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

Why TH has range issues?

Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
88
Reaction score
20
Age
70
I have consistently seen DJI and others brag about how much range they have. Of course, extreme range is usually illegal, but in my thinking, a more powerful transmitter and/or receiver would equal better reliability when atmospheric conditions cause radio interference.

So why is it that Yuneec has such limited range compared to other brands, like DJI? I will pick reliability over range any day, but the two are actually related.

Final question...what is the longest range tested by a TH owner?
 
I would ask Yuneec why it has a shorter range, probably to do with signal transmission etc, but not all of the DJI products have great range, you will only get advice and recommendations here. Probably the vast majority here don't regard extreme range as a must, better to keep it in visual range, what goes out far, must come back, and it can all end in disaster.
 
The "more power" argument is not totally valid. The signals are digital and not analog. It is either there or not, like you cell phone. So once you reach the range limit it drops completely. The signal does not fade with distance with respect to having a connection. In my experience with the Typhoon H+ it has plenty of range to be flown legally.

My personal best is a hair iver 2,500 feet. Blink and you lose sight of it. At that distance I still had full control but I had lost video link.
 
They are different simply because the design was and is intended to limit range.

People seem to have problems accepting Yuneec limits their range to assist them in maintaining legalities but does not significantly limit where they can fly. Oddly, they are quite willing to accept DJI provides them more range while severely impacting when and where they can fly.

So we have either a lot of dumb people or a lot of people who care only about themselves.
 
Neither of my Typhoons have any range issues. Both will fly out as far as I can see and still determine orientation, about 2500’. Any farther and I can’t see it.....I’ve always had great eyesight, but as I get older (53) I need reading glasses for anything closer than about 18”.....

Spend some time in the Mavic forums......they routinely post brags about going out 2-3 miles and more. Nobody seems to care about the legality of this....and if someone points it out the response is always “I have a strobe on it, I can see it”.....or no response at all.
 
Despite the fact the signals are digital, doesn't it make sense that more power would equal more reliability of the signal? That is my reason for starting this thread. Sure, 2,500 feet is more than enough. But if the CAPABILITY of the drone to give more range was there, I would feel better when in marginal conditions.
 
Despite the fact the signals are digital, doesn't it make sense that more power would equal more reliability of the signal? That is my reason for starting this thread. Sure, 2,500 feet is more than enough. But if the CAPABILITY of the drone to give more range was there, I would feel better when in marginal conditions.
There are antennas which concentrate the signal, they are more directional, but not so much of the signal is being lost in every direction.hence less lag, more stable signal and better range
 
Are you talking about the patch antenna? That antenna is directional. But the stick antennas (in my understanding) are not directional.
 
Are you talking about the patch antenna? That antenna is directional. But the stick antennas (in my understanding) are not directional.
I have only used my stock mushroom multi-directional antenna on my TH+. The other day, I was photographing a farm that is going on the market, and I lost video just before hitting 2,500ft. I put my stock patch antenna on today to see what kind of distance I can get with that, but haven't tried it yet.
 
Power is only good up to a point. Wavelength has as much or more to do with range as power. Both 2.4 and 5.8 are short wavelength and easy to obstruct regardless of power level. Using 2.4 for video signal I’ve flown a system out over 140 miles at less than 2 watts but that signal was transmitted using an amplified actively directional antenna that remained oriented with the aircraft regardless of position. However, the further away the plane was the higher it had to be to remain clear of ground clutter and remain above the curvature of the earth. Regardless of RF power it still needed to maintain a clear path between the transmitting and receiving antennas.

BTW, using the same power and an omni antenna cut range down to just over 10 miles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoomMeister
I don't really think range is such an issue to me. Presently, until June 1, i am legally limited to 500 M LOS. After June 1st, it becomes simply LOS. On my last trip to the Croswnest Pass, I got distracted getting the shot and let it get to 674 M (2211 Ft). Once I saw that, I hit RTH to bring it back. At that range, with trees in the way, I still had solid video and control. The only reason I realized that it was too far out was looking at it and thinking, "Boy, that is getting hard to see." Oops.... RTH, While still getting the shots I wanted. I know DJI people brag about miles of distance, but since that isn't legal, what good is it really? It is like a friend of mine I worked with in the 80's. He showed me a picture of a Porsche he owned at home in Germany. I asked him why did he buy a van when he moved here. He looked at my 1982 Datsun Diesel PU and asked me "How fast can you go?" I told him 110 KPH (68 MPH) , that is all I am allowed. He said "Exactly, there is no Autobahn here, so my van goes fast enough". I learned a lesson right there.

PS: My ST16 has the one stick antenna and the mushroom antenna on the outside.
 
