phantom driver

My Feedback: (32)

I have searched the forums and come up with that some people are for and some are against whip antenas. Brand is the next thing that people differ on, followed by whip Length. I have flown prop planes with Deans 7" antenna and had no problems. I am setting up my first jet and I am considering the Revolution antenna, because it seems to be what most jet flyers are recomending. What do you think?

KerryR

My Feedback: (34)

I have a deans on my Rookie, My yellow A4 and My Avons F104. I 'm very pleased with the range. The rookie has 3 years of flying with no problems (except my landings, The antenna didn't seem to help me hit the runway), I have been flying the A4 for about a year, also has no range problems. I really like the Deans. it screws off for transport . I use a grommet mount, it helps when I hit/bang the antenna.

Hope this helps

Kerry

Wayne22

My Feedback: (2)

I use both the deans 2 piece antenna and the revolution with outstanding results....

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Be aware that there are two different kinds of "whips": base loaded (shorties), and full length. The full length variety keep your antenna the exact original intended length and are best for reception. Base loaded antennas are not what the radio manufacturer intended to be used and will normally reduce your range. But some guys (Gordon Dickens is one) have reported increased range using a base loaded due to the fact that the shorty antenna gets his antenna further from the noisy electronics (ECU, fuel pump, etc.) than the stock string antenna does. But a full length whip is the best choice for radio reception (keeps the original length and gets away from the noise), but is not always practical.

Chris True

My Feedback: (14)

Todd @ Dreamworks carries the 20" full length whips. I use them on all my 3,000 watt EDF's with the Rx mounted as far as possible form the power system. HIGHLY recommended, some may say a bit unsightly but the increase in ground range is astonishing and gives makes me feel good

Hobby Inn

I have a Revolution in my Boomerang and have not had any problems.

tp777fo

My Feedback: (28)

Ive been using Revolution antennas for my last 3 airplanes. Range increased with the change and Ive had no problems. I mount the antenna in the nose pointed forward well away fron all the electrical noise. No stock antenna routed down the fuselage or wing to worry about and no ugly whip sticking out on a nice scale airplane. You will be very pleased.

phantom driver

My Feedback: (32)

I have a Deans base loaded antenna and I like that it can be taken apart, it is short and it is easy to mount. I have seen the Dreamworks 20" whip and I am considering it too. I really like the Deans, but it is so short at 7" that it makes me conserned about limited range.Thanks for your help.

lov2flyrc

My Feedback: (24)

Been using the Revolution Base loaded antenna in all my jets for several years now. Reception is flawless, increased ground range....
Todd

mc3854

My Feedback: (6)

Same for me and the base loaded Deans ! I have more ground range than before. Also using one on the Weatronics receiver! When looking at the data logged it always uses that antennae so it must like it too!

DelGatoGrande

My Feedback: (23)

they are agly .have u seen a full scale with a wip?.dont use nothing ....cut this agly wire from the start....

....i use a whip[&o]....

mc3854

My Feedback: (6)

I have seen many full scale with various antennaes on them but what does that matter?

phantom driver

My Feedback: (32)

Well, I installed my Deans base loaded antenna on my Reaction 54 near the nose vertically through the hatch. I will range check before I fly and replace it with a Revolution base loaded, or a Dreamworks whip antenna if I have trouble. Thanks again to all for your help and advice.

c/f

My Feedback: (1)

Best solution to this debate I've seen to date is what Rod Snyder told me @ jets 66.

He uses the Kraft (base loaded)? and sends the receiver and antenna in to Horizon (JR) to have them install and tune the antenna to the receiver. He says it around $15.

David Gladwin

All this guesswork can now be eliminated by using a Weatronics Dual receiver. This unit records the values of the signals received from its two antennae and that data can be downloaded onto the PC or laptop after the flight . So, the answer is simple; try your various aerials as, say, no 2 in the DR and see what the receiver records for each aerial type. This device is an incredibly valuable and powerful tool for REALLY finding out what is going on in our radio systems.

Regards, David Gladwin.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

The Weatronics looks pretty awesome, solves many problems in one shot, but it's $600 or so, and I don't THINK it comes on 72mhz yet...but I think there are a lot of guys who don't want to throw another $600 into their jet, or their credit card companies won't LET them throw another $600 into their jet!

I have a question about the shortly 7" deans base-loaded antenna. It's very convenient, but I have been unwilling to try it in a larger plane, because of fears about the range. Valid fears, or no?

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

Now THAT is a pretty smart idea.

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

The way I understand it Curtis (and I am not an RF expert) is that EVERY base loaded antenna HAS to reduce your range, ALWAYS. I have typically seen figures like a 10% reduction quoted. A full length whip will always be better than a base loaded for reception. But where a base loaded shines is in an installation where the owner is unwilling to use the best solution, the full length whip, perhaps because of scale appearance concerns. In that situation, using a base loaded whip can sometimes (obviously this is dependent on installation geometry) be better than the original string because it can get the meat of the antenna further away from noisy electronics (pump, ECU, etc) and actually increase the apparent range over the string antenna. But a full length is always better (string or whip) when judged independent of sources of noise. Obviously tuning the receiver to work with the base loaded will improve the situation, but I don't think it gets you back to the same performance as the full length. And some manufacturers won't do that.

