is one brand of parabolic copper booster better than another? i recently bought a pair for my p4
from a local dealer (best buy) but it seems alot of people like the skyreat brand. is there a difference
they all pretty look the same, i tried looking on the net for a review of one vs the other but there is
no such review or i couldnt find one if there was. anyone know? thanks

If you were to remove the plastic shell from the stock antenna, what you would see would be a piece of coax cable that had the insulator and shield removed very close to the end,  leaving a tiny bit of the center conductor exposed.  That is what radiates the signal from the r/c.  Parabolic type range boosters work by taking this omnidirectional signal and reflecting it in more or less one direction.  The copper used in the reflectors  is mostly a gimmick.  In this application,  aluminum foil,  aluminumized mylar or similar would do just as well so long as it was wrinkle free.  The reflective qualities of aluminum and copper are quite similar in this respect.   Also,  there is no need to put the reflective surface on the face of the range booster.  It will work just as well if you attach it to the back,  or even embed it into the plastic.  The rf produced by the Phantoms r/c goes right through the plastic.  Otherwise,  the stock antennas plastic housing would prevent any signal from getting out.  It is important that you have the antenna pointed as directly at the aircraft as possible, because these things have 0 performance to the side.  This is true of the reception of the video fpv as well as transmitting the control signal.  For anyone interested in getting the maximum performance from any antenna system,  I recommend the ARRL antenna handbook.  It is THE definitive source of antenna theory,  design and information

Kneepuck Posted at 2017-11-17 16:07
If you were to remove the plastic shell from the stock antenna, what you would see would be a piece of coax cable that had the insulator and shield removed very close to the end,  leaving a tiny bit of the center conductor exposed.  That is what radiates the signal from the r/c.  Parabolic type range boosters work by taking this omnidirectional signal and reflecting it in more or less one direction.  The copper used in the reflectors  is mostly a gimmick.  In this application,  aluminum foil,  aluminumized mylar or similar would do just as well so long as it was wrinkle free.  The reflective qualities of aluminum and copper are quite similar in this respect.   Also,  there is no need to put the reflective surface on the face of the range booster.  It will work just as well if you attach it to the back,  or even embed it into the plastic.  The rf produced by the Phantoms r/c goes right through the plastic.  Otherwise,  the stock antennas plastic housing would prevent any signal from getting out.  It is important that you have the antenna pointed as directly at the aircraft as possible, because these things have 0 performance to the side.  This is true of the reception of the video fpv as well as transmitting the control signal.  For anyone interested in getting the maximum performance from any antenna system,  I recommend the ARRL antenna handbook.  It is THE definitive source of antenna theory,  design and information

Great info. Awesome actually. Thanks for sharing this.



RedHotPoker

TOZO is another make that gets higher ratings than others.  Here's a link if you'd like to check it out.  I've heard a lot of pros recommend this one.  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01K1B ... colid=2H9Y21S560S5Q

Whether you get a $4 one from ebay or a more expensive brand name model, the effectiveness of the reflector will probably be the same.
The difference between a good one and the others would be in the way they fit the antennas and whether they get in the way of the shutter button.

Labroides Posted at 2017-11-17 20:21
Whether you get a $4 one from ebay or a more expensive brand name model, the effectiveness of the reflector will probably be the same.
The difference between a good one and the others would be in the way they fit the antennas and whether they get in the way of the shutter button.

Thankfully, we can use the camera shutter control on the screen. ;-)


RedHotPoker

RedHotPoker Posted at 2017-11-17 20:34
Thankfully, we can use the camera shutter control on the screen. ;-)

The screen shutter button is not satisfactory when you are concentrating on composition with a moving subject.

Labroides Posted at 2017-11-17 22:06
The screen shutter button is not satisfactory when you are concentrating on composition with a moving subject.

I wouldn't know, I always use the screen tab.  ;-)

I suppose my targets are not moving at high speed either.,.

But I understand your sentiment, makes total sense to me.

Thankfully, I don't find a purpose or need for parabolic reflectors.
Plus that extra bit of RC Kit, would not go well with my Nanuk 945 case. No room. ;-)

Thanks for pointing that out. It is good advice, and information.

