correct di-pole mounting?

[Dusty]

Hey guys, so my Rangelink arrived from China with no fees or charges

I'm just starting to fit the RX to the Tek Sumo and was after some help.

Am I right in understanding that this is the right way to mount a di-pole antenna?





I have some antenna tube for the top part of the antenna, but because I'll be belly landing the wing, I've not bothered with the lower portion... the antenna tube would just be ripped off the first time I land anyway.

Is this going to be OK or should I try to keep the lower part straight?

[Dantian]

Some people have the lower part in a hard tube but make it flex near the top next to the wing using some flexible tube, I've also heard that just trailing the lower part like you have it works good too compared to standard monopole.

[Dusty]

I suppose I could put it in tubing that's about 2cm too short and use heatshrink tube for the flexible part... worth a go I reckon.

either way, getting the "perfect" mounting solution is only a concern when really REALLY pushing the range limits. a monopole "sanders" style antenna could easily let me achieve the distances I'll be travelling. I have no plans to go further than my current VTX/VRX will let me go. cant be bothered with patch/helical antennas as it means having an actual groundstation/tripod with me, I prefer to just carry the aircraft/goggles/transmitter to the field

[MrBen]

a dipole pole even with a trailing ground like that should work better than a sander style mono I use platic antenna tube with a break in it and fuel tube over the break so it flexes

[Cupid Stunt]

I'm confused, I thought you was giving up with longer range stuff and sticking to more basic flying within 1km ?

[Dusty]

no, the flying within 1km is with the skyhunter and no OSD. This tek sumo is for altitude/range, but only as far as the antennas I have will get me. Not spending out on directional antennas.

[Cupid Stunt]

Oh right
What was wrong with your Rmilec then ?

[Dusty]

nothing, sold it whilst it was still in 100% perfect working order. But was put off that it had no filtering. The rangelink has filters built in. I have it here right now and I must say its a lovely unit. just soldered connected it to the 9x and am about to bind/test it

wish me luck lol

[bigMouse]

As MrBen said, a bad dipole is twice as good as a good monopole.
On low power that will get you farther than most other gear...

[Balders]

I use a "bendy" drinking straw for my lower one...

[Dusty]

I've put it in another tube, 2cm shorter than the wire. Heat shrink tube over the gap and hot glued the heatshrink to the wing.

it's now flexible at the point where it meets the wing, but still straight when in the air... albeit pushed back at an angle I guess when flying

[Mancini]

signal wire UP ,ground wire down for dipole.

[bigMouse]

A simple 1/2 wave dipole should behave the same either end up, particularly an airborne one, it would not necessarily apply to other types though!

The ham guys don't recommend mounting them upside down because the cheap commercial ones can have poor seals or drain holes so placing them usd they would fill with water!
On the other hand a ground based usd dipole antenna would probably perform worse because of the infinite ground plane below it.

[Dusty]

cheers guys... I'm with BM on this one... cant see it making any difference being USD if it's in the air... as long as they're both in the same orientation.

however.... just out of interest... how can I tell which one is signal or ground? it came with the rangelink set so I didn't make it... the "spilt" is heat shrinked over so I don't know which one comes from the centre of the cable.

[bigMouse]

In all likelihood, the signal element is a continuation of the feeder and the other element is doubled back under the shrink wrap along the feeder.

The feeder should be kept away from either element, in a wing the dipole is usually fed in at 90 deg to the dipole elements so should be the best option!

Of course, any conductive material in the vicinity of the dipole elements (Regardless of orientation) will have the most significant influence on the field pattern. In our case probably for the worse!