Thread Tools
Mar 12, 2011, 05:54 PM
Registered User
Help!

Poor range: Identifiy this 5.8Ghz(?) antenna


Dissapointed by the performance of my Fatshark 5.8GHz goggles I decided to tear appart one of the antennas!

Can anybody help me and identify what exactly this antenna is? Is it a 5.8GHz? 2.4? Dualband? Dipole? "Mini-Patch"?

Any help appreciated!
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Mar 12, 2011, 07:50 PM
Engineer for Christ
IBCrazy's Avatar
Looks to me like a bazooka dipole for 5.8GHz.
Mar 13, 2011, 03:42 AM
Registered User
the stock fatshark 5.8g antennas are really bad!

get a pair of those and your range will almost double
http://globe-flight.com/3dBi-58-Ghz-Rubber-Duck-Antenna
Mar 13, 2011, 04:48 AM
Registered User
Thanks for your input, unfortunately they are out of stock but I will keep an eye on them! I read that they really can make a difference!
Mar 13, 2011, 09:41 AM
Engineer for Christ
IBCrazy's Avatar
5.8 GHz antennas are extremely sensitive. I am developing some circularly polarized 5.8GHz antennas that have been performing very well for everyone who has tried them.

If you are fairly handy, look up the "cloverleaf" antenna tutorial and build two of those. one for the plane, the other for the RX. You will be impressed with the performance even if the build is done poorly.

-Alex
Mar 14, 2011, 05:03 PM
Registered User
Wow great tutorial, thanks! Just got me some welding wire and tried bending one. Boy do those 5.8GHz antennas get small! But unfortunately I had no luck soldering the two pieces together with electronic solder... Whats the best way to get these together?
Mar 26, 2011, 02:25 PM
Registered User
Finally weather allowed me to test two new pairs of antennas: some selfmade cloverleafs and brand new 5.8 rubber ducks from globe flight.

The rubber ducks gave me some improvement but still nothing serious.
Unfortunately the cloverleafs did not perform as expected and showed worse results as the rubber ducks... Not sure what was wrong, I guess I did not build them good enough? Besides that, I'm thinking maybe the environment (tested in some playground with houses around it) and/or the fatshark RX(/TX) are just bad...
Aug 12, 2013, 12:48 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by nosaari View Post
Finally weather allowed me to test two new pairs of antennas: some selfmade cloverleafs and brand new 5.8 rubber ducks from globe flight.

The rubber ducks gave me some improvement but still nothing serious.
Unfortunately the cloverleafs did not perform as expected and showed worse results as the rubber ducks... Not sure what was wrong, I guess I did not build them good enough? Besides that, I'm thinking maybe the environment (tested in some playground with houses around it) and/or the fatshark RX(/TX) are just bad...
have you tried facing one of the lobes in the front of your plane/multirotor ?

There are 3 lobes on the cloverleaf. I did that for the first time today and surprised my self big time.

try it out if you already havent done it other wise it is clearly magnetic interference. untill you go to another location that is at least an hour away, dont come to any conclusion. dont get me wrong that doesnt mean you are out of the magnetic radiation zone but worth giving a try. hopefully you get no interference and we can conclude it just happens to be that particular area that messes with you.


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help! Fatshark 5.8GHz aviator edition - improve range? BKMorpheus FPV Talk 21 Jan 21, 2012 11:29 AM
Discussion 5.8Ghz and V antenna's crd FPV Talk 110 Jul 10, 2011 11:28 AM
Help! What range for the 5.8ghz 2010 Fatshark + 100mW Tx? Getting 60-100m only! adbo FPV Talk 16 Oct 27, 2010 04:00 PM
Question What do you think about this 5,8Ghz Patch? CyberCrash FPV Talk 3 Oct 25, 2010 03:13 AM
Discussion 5.8Ghz Transmitters and Receivers (allowed 5470-5725mhz range for West europe) ganapati08 FPV Talk 5 Oct 11, 2010 11:09 AM