Go Back  RCU Forums > Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more > Aerial Photography and Video
Reload this Page >

the prefect platform for aerial photography

Notices
Aerial Photography and Video Discuss the growing field of aerial photography and aerial video right here!

the prefect platform for aerial photography

Old 10-04-2007, 11:00 AM
  #226  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Bill,

Could your interference with the G38 be due to ignition spark noise? This is very wideband in nature. You could test this by playing an AM radio near the engine when running. Ignition noise will make a strong buzzing static noise that increases/decreases with RPM.
Just an idea....
Hey! It's raining here in GA! We're currently in drought condition 4, which means no outdoor water use.

Cheers,

Dave
Old 10-04-2007, 11:46 AM
  #227  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Dave,

Ignition noise is a very possible culprit. I will have to take my sony walkman to the field to test that. I am familiar with the technique as it is how many wise ranchers test their electric fence status. In the old days I spent a bit of time on a ranch and to test the fence we would drive up next to an electric fence and then with the radio on AM open the door and touch the fence with the door. You could hear the pulses through the radio and not get personally zapped in the process. We now have horses at home and run a hot fence around them. My Walkman on AM will serve the same purpose and without touching the wire. The GBS with the G38 is a really fun flier without any camera gear. I will have to test it next time we fly.

It is rainy here too with more wind and rain forecasted for the weekend. Perhaps it will be a building weekend.

Bill
Old 10-04-2007, 11:55 AM
  #228  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Hey, Bill,

Glad you don't use the 4-T's method of checking electric fences: "T-T-T-Turn the dang thing off!!"

Well, suppose the ignition IS the problem, what would the next step be? I've got limited experience with gas engines used in aircraft. While probably already familiar to you and Steve, these steps would occur to me, a newbie:
1. Check the spark plug wire for cracks, etc. or just replace it with a new wire.
2. Use a resistor-type spark plug.
3. Use shielded braid around the spark plug wire, like the full scale aircraft do, and make sure you ground one end of the braid to the engine.
4. Wrap aluminum foil or tape around the ignition module (taking care not to get too close to the hot terminals, and inducing an arc over). Ground this foil shield to the engine.
5. Use short leads on the radio, electronics gear, or shield them (Not the antenna!) with foil and ground the foil to the engine.

It helps me to itemize things, sorry about including the no-brainers too.
Cheers,

Dave
Old 10-04-2007, 12:21 PM
  #229  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Dave,

Thanks for the advice but actually it is a moot point. The big gasser is out due to vibration and that dirty oily stuff that comes out the bottom of the plane. The major investment in the 10s Lipo batteries and 160 brushless outrunner will keep us on the "E" side of the world for quite some time. With no exhaust to deal with the camera mount is on the belly and closer to the CG. All that is left in the gasser's future is to tear up the sky on that overgrown stik.

Actually, aided by some imagination enhancing alcohol we have come up with a new use for our heavy lifter. It doesn't have anything to do with aerial photography but it is a bit humorous and the plane did start its career in AP. We are thinking that for our pilot friends who want their ashes scattered over their favorite airfield we should build an "Aerial Burial Hearse". That would be to manufacture a servo opened container fastened to the belly of the GBS that could carry and disperse ashes. We probably would not get any customers but it might be lots of fun to perform repeated tests with 5lb bags of flour. We could re-cover the stik in white with black hearse markings. What do you think?

Bill
Old 10-04-2007, 12:57 PM
  #230  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Bill,

Nah. I don't think you'd have any luck with that. First, there's all those state and city permits. Then the mourners all get ash in their eyes--think of the liability issues. And then there's the total lack of serenity of the gasser engine roaring by. It loses that serious quality that all good services of this type should include. And, where would you get that S-shaped ornament that the real hearses have on their sides?

