Max range for nano \ RFU with AIO FPV camera - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Aug 17, 2017, 01:50 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Discussion

Max range for nano \ RFU with AIO FPV camera


I recently got some FPV goggle so my buddy and I decided to check the range of some of our receivers by flying our combat wings out in a safe place till we lost control. He flew his 14 ch Futaba/fasst comp. FrSky diversity receiver and I flew my Futaba 9c\nano or RFU setup. He got out to 1.1 miles and back with no trouble. I tried first with a nano and only got about .7 miles. Next I tried the RFU and was suppried I still only got about .8 miles. We then flew FPV around the runway. He was able fly around behind a row of 4 trees ~150m out with out issue. When I tried it with either the RFU or the nano I lost control. The RFU has been sitting around for a while and I've never used it till recently. The nanos I've been using for years and they have never let me down flying line of sight. I'm just surprised they don't have better range, especially the RFU. Do these numbers sound right? I thought the RFU was to have much greater range than the nano. It's been a few years back but I seem to remember a guy on youtube taking a nano out 1.5 miles flying FPV
Last edited by MickeyMoo; Aug 22, 2017 at 07:09 PM.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Aug 17, 2017, 04:20 PM
Build more, websurf less
FlyingW's Avatar
Interesting result, however; I've learned that the installation and location of the antennas can have a great affect on range.

Are the antennas at least two inches away from any other wires or metal objects or batteries and such? Do the antenna get blocked by large objects aboard like the battery or motor? Are the RFU antenna leads set at 90 degrees to each other and also at least two inches away from other objects and not blocked by other objects?
Aug 17, 2017, 06:24 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingW
Interesting result, however; I've learned that the installation and location of the antennas can have a great affect on range.
The plane is a 37" wing but there was close to 2" clearance. Much better than some of my "line of sight installs" where there is simply no room. Orientation did make a big difference. With the nano, when things would start to get glitchy around max distance, I would turn to come back and loose it in the turn when the antenna was parallel to the line of sight (should have done an Immelman to maintain orientaion). With the XPD I ran a servo extension out a ways on the wing and secured it there with the two antenna at 90 degrees. When it got glitchy I would just turn and was able to make it back.
Aug 18, 2017, 09:29 PM
Build more, websurf less
FlyingW's Avatar
Thanks for the description of your XPS installations. Can you describe the installations of the Futaba receivers that performed well at those distances?
Aug 19, 2017, 06:27 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingW
Thanks for the description of your XPS installations. Can you describe the installations of the Futaba receivers that performed well at those distances?
It was an 7ch FrSky receiver that was FASST compatible. The receiver has diversity and his antennae were mounted vertically at 90 degrees. He used a straw bent at 90 degree attached and inline with the wing and with the antennae inside the straw. My RFU antennae were also at 90 degree but were mounted to the surface of the wing away from any metal and electronics.
Aug 19, 2017, 09:36 PM
Build more, websurf less
FlyingW's Avatar
Ok thanks, interesting. I just can't get my arms around an FrSky RF link being more robust than an XPS RFU link. I feel like something else is at play.

Can you recall if your transmitter antenna was positioned in the same orientation as the antenna in the wing when you lost control? That is, receiver antenna vertical, transmit antenna vertical (or both horizontal).
Last edited by FlyingW; Aug 20, 2017 at 10:08 AM.
Aug 20, 2017, 12:18 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingW
Ok thanks, interesting. I just can't get my arms around an FrSky RF link being more robust than an XPS RFU link. I feel like something else is at play.

Can you recall if your transmitter antenna was positioned in the same orientation as the antenna in the wing when you lost control? That is, receiver antenna vertical, transmit antenna vertical (or both horizontal).
The antennae on both the nano and RFU were both horzontal with the wing. The transmitter antenna was around 30 degree from horizontal. My RFU has been sitting around for a couple of years never used. I don't know if a firmware update would help but it didn't seem to rage test as well as the nano on the ground. If I have time I'll try to range test it again today.
Aug 20, 2017, 12:40 PM
Build more, websurf less
FlyingW's Avatar
Your antenna orientation sounds like it was pretty close to optimal. How about the FrSky/Futaba antennas ground and air?
Aug 20, 2017, 06:38 PM
The range without another transmitter on board is well over 5 miles with either the Nano or RFU. Co-located antennas greatly affect the range due to the Nano and RFU sensitivity. Orientation, moving wires, closely located metal objects, etc. all play a part in the maximum range.

If you want to know the max range without having to find a space large enough, just do a range test. Whatever range you get during the range test can be multiplied by 41.2 to get the max range at full power.
Aug 20, 2017, 09:18 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingW
Your antenna orientation sounds like it was pretty close to optimal. How about the FrSky/Futaba antennas ground and air?
I described the install in post 5 but here are a couple of pic to help.
Aug 20, 2017, 09:22 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew
Co-located antennas greatly affect the range due to the Nano and RFU sensitivity. Orientation, moving wires, closely located metal objects, etc. all play a part in the maximum range.
Jim I did a range test with the nano with and without my AIO FPV camera sitting around 6 inches away and the results were the same. I will try to repeat the test tomorrow and provide some numbers.
Aug 20, 2017, 10:07 PM
Build more, websurf less
FlyingW's Avatar
Can we please see a photo of the XPS setup? Also, what FPV transmitter frequencies and power are you using?
Aug 21, 2017, 01:05 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingW
Can we please see a photo of the XPS setup? Also, what FPV transmitter frequencies and power are you using?
Here is a picture of the setup. I put my lemon Rx back in and the nano is sitting on top of it in it normal place. The RFU is out on the wing were I had it installed and the antennae were taped down at 90 degree separation.

I also did some range tests. The nano tested to around 188ft and with the AIO camera connected it dropped to 110ft. The RFU did around 250ft and dropped to 190ft with the camera connected to the x10. Having the camera on its own power system but in the same proximity made no apparent difference.
Aug 21, 2017, 03:30 PM
Having the Nano sitting on top of an electronic device will not work.
Aug 21, 2017, 11:25 PM
Registered User
MickeyMoo's Avatar
The nano was simple placed there for the picture. I don't normally fly with two receivers or 3 if you count the RFU (also there for illustration purposes only)


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion RFU w/flight controller tholmes345 Xtreme Power Systems 5 Jul 23, 2017 06:54 PM
Help! Binding of the Nano and RFU Receivers RCMC Xtreme Power Systems 6 Aug 23, 2015 07:53 PM
Question Nano and RFU for 3-Axis Heli Gyro System FlyingW Xtreme Power Systems 82 Nov 17, 2014 05:26 PM
Discussion RFU vs Nano?? KB9STD Xtreme Power Systems 17 Dec 09, 2013 08:36 PM
Max Altitude/Range for RC sailplanes Petewp Sailplane Talk 17 Nov 22, 2005 04:27 PM