I wouldn't wish to block the controls on any of my other important interests as well.
Perhaps that's why I try to avoid interference.

Having less than perfect vision, by adding Lume Cubes to my Phantom 3 Pro, leveled the playing field for me.  Now I can see what most all the others can see... At much greater distances.


Having read your point, I will start to use the RC shutter remote. Committed. ;-)


RedHotPoker

Aloha Danny,

     As all these very experienced commenters point out, the copper is not the important aspect of the product.  But I will confirm that parabolic range exgenders do work and for very little money.  In my case they even penetrate the jungle around my house to such an extent that I can fly with a fair amount of confidence through jungle tree tunnels.  I even have a video about how well it works in a thread with photos.

https://forum.dji.com/thread-60563-1-1.html

There are some risks though.  The parabolics, as we call them, are very directional and can cause you to lose signal if the Remote Controller has the parabolics facing the wrong way.  Please do your research before deciding what you buy and use to fly your DJI Phantom.  If you spend more than $20, you are spending too much.  

     There are also two basic types of boosters for Phantom antennae.  The ones that are connected limit your versitility.  In my thread photos, I show just how versitile those boosters can be if they are not connected.  When I want them connected, I tape them together.  Real simple and inexpensive.

     Hope this helps!

Aloha and Drone On!

Mahalo.....I was just curious because some are 8 dollars and some are 20 dollars so I was thinking maybe some are real copper or a heavier guage than others but I guess it's just marketing

surfnhunt Posted at 2017-11-18 05:22
Mahalo.....I was just curious because some are 8 dollars and some are 20 dollars so I was thinking maybe some are real copper or a heavier guage than others but I guess it's just marketing

They could have 2 cents worth of aluminised mylar and still work.
The thickness of the metal makes no difference.

i bought a cheap 3D printed one from Ebay for my P3S and it doubled my range, also bought another cheap folding style kind for my P34K and Inspire and same thing works as it should. i like the folding style ones just cause in the cases the foil part is protected and when on the antennas it keeps them parallel as they should be

There could be slight difference from brand to brand as the size and shape of of the parabolic arc and placement of antennas in the arc would make the difference.
One with better directional shape and antenna placement would have better range but also would be harder to keep in alignment with the drone at distance.

I read a post that talked about the top 5 boosters and it had 2 or 3 different parabolic boosters and it actually said that one brand was better than another

Link.........?  

surfnhunt Posted at 2017-11-18 11:22
I read a post that talked about the top 5 boosters and it had 2 or 3 different parabolic boosters and it actually said that one brand was better than another

If you mean this piece:  http://www.droneuplift.com/top-5 ... al-range-extenders/

It looks at 3 reflectors, one branded and two generic unbranded models with no way to tell what the last two are.
And there's nothing to indicate these are the best available.
Overall it's a rather dodgy "review"

Some people swear by these things, but I never saw any more range.  Waste o money.

The reflector type device is almost useless in an urban environment, primarily because they are not designed by people who have any real experience in antenna design and secondly because nothing is done to improve transmission/reception at the aircraft end. They are a placebo, and you rarely hear of anyone buying a set and then reporting they were rubbish, because no-one wants to admit they wasted their money.

Geebax Posted at 2017-11-18 16:30
The reflector type device is almost useless in an urban environment, primarily because they are not designed by people who have any real experience in antenna design and secondly because nothing is done to improve transmission/reception at the aircraft end. They are a placebo, and you rarely hear of anyone buying a set and then reporting they were rubbish, because no-one wants to admit they wasted their money.

Geebax, true words!  I readily admit I got clipped for 12 bucks.

ALABAMA Posted at 2017-11-18 16:36
Geebax, true words!  I readily admit I got clipped for 12 bucks.

I returned a SKYREAT one to Amazon recently. It was clearly a fake! The shape was as round as a  soup can and when I aimed a laser at it while mounted, the bounced light hit everywhere But the antenna.

A windsurfer - or a properly designed deflector placed on an omni antenna - changes the omni antenna into a directional antenna.  If aimed correctly, as a transmitting antenna, it will give the receiver better signal strength and therefore better distance.  As a receiving antenna, it will amplify the incoming signal and therefore make a weak intermittent incoming signal a solid signal.  Either way, it extends the range of the connection.  

