Range of flight - opened a ticket

[Terry]

I agree with most of these comments as I experience video interference and loss of control at distances less than 1/2 mile. I fly in rural wooded area with 85 flights so far. Line of sight is of course better but still under 1/2 mile. The RTH has never failed, a real lifesaver! So for me it is what it is and I work within the limitations. I have learned to consider Maximum Range on any radio link to be an exaggeration to be divided by at least 2-3. The XSP video/photos are great and it serves me well.

 

[Terry]

Very new at this yet but I was experiencing L.O.S. problems before and after loading 2.0 firmware. What has seemed to have fixed my problem was the purchase of a short braided USB cable made for drones. Got mine from Best Buy for about 18 bucks. I had been using a 6 ft. USB which was not shielded and I think it may have been acting as a antenna picking up lots of interference.

Sure would like to hear details on where to buy short USB cable and if experience has shown any radio distance improvements. A short cable would be nice just to make things neater. I did a lot of searching and came up with nothing.

 

[Louis Mamakos]

Thanks for all the great info and testing guys. I am going to go to a large clearing this weekend and try a long distance flight again and see what I get. I also ordered some 4.5mil EMI/ESD material that I am going to cover the back of my galaxy tab with just to isolate the tablet from the antennas as best as possible and see if that has any positive impact.

I wouldn't install ESD shielding material in the near-field of the antenna.

Maybe because I've been an amateur radio operator for decades, but I'm always sort of aware of the radiation pattern of the antennas, and try to orient them such that the major lobes of the antenna pattern are pointed toward the aircraft. When you interpose more metal junk near the antenna, you're going to distort the radiation pattern and detune the antennas. So don't wrap your USB cables around the antennas and try to orient the tablet and cables away from them. I doubt the range problem you're seeing is a result of radiative interference from your tablet; but that's just a guess on my part.

 

[intrepidusa]

I wouldn't install ESD shielding material in the near-field of the antenna.

Maybe because I've been an amateur radio operator for decades, but I'm always sort of aware of the radiation pattern of the antennas, and try to orient them such that the major lobes of the antenna pattern are pointed toward the aircraft. When you interpose more metal junk near the antenna, you're going to distort the radiation pattern and detune the antennas. So don't wrap your USB cables around the antennas and try to orient the tablet and cables away from them. I doubt the range problem you're seeing is a result of radiative interference from your tablet; but that's just a guess on my part.

Good points Louis, I myself was a electronics engineer in the Air Force from 1985-2000 and worked on HF/VHF/UHF radios of all sizes, up to 10KW transmitters and many antenna types including rotating log periodic antennas that were enormous. My instinct tells me it is reception of signal back from the XSP and not so much the transmission aspect of the controller. The viewing device is defenitely affecting receive sensitivity or better stated causing additional electromagnetic field too close to the antennas. The EMI shielding of the tablet works, at least the data supports it with gains of near 40% from the same exact spot flying the same flight path. The cable shouldn't be doing much, but I like to cover all bases. The XSP's transmitter is likely weaker than the RC, or it would require more battery for higher TX power. Would think it would be probably better in the cellular range of 800-900 MHz and have better building and tree penetration but I'm sure they can't get any bands in that range anymore. That said, some type of higher gain antenna on the XSP would be a game changer. If you look at most racing drones, the antennas for video signal look as though they have some gain designed into them (the mushroom antennas). The XSP design would allow for downward facing antennas along the landing gear versus the simple wire antenna it uses now...might be my next ambitious test if I can find a suitable sized antenna that would be mountable to the landing gear. Video signal is the lesser of the two evils to worry about, its control signaling that needs to be addressed first and foremost.

There was a post in the forums to orient the antannas downward and not up near the viewing device, down at a 45 degree angle pointing the long axis of the blades toward the flight path. If someone would try this one day and see if they get better distance in a known location and report back the results this could be beneficial.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

That is pretty much how I have my antennas all the time @ 45° unless I am flying right over head I will drop them down to horizontal. So far I don't have much trouble with range or video interference

 

[intrepidusa]

Downward 45 degrees?

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Yes downward, the way I have my sun hood setup the antennas really cannot be any place else but 45 degrees. Any higher up and it is hard to hold the controller and see the screen on my tablet.

 

[intrepidusa]

Thanks Agustine for clarifying, I got confused when you said drop them down to horizontal, which is really put them up to horizontal. I made my own sunshade from some cardboard, I don't like using it at all but saves battery in the device not having screen on full brightness all the time for sure.

 

[Terry]

Good discussion hearing about what you guys have tried. Regarding interference caused by phone/tablet in close proximity, a simple way to test would be to remove the phone/tablet from the controller and set it to the side on a lawn chair or table. I will give that a try next flight.

