doing this stuff voids their warranty, which means I bought a brand new Typhoon H standard version that came with no warranty because it was internally modified at my request.

They both work pretty good though

You can buy an antenna kit from Carolina or another vendor if you are talented in small electronic assembly processes. Recognize the H has to be disassembled to do it, and if you screw up it's all on you. The JST connectors for the camera and GPS are quite fragile. Tip of the day: If an end of a mini female JST connector breaks away the male/female assembly can be reassembled and secured using a small drop of hot melt glue to offset the missing end of the female JST receptacle.

If you have an H that still has the 2.4 antenna wire taped down with the warning label, remove the label and free the wire. They all come with the wire taped down. There is an antenna wire on both sides of the H. DO NOT cut or modify them! They are everything to your flight control system.

Steve Carr · May 30, 2017

Photo said:
Hi, is there a possibility to "improve/modify" the performance of the small cable antenna under the body?
I assume it's used for flight control / telemetry. I can imagine that the performance will decrease when the antenna is hidden from the ST16 when the H body is turned away from the ST16. Or is this tiny cable enough?
View attachment 6107

Those antennas are for telemetry and flight controls and generally have a much longer range than the video. I have found it is much easier and more effective overall to use a different antenna on the ST16 to improve all of the signals. I prefer the Itelite antenna made specifically for use on the ST16.

Photo · May 30, 2017

Steve Carr said:
Those antennas are for telemetry and flight controls and generally have a much longer range than the video. I have found it is much easier and more effective overall to use a different antenna on the ST16 to improve all of the signals. I prefer the Itelite antenna made specifically for use on the ST16.

Hi Steve, I also use a Itelite sometimes but it's tricky when you have the H behiind you and not aiming the ST16 towards it..

Steve Carr · May 30, 2017

Photo said:
Hi Steve, I also use a Itelite sometimes but it's tricky when you have the H behiind you and not aiming the ST16 towards it..

It really depends on how far away it is. Within 1-200' it should be fine. But it's always good to face the aircraft to keep in in sight.

PatR · May 30, 2017

Duh.

It always amazes me when I read about people that put an RC aircraft in the air that uses frequencies that even at strong power levels are easily blocked by any type of obstruction. Toss in a relatively weak WiFi transmission method the the situation can become worse in a hear beat. yet they willingly put themselves between their aircraft and the transmitter. Regardless of the antennas used, 2.4 and 5.8 are not frequencies that penetrate solid objects, or even dense foliage. They don't even bend around them very well. Only ultra low frequency signals, at high power, can propagate through water.

Wonder why they won't allow liquids in your carry on baggage? It's because that super sophisticated back scatter x-ray stuff they inspect you and your carry on's with can't see through a liquid. If you have been sweating heavily they will always pat you down because they can't see through the sweat. Your body is ~70% water. Do you really want to put your body between the aircraft and the ST-16? Think these things through people.

spongella · May 31, 2017

In the olden days hams could use frequencies on HF, think it was 72 MHz, might still be the case. And the general public used frequencies that were somewhere in the 27 MHz band.

And, some early wireless printers used the 27 MHz band but now they are at much higher frequencies.

Guess there is just a general upward trend in frequency use - probably because the lower bands have been spoken for?

PatR · May 31, 2017

72MHz was reserved for model aircraft use. Still is I believe. Hams involved in aero modeling typically used 53MHz, while RC cars and boats used 27MHz.

The push to use 2.4 GHz for RC was due to frequency congestion at flying fields. Too many people, to few available channels. 2.4 and frequency hopping allowed more people to fly at any given time and place.

Since the move to 2.4 the 72MHz channels are virtually deserted, and still safe to use for aero modeling. Much longer range capability and deals much better with obstructions but uses an antenna size that would put most of today's flyers off. Combine flight control on 72MHz with video on 2.4GHz and you could fly a heck of a long ways out and be legal aside from line of sight rules.

Robert Brooks · May 31, 2017

Installition of the ext antennas is pretty straightforward

Robert Brooks · May 31, 2017

spongella · May 31, 2017

Anyone know of a good source for coaxial cable used for these antennas? Thanks.

Robert Brooks · May 31, 2017

Amazon is where I got everything totaled abot $17.00
The piece of shrink wrap was from the old c cell battery packs I used to make for rc cars.

Steve Carr · May 31, 2017

spongella said:
Anyone know of a good source for coaxial cable used for these antennas? Thanks.

Amazon and eBay have lots of them.

PatR · May 31, 2017

Looks like Mr. Brooks did his antenna orientations right.

Rubik · Jun 2, 2017

PatR said:
If you have an H that still has the 2.4 antenna wire taped down with the warning label, remove the label and free the wire. They all come with the wire taped down. There is an antenna wire on both sides of the H. DO NOT cut or modify them! They are everything to your flight control system.

Pat, thanks for the tip.
Is there any harm in slipping nylon tubes over the wires after un-taping to stiffen and hold the wires in flight? The nylon tube could be glued to the shell at the desired angles (I believe you said elsewhere, 90-deg between them).

PatR · Jun 2, 2017

The nylon tube has standard practice for maintaining antenna orientation in RC since before 2.4 was an accepted frequency band. Go ahead with that. The best antenna performance occurs when the 2.4 antennas on the aircraft are oriented 90* to each other. If they both happen to be positioned in 45* angles opposing each other you have 90*

If you have 1.5 and 2mm long shaft hex keys you could open the shell halves, drill s couple small holes at appropriate locations, insert and secure the rubes, snd route the antenna wires through them.. Done correctly that would be better than how Yuneec places antenna tubes on the Pro version.

Thanks for the idea

. Since I can't find my spare dipole antenna kit I think I'll take my own advice using your idea for one of my H's.