You might look into crop-dusting very small fields, though.
The plane would probably cover a few rows of carrots or lettuce if you flew the right height. Good ideas, though, trying to make the hobby pay for itself. Keep thinking them up and put them on the forum. I'm waiting for Jettpilot to comment.
Cheers,

Dave
(with tongue-in-cheek)
Old 10-04-2007, 02:47 PM
  #231  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

[8D] I thought that fine tuning the deployment mechanism/procedure would be the fun part. How many bags of test flour would it take optimize the servo opening speed and to perfectly meter the powder out into the slipstream? Or would it be more dramatic to pull into a full throttle vertical and dump the whole load all at once?
Old 10-24-2007, 01:29 PM
  #232  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Hi Steve,

I was testing on 900 mhz 500 mw video and was getting very poor results. With a 8 dBI patch from hyperlink mounted on my head with a helmet, the video would become unusable before 2 miles [:'(] When I set the helmet antenna down on the ground in disgust, the video suddenly became very clear [X(] With the helmit sitting on the ground, I got a range of 8 miles... See the attached picture.

I have read you talk about adding ground planes to patch antennas before, but appears that having ground near a 900 mhz patch makes a HUGE difference !!! I would also guess that it helps at 2.4 GHZ.

I should be able to get more than 8 miles range from 1000 mw 2.4 ghz video. I am going to add external ground planes to my patch antennas on both 900 mhz and 2.4 ghz, do you know what size and distance would make the optimum ground plane ??? I see you listed the size for the 8 dbi patch, but i use a 14 dbi patch for 2.4 which is much larger, and also happens to be the exact same size as the 8 dbi patch for 900 mhz. Lots of us use patch antennas and this would be really good information.

Thanks

JettPilot

Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Ay75772.jpg
Views:	11
Size:	79.2 KB
ID:	789596   Click image for larger version

Name:	Rm38605.jpg
Views:	8
Size:	94.9 KB
ID:	789597  
Old 10-24-2007, 02:28 PM
  #233  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Hello, JP,

Your results made me very curious, so I went and talked to one of our antenna experts. I've made a quick (and very crude) sketch of what he told me.

He thinks that with the helmet on your head, about 4-5 ft above ground, and with the small ground plane included with the antenna, this places the patch too high above a reflecting ground plane. This causes "ground bounce" lobing that will place a deep null (area of very low gain) in your patch antenna pattern. In short, the pattern will have many of these lobes with nulls about every 30 degrees. In my crude sketch on the left, I represent two aircraft, A in the high-gain lobe part of the pattern, and B in the V-notch between the lobes--the null. Depending on your aircraft range and height, and how you hold your head, the plane could be in or out of the pattern, causing poor or unreliable reception.

In the right-hand sketch, the patch antenna is sitting on the ground, and has one fat main lobe. Airplane A or B will both be in the main lobe under this condition. This may be what you are experiencing when you put the helmet on the ground, and notice better range/reception.

This is just a SWAG, but the guy is pretty brainy who told me all of this.
Steve will likely be able to comment based on his greater experience with all of these systems, but I wanted to get you a response quickly.

We think that adding more metal behind your patch will help. Wavelength for 900 MHz is 11.8 inches/0.9 GHz = 13 in. and a patch is typically 0.5 WL per side, so behind the plastic is probably a patch of about 6.5 in square, with a little extra around making the ground plane. More is better, my friend says. Try just adding some aluminum foil behind the patch.

I still think that antenna-on-a-helmet is really clever.
Cheers,

Dave
finally getting rain in Atlanta
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Bz79086.jpg
Views:	9
Size:	18.3 KB
ID:	789622  
Old 10-24-2007, 05:17 PM
  #234  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Thanks for the fast reply Dave, I am here racking my brain, trying to figure out what I should do with my antennas now. Should I take them out of the helmet, and tripod mount them with bigger metal reflectors ? Or should I just set them on the ground ?

I was amazed by the performance difference. I dont think it was lobes, because I tried this a LOT of times, and always went to NO SIGNAL no matter where I pointed the antenna when it was on my head.

So far I get this, more ground plane behind the patch is better How far behind the patch should I mount the ground plane ? Steve Molmer had some very specific figures for the small 8 dbi 2.4 patch, I just dont know what to do with a 14 dbi 2.4 patch and also a 8 dbi 900 mhz patch.