A buddy I grew up with has been doing small military drone stuff for 25 years or so. He once told me that they used many consumer R/C receivers over many years and had experimented with different antennas. They always came back to a string or full length whip as the best for range. He once did some experimentation to determine optimum string antenna orientation. He told me that the absolute best way to mount the string was to get it in the airframe's Z axis. In other words, up, away from all of the wires, pushrods, etc. Exactly what you end up with when you use the full length whip.

Don't get me wrong, lots of guys get away with the base loaded set-up, but I believe they are accepting less than max range that way. Make more sense on a heli to me, but if its adequate for a jet, then its OK!

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

"Full length whip" being really only 20"! I have plenty of trust in them, they just put the last 20" on that z-axis and away from the pipe and any CF.
But the little base-loaded deans one, I have flown it pretty extensively in some smaller planes with no apparent issues, but it just scares me for a bigger jet. Also, I ordered the wrong one, the one-peice one, they have a screw-in one that has a vertical mount, mine needs to be velcroed in somewhere, inevitably on the longitudinal axis of the fuse, which does not help things.
I'll take the 20" whip over just the string anyday, just because of the way it puts the antenna on the z-axis, as opposed to the string being mostly blocked by the fuse in many modes of flight...even without re-tuning, I feel safer with the 20" whip...
But while I hear guys saying "no problem" with the short base-loaded ones, I am still nervous.
Deans advertises "adequate range". Which is not the same as "full range". The Revolution one, I don't know anything about.
Will Futaba tune my RX with a new antenna?

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

I remember reading, years ago, that Futaba will not tune a RX for a base loaded. But that might have changed.

I also remember my UAV buddy saying that if you can not get all of the string in the Z axis, getting some of it there (basically an "L" shape, with some in the Y/X plane and some into the Z) still helps a lot.

Shaun Evans

Hi,

I did an experiment years ago with a couple of Hobby Shack 40-sized trainers. Both were on Airtronics Vanguard 6 radio systems. One had the Deans base-loaded whip, the other the stock antenna. Both were on the same channel and flew with the same transmitter. I took off with the Tx antenna down with the stock-antenna plane and got about 175' away (was just turning crosswind) when the plane started to jitter. Out came the Tx antenna and the plane straightened and landed. When we did the same thing with the base-loaded whip plane, the plane took off, climbed out and got nearly a 1/4 mile before it started jittering. This was done at the Palomar club field when it was on Via De La Valle (for those familiar with the area and relative distances...). I'm not sure if that's just a short-range phenomenon and the overall range is somehow reduced, but after that little experiment, just about everyone present started using the base-loaded antenna by Deans.

Terry Holston

My Feedback: (1)

Kinda an extreme way to do a range check........Don'tcha think? LOL




Edited for typos

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Shaun, you should have swapped receivers and did the same test again. I would think that the one receiver was off tune in th right direction to work well with the Dean's and/or perhaps the other was off tune for the string. Other possibility is as above: the plane had some source of RF in it that was killing the string, but the base loaded whip was in cleaner space. In that case, a full length whip would have been even better.

One thing is for sure: if the radios worked better with base loaded whips than strings, the manufacturers would sell them that way so they could brag how much better the range was.

phantom driver

My Feedback: (32)

It sounds to me like this thread is going in the direction of other threads that I have read about whip antennas. Everyone has what works for them, because no body has said they have lost a plane due to an antenna problem. I probably would feel more comfortable trusting my jet to a 20" whip antenna instead of my Deans base loaded one. Not that the 20" whip is for sure better, but I am new to the jet world and I don't want to be the first to lose his jet due to the antenna. Everyone has made very good point as to what they like to use and why, but the whip antenna issue seems to be open as to which antenna is the "right one."

Chris True

My Feedback: (14)

Well, I've had a couple of high power EDF's with range problems. 1 was 3,400 watts and came before I discovered the long whips. I used a deans antenna in it after the intitial range checks were totally unacceptable. With the Deans it improved to marginal and I flew it for a while, eventually the plane got damaged in the hangar and I never fixed it - I had no confidence in flying such a monster in front of crowds with a marginal range check! The second plane was much smaller but still power packed @ 1,000 watts. Same scenario - no go until the deans was installed then I got a marginally OK range check. Flew the plane for a while until one day I launched very hard and fast and flew out at a particularly altitude - PCM LOCKOUT and crash.

Since then I use long whips, I don't have any more marginal range checks, they are all outstanding on each plane I've put the 20" whip on. EDF is a bit harsher environment than a little ECU make your own choices...