RCU Forums - View Single Post - Weatronic 2.4
View Single Post
Old 06-01-2009 | 03:11 PM
  #18  
rhklenke's Avatar
rhklenke
My Feedback: (24)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,005
Likes: 0
Received 34 Likes on 21 Posts
From: Richmond, VA
Default RE: Weatronic 2.4


ORIGINAL: mikehannah

Hi
Thanks for the steer. But it confirmed what I had drenged out of the back of my memory ( antenna theory never was my favourite subject and too be honest Maxwell's equations did my head in) but I did remember that flat Antennas were highly directional. So yes you get the gain but at a cost. That being said I am very curious what they have in that weatronics box.

But it doesnt answer my question. Why hasnt anyone else adopted a flat antenna?

M
Mike,

More than likely its because nobody else has a downlink - the Weatronics unit does. In order to get a reliable downlink at the distances our models fly, you have to have a higher gain than simple 1/4 wave dipoles can give you. In the research work I'm working on with NASA, we have a 5W transmitter on the aircraft (at 2.2450 GHz, but that's close enough to 2.4 to illustrate the problem), and a one meter steerable dish antenna that gives us more than 30 dB of gain. Still, at the distances that a jet can fly we get data dropouts. Yes, we are operating at a much higher bandwidth than the Weatronics unit needs to for its downlink, but the bottom line is, you need a high gain antenna on the ground to receive data from an aircraft...

Bob