Thanks

JettPilot
Old 10-24-2007, 06:09 PM
  #235  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

JP,

If you go way back in this thread these guys outlined the ground plane specs for me. I believe that his instructions were to mount the ground plane directly on the back of the patch. There is even a ground plane for the fm radio on my Electraglide Classic. It is a square sheet of metal under the rubber mat inside the fiberglass trunk.

Bill
Old 10-25-2007, 07:17 AM
  #236  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

JP,

The patch antenna works best over an infinite ground plane. Anything bigger is better, where it gets a lot better with just doubling the size, etc. As Bill mentioned, the additional ground plane should be close behind the back of the antenna. Not practical, but ideal would be to have some foil or metal sheet actually in contact with the back of your patch (the antenna is a patch--separated by a dielectric (insulating layer), backed by a larger metal piece--the ground plane). Note that the shield or outer conductor of the cable and patch connector will be connected to the ground plane.

Interesting that you get bad results with the helmet in all orientations.... I wonder if there could be a loose connection somewhere, and when you move around, it loses contact. I'm going to take Bill's advice and read back to those posts where the ground plane was discussed.
Cheers,

Dave
p.s. thanks for not flaming my sketch--it was pretty awful but fast. And, no, I'm not a special ed student nor a heavy coffee drinker
Old 10-25-2007, 07:32 AM
  #237  
geh3
My Feedback: (84)
 
geh3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: wilmington, DE
Posts: 1,374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

For what it's worth, I use a large SIG RASCAL with a small digital video camera mounted on a 180 degree rotatable platform above the wing@ the CG. I just fly around and take scenes, then using editing sofrware, edit out the bad stuff and end up with excellent aerial movies! The large rascal is steady as a rock and it is electric powered so there is no vibration and very little engine noise!
Old 10-25-2007, 07:51 AM
  #238  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Hello, geh3,

Thanks very much for the note about the Sig RASCAL. I've been looking for a big plane like the Liftmeister, but they aren't available until Dec. I'll look at the RASCAL, and your recommendation is a valuable data point.
--What engine do you have on your RASCAL?

Cheers,
Dave

Old 10-25-2007, 11:37 AM
  #239  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

No lose connections at all in that system, nothing is ever intermittent with it. Receiver is mounted right behind the antenna on the helmet. Having it on the ground made a big difference at 900 MHZ, not so much at 2.4 ghz. But I did not get a chance to do much experimenting at 2.4... I think my solution will be to put a ground plane on the antenna, this will be easy, an aluminum plate behind the patch twice as big. I can attach some wires to the ground of the patch and screw them to the aluminum ground plane. With that size, the head mount will have to go, but I can put it on a tripod.

The Liftmeister looks like a SWEET airplane Big enough to put a G26 reliable gas engine on it ! And a bunch of gas and gear inside. I think I could make that fly for 2 hours easy with the G26. If my current large plane ever gets crashed, I will be getting a liftmeister. The rascal looks kind of fragile and small for my needs. Doing long range FPV, planes eventually get into dives, etc, I need something that will stay together in a nasty high speed pullout.

JettPilot
Old 10-25-2007, 06:40 PM
  #240  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Here are some pictures Stevel Molmer requested some time ago. This is my 900 MHZ Mobicomm receiver with digital tuner. Inside the case are only two things I got, which is the receiver board, and the digital tuner board. They work very well as advertised, and the receivers seem very sensitive, but I am still having a problem with blurry - ugly video. The signal is good, but its just kind of blurry and the contrast looks bad, its not jumping around, it just looks ugly and is bad enough its not fun to fly by. Both my 2.4 GHZ and 900 MHZ mobicomm receivers are built the same way, in the same sheilded case, and put out ugly video. [:@] Its not the transmitter or the camera, because as soon as I hook up a lawmate receiver the picture is really good.