 

[intrepidusa]

Thanks Terry, let us know how that goes...I am sitting sidelined for a bit till mine comes back from Autel.

 

[ronwhet]

The 12" usb cable from best buy is still working well and seems to have fixed most of my LOS problems but I agree with most of you where and when you fly is still a big factor. Here at our villa and surrounded by numerous types of interference and line of sight problems range is limited to half mile or so but at the like I have no trouble flying 1.25 miles. Sorry for not reporting back sooner.

 

[QuadSquad]

Yeah, that's what I thought. What an open door that is.

So if I have no obstacles between me and the drone, and I have a really good set of binoculars, I can fly as far away as the drone will go?

No. If you wear glasses, or contacts, that's ok. BUT..... you can't use anything else to aid your eyesight while maintaining visual with the drone. Your spotter can use binos, or s spotting scope to aid you. Buy, the pilot in command MUST maintain visual contact UNAIDED by anything, but prescription eyeglasses, or contacts.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

In US: Unaided eye (corrective lenses/glasses allowed) is required... day OR night. Binoculars, telescopes, FPV, etc. don't count.

A second person with an unaided eye and in a position to see the drone when you can't due to obstruction or distance AND in constant contact with you as the pilot will also, technically, fulfill the requirement (even by radio or phone) .

Is FPV legal? The FAA’s response was direct and to the point: if a drone is “flown under Public Law 112-95 Section 336 (hobby and recreation), First Person View is prohibited.”

1. Indoor Flights: Not regulated by the FAA, so no rules.
2. Flights Under the Recreation/Hobby Drone Law: Known as the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, requires that a drone be operated within the pilot’s line of sight (among other requirements).
3. Flights Under a Section 333 Exemption: Section 333 exemptions have traditionally been used for commercial drone operations, but could technically be used for any operations that do not fit within the Special Rule for Model Aircraft or other applicable laws.
4. Flights Under a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA): Drone operations by public entities.
5. Flights Under Traditional Aircraft Rules: Drone and pilot must meet the requirements of traditional manned aircraft.
6. Flights Under Part 107 Rule (effective August 29, 2016): Drone operations that comply with the Part 107 requirements (includes passing an FAA test to obtain a remote pilot certificate). The new rule permits FPV flight with the aid of a spotter.

 

[OrangeUFO]

I might be on to something with low memory write speed causing issues. Before I recorded my flight I flew 200' high and flew 1.3 miles out with no issue at all, video link was great. I flew home then attempted same exact route and height while recording and couldn't get pass half mile without issue, after a few attempts I gave up. What I should've done is tried again without recording to see if it was fine again.

 

[Normex]

It would have to be replicated as you mentioned but also by others that have similar issues as you.

Good Luck

 

[Sirloinofbeef]

I kinda like the idea of a mushroom antenna on the drone. Maybe it would help.
I just got my itelite dbs but i havent installed it yet. I plan on doing a couple of flights stock again and then a couple more with the skyreat again and then i will install the dbs. Lets see what bappens.

 

[Sirloinofbeef]

I kinda like the idea of a mushroom antenna on the drone. Maybe it would help.
I just got my itelite dbs but i havent installed it yet. I plan on doing a couple of flights stock again and then a couple more with the skyreat again and then i will install the dbs. Lets see what bappens.

I shouldve mentioned that i fly in a corn field without power lines in the direction im flying in and still havent been able to much over 1/3 mile. 800m seems imposible right now as she sits where i fly.

 

[Normex]

Greetings, how much do they sell the itelite dbs, you must have seen the Raptor which is similar.
I bid you good luck and of course your progress in that regard will be appreciated.

 

[Sirloinofbeef]

Greetings, how much do they sell the itelite dbs, you must have seen the Raptor which is similar.
I bid you good luck and of course your progress in that regard will be appreciated.

The dbs was $122.00 which included taxes and delivery. Got it from carolina dronez.

 

[Sirloinofbeef]

Well i finally went to test the drone today (no itelite dbs) and was very impressed with the conclusions of the 2 flights i did.
1) 300' high straight out.-------------------- Flew 1.23 miles
2) 300' high with skyreat extenders ---Flew 1.25 miles
With the skyreat, i had tons of interference and its was a lot more choppy for lack of better words.
One thing i did do wrong was set the height limit to 300' .. i had to rth manually because i was heading towards a knoll and didnt want to climb a giant oak tree to get it out.
My conclusion so far is the skyreat extenders didnt make any difference that could make me buy them again. Now this isnt to say that it hasnt helped others with there distance.
I do have the itelite dbs that i will install at some point but i want to do some more controlled flights first, maybe..