Despite the fact the signals are digital, doesn't it make sense that more power would equal more reliability of the signal? That is my reason for starting this thread. Sure, 2,500 feet is more than enough. But if the CAPABILITY of the drone to give more range was there, I would feel better when in marginal conditions.

In the USA the maximum power for the frequency bands used are set by FCC standards. If Yuneec is using the maximum power allowed by the FCC then your only path is to improve the antennas and limiting obstructions between your controller and the TH480.

I haven't seen any measurements on power out for the transmitters in the TH480 or the ST16. I guess it's possible Yuneec is not running at max legal power but it seems kind of unlikely.

The frequencies used are in the 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz bands. These are the same frequency bands used by your home WiFi system. Your experience probably tells you how limited that range can be.
 
One other small point I'll make just for the sake of making it. In the US it is illegal to use any antenna other than the one/type used to certify the device. So while the 4Hawks are cool and all, they are not technically legal to use. Now, the likelihood of the FCC catching is nearly zero it is still worth knowing. Because I guarantee you that if you cause an incident and end up in court the plaintiff's attorney will love it if you were operating with an illegal antenna.

But like I said, the FCC has not demonstrated that they give a crap about this. So people can do as they wish, but do it with both eyes open.
 
DJI is capable of long range and better connectivity, hands down.

TH and TH Plus, with using the original antenna has limitations, and where I fly, I limited to 900ft using the stock antenna, and I fly in different, busy urban locations.

When I switched to using the 4Hawks antenna, my range greatly improved, and I proceeded to relocate the compass, I was able to achieve around 2,00ft, and currently I’ve gotten 3,000+ with the reshielding of my RS module.

Having a long range capability does not mean that one will want to fly BLOS, a range test is to measure your drone’s satellite strength.

Presently, I am satisfied, with my drone’s performance, I can fly my drone in a busy area obstruct by buildings with ease and confidence. Do a check search of my mods. they are simple to do.
 
DJI is capable of long range and better connectivity, hands down.

TH and TH Plus, with using the original antenna has limitations, and where I fly, I limited to 900ft using the stock antenna, and I fly in different, busy urban locations.

When I switched to using the 4Hawks antenna, my range greatly improved, and I proceeded to relocate the compass, I was able to achieve around 2,00ft, and currently I’ve gotten 3,000+ with the reshielding of my RS module.

Having a long range capability does not mean that one will want to fly BLOS, a range test is to measure your drone’s satellite strength.

Presently, I am satisfied, with my drone’s performance, I can fly my drone in a busy area obstruct by buildings with ease and confidence. Do a check search of my mods. they are simple to do.
How does a long range capabilities, measure satellite strength? As you travel the count will possibly change. In extreme circumstances you could lose GPS, I never knew there was a way to measure the signal strength of the satellites on the ST16 only the ability to just see them?
 
How does a long range capabilities, measure satellite strength? As you travel the count will possibly change. In extreme circumstances you could lose GPS, I never knew there was a way to measure the signal strength of the satellites on the ST16 only the ability to just see them?

Drone manufacturers cite theoretical communication range, but those numbers can vary greatly in the real world. We see how far a drone can fly while still responding to controls and delivering a smooth, clear video feed *** But do remember the FAA rules call for a drone to kept within line of sight when operating, and we want you to know if you can safely control it within that distance.

(The ST16s in my opinion false peak, when communicating w/ the px4 controller and its system. I’ve proven it many times over.)

How do we measure strength, and avoid getting into problematic situation: A range test will help you determine, and answer the questions that you ask.

PX4 is a great system, I’ve tested under stress, and found confidence, when I lost video feed, during a manual orbit. The problem is Yuneec, and they test and write their build/firmware, because their visual satellite percentage on the ST16s is not precise.

Take a look at my satellites to RC it’s low, yet I’m able to complete this mission.

 
  • Like
Reactions: oldcaptainrusty
Take a look at my satellites to RC it’s low, yet I’m able to complete this mission.

Again, how many satellites your aircraft or transmitter (Controller) are seeing has zero to do with the quality of the connection on 2.4 and 5.8 GHz for control and video. And each has it's own GPS receiver. There is no such thing as "satellites to RC."

If it did then you would not be able to fly with the GPS disabled, which you can.
 
Again, how many satellites your aircraft or transmitter (Controller) are seeing has zero to do with the quality of the connection on 2.4 and 5.8 GHz for control and video. And each has it's own GPS receiver. There is no such thing as "satellites to RC."

If it did then you would not be able to fly with the GPS disabled, which you can.

What com module is the TH Plus is using?
 
Once you know the answer, the manual and source codes has to be rewritten.
 

New Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
20,955
Messages
241,587
Members
27,284
Latest member
csandoval