There is a pot on the receiver board that can be adjusted that affects the quality of the video, I have carefully adjusted this to the best possible picture, but it still sucks. I have also tried tuning around the frequency and changing the IF frequency to solve this. Nothing works. Steve, you menioned a pre emphasis circuit once, but I am not familiar with this. Would this cure my ugly video ?

Thanks,

JettPilot
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Db85885.jpg
Views:	5
Size:	64.7 KB
ID:	790291   Click image for larger version

Name:	Nj25457.jpg
Views:	7
Size:	44.2 KB
ID:	790292  
Old 10-26-2007, 07:14 AM
  #241  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

JP,

When you mention "blurry video" I'm assuming you have adjusted the camera lens for the sharpest image at infinity. I was working on my camera and one of the students came by and saw it and said, "Dude! Why don't you FOCUS your camera?!" (imagine Sean Penn's voice here). But, since you mention that the Lawmate receiver works okay, I guess the camera focus isn't the issue.

The trim pot on the receiver board--what does that adjust? Is it the video level adjustment?

Does the video quality seem poor even when the transmitter and receiver are on the ground close together? Could you maybe post a picture of the video from both good and bad receivers....?
I'm sure when Steve checks in, he'll have some good ideas.

Bill--any experience with this kind of problem?

Hope you all enjoy a great Friday and weekend!
Cheers,

Dave
Old 10-26-2007, 08:58 AM
  #242  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Guys,

If JP has a solid signal but a bad image the first thing that comes to my mind is the surface of his camera's objective lens. One of the reasons that great big lenses acquire such good images is that a minor blemish on the glass only covers a small fraction of the entire surface capturing the light. The smaller diameter the lens the more perfect it has to be. Steve, your suggestion of comparing quality when the distance between tx/rx varies is the path I would take after verifying the integrity of the camera lens. JP, do you have a second camera to verify that your problem is in the electronics and not in the camera? I have just returned from a business trip that did not include much sleep. That is all I can think of at the moment.

Bill
Old 10-26-2007, 09:05 AM
  #243  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

After rereading JPs explanation it would seem that camera lens is not the issue. I would still swap cameras if possible to eliminate signal compatibility from a specific camera as being the problem.
Old 10-26-2007, 07:59 PM
  #244  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

I should have been a little more clear about the fact that the problem is definately not with the camera. I can set up the plane, and with my mobicomm receivers the image is #1 somewhat blurry, #2 and the contrast just looks bad, maybe like its to much ?. Its hard to describe, but the light levels look carpy... A very ugly image to fly by.

Not touching anything on the plane, not even powering it down, I can switch my lawmate reciever into the same system and the image is absolutely perfect. This holds true for both my 900 MHZ systems and my 2.4 GHZ systems, two seperate systems, seperate everything, and exactly the same probelm, So im guessing its just a charactaristic on the mobicomm recievers. The pot is a video level adjust, and everything and I mean EVERYTHING on the mobicomm receivers has been adjusted, and rechecked to optimum. I have tried varying the frequency , IF frequency, and antennas, but none of it ever fixes this issue.

Im guessing there is a circuit or something I have to build or modify to fix this, because it most definately is not a any of the adjustments on the receiver.

Im banging my head against the wall on this one, the mobicomm receivers seem very sensitive, and they can tune to any frequency, I would really like to use them to fly with !!!

JettPilot
Old 10-29-2007, 11:57 AM
  #245  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Hello,

Does anybody have a favorite U.S. source for their video cameras, transmitters, and receivers?
I've been looking at Range Video and wonder if any of you all* have personal experience with them.

Thanks,

Dave

*you all = how people in Georgia refer to one or more persons.
See also " y'all "
Old 10-29-2007, 09:51 PM
  #246  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

I have bought several things from www.rangevideo.com and have had excellent results from them. I also got a pair of video goggles that were bad, range video refunded the money for them with just an email and sending them back. Shipping is fast, and he sells good stuff !!! I recommend them highly.

As far as the best video camera you can get for your plane, I like the KPC-650, its to big for a small electric, but if you have a .40 sized glow plane, its great Much better picture, color, and light handling than anything else I have ever used.

JettPilot
Old 10-30-2007, 03:45 PM
  #247  
JettPilot
My Feedback: (6)
 
JettPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
Posts: 1,161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Here is another question for Steve Molmer. I was looking at your Patch Antenna from before and the ground plane you added. I see that you said the size should be 2 waveleingths from the center left / right and up / down. 1 waveleingth for 2450 MHZ is 4.8 inches, which would make the ground plane for your 8 dBI patch 19.2 inches square. But looking at your pictues, your ground plane is somewhere around 12 inches square [sm=confused.gif] What am i doing wrong here ?

Also, what dimensions of ground plate would I need to put behind a 14 dBI patch at 2450 MHZ whose size is 8.5 X 8.5 inches ? It just about double the size of your 8 dBI patch.

JettPilot
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Hf98569.jpg
Views:	10
Size:	54.6 KB
ID:	793661  
Old 10-30-2007, 04:00 PM
  #248  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

While you are waiting for Steve to comment, did you make it to page 6 of this thread? Steve corrected his earlier formula typos and sent me the post below.

Bill:
I should have been clearer on this.
The main equation you need is setup is below.
Wavelength and frequency are related by the following formula: c = l * u * √er,
Where: c = speed of light
l = wavelength
u = frequency
er = relative permittivity
In this case er = 1
Now by rearranging as to solve for (l)
you will then find for 2.4Ghz the wavelength is 0.1429m were m is in meters.
for 2.45 Ghz the wavelength is:
0.1224 m
122.3643 mm
0.4015 f
4.8175 inch

m = meters
mm = millimeters
f = foot
inch = inch or "

Now total length and width of the plate will be 19.27"
The antenna will be centered at 9.635"
Remember to use ½” nilon stand offs and hardware to mount the antenna. To the plate.
When you get to the cable length let me know and I will do the calculations for you.
Hope this helps.

Steve
Old 10-30-2007, 07:08 PM
  #249  
wjglynn
Senior Member
 
wjglynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

JP,

Have you ever snooped around this site? I believe he shows a conversion to 900mhz for his goof proof patch that might help your research?

http://www.rc-cam.com/gp_patch.htm

Bill
Old 10-30-2007, 08:37 PM
  #250  
S_Dave
Member
 
S_Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: the prefect platform for aerial photography

Bill,

Thanks for posting that link to the G.P. patch. It's very informative and I hadn't seen it yet.

I had a project years ago, to develop a patch antenna that would have 10% bandwidth. There was some literature on the patch, and the folks who make Ball jars for canning had an aerospace division that had done a lot with patch development for missiles and aircraft. They had a good design section in the "Antenna Engineering Handbook" by Johnson and Jasik. I made dozens of patch antennas and swept them on the network analyzer to test their match and performance.

That article that you mentioned is correct, in that a patch can be fairly simple. Some are made of circuit board with copper on both sides--they etch the patch on the front; the back stays copper for the ground plane. Feed point is some distance in from the edge, with high Z at the edge, and lower as you go in--nominally 50 ohms to match coax. The material that's in between the copper determines the bandwidth--how far off perfect freq. it will still perform--with vacuum or air being the best. Thus, his spacer blocks are establishing air as the dielectric, and giving the most bandwidth. More bandwidth also means you can be off the perfect dimensions and it may still work fine, being still inside the tolerance.

Ground plane size isn't critical, but more is better.

Here's something that I don't think has been mentioned--polarization sense. You must have your receiving and transmitting antennas oriented the same--vertical or horizontal, etc. or both CP with the right sense. For a vertical whip antenna, your patch should be turned to be vertical, too. This will mean that the short distance between feedpoint and edge is up and down, not side to side.

Hey, JP,
Thanks for the thumbs up on Range Video. I'll be ordering from them soon.

Good flying weather here in Georgia. Hope you guys are enjoying the same.
Cheers,

Dave

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.