It has other advantages.  For example, if you know you have interference coming from behind you but not in front of you, the windsurfer will block much of the interfering signal coming from the back.

However, aiming correctly is critical.  A poorly designed windsurfer or a windsurfer not installed correctly or not aimed correctly can result in no advantage, and it can even make the signal worse by interfering with itself (due to half-wave phase-shift) or by amplifying an interfering signal that's in front of you.  

Years ago, hobbyists were using Pringle cans.  And yes, they worked.  Range improved.  Pringle cans, however, may not work as well for 2.4 ghz as they do for 5.8.  So if your deflector looks like a pringle can, be wary.  

The original windsurfer was designed here, copyright 2002, and was primarily used for routers:  http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template/index.html

Within a few years, it evolved to this:  http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template2/index.html

This design works for both 2.4 and 5.8   It's all over the internet.  Sometimes the designer at freeantennas.com is credited, sometimes not.  

The two stock omni antennas sticking up on the more modern drone controllers makes this design obsolete due to their width, since two of them won't fit side by side.  Forcing them to fit won't work well for you.

Don't do this:  https://phantompilots.com/attachments/20150710064257-jpg.24436/

The others which have appeared over the past year or two are more narrow.  They probably won't work as well as Erskine's design, but clearly they add something because pilots have been reporting great distances achieved with the deflectors.  Some sellers have even included Erskine's original drawing on their own site in an effort to promote sales, even while they don't use his design:  




Take a look at the P3 leaderboard and count how many pilots use windsurfers and where they are ranked relative to those who use stock alone:

https://phantompilots.com/thread ... -leaderboard.76464/

I have a buddy in Iowa who is a world class distance pilot and holds the world record in one-way suicide mission distance for a Phantom (19.4 miles), and when I told him I bought a new drone, the first thing he told me was "get a windsurfer."  

Hope this helps.

I like  the ones made from metal and not the plastic reflector type. I could not find the brand I have (2 years old) but I have a link to one example

Link

photo showing them facing up



Rich

Just a word of reminding, we don't suggest using the unauthorized third-party accessories like antennas booster. If the connection distance between the RC and AC is short, please try to adjust the antennas, distance should be greater than height during flight, and please make sure the remote controller’s antennas are positioned parallel to and are pointed towards the aircraft, you can refer to the picture below. Sometimes the flight environment is also a big factor, fly in a wide place with less interference.

I find they work very well, not a placebo as Geebax suggests at all. I posted my test on this forum some time ago..
https://forum.dji.com/thread-92139-1-1.html

Kneepuck Posted at 2017-11-17 16:07
If you were to remove the plastic shell from the stock antenna, what you would see would be a piece of coax cable that had the insulator and shield removed very close to the end,  leaving a tiny bit of the center conductor exposed.  That is what radiates the signal from the r/c.  Parabolic type range boosters work by taking this omnidirectional signal and reflecting it in more or less one direction.  The copper used in the reflectors  is mostly a gimmick.  In this application,  aluminum foil,  aluminumized mylar or similar would do just as well so long as it was wrinkle free.  The reflective qualities of aluminum and copper are quite similar in this respect.   Also,  there is no need to put the reflective surface on the face of the range booster.  It will work just as well if you attach it to the back,  or even embed it into the plastic.  The rf produced by the Phantoms r/c goes right through the plastic.  Otherwise,  the stock antennas plastic housing would prevent any signal from getting out.  It is important that you have the antenna pointed as directly at the aircraft as possible, because these things have 0 performance to the side.  This is true of the reception of the video fpv as well as transmitting the control signal.  For anyone interested in getting the maximum performance from any antenna system,  I recommend the ARRL antenna handbook.  It is THE definitive source of antenna theory,  design and information

you seem to know about antennas,would a taller base type antenna.improve range? just curios.iwas wanting to know how to improve range.

Labroides Posted at 2017-11-17 22:06
The screen shutter button is not satisfactory when you are concentrating on composition with a moving subject.

hey not if the wife is helping fly,shes faster than a speeding jack rabbit on those buttons.ha ha.

repairman Posted at 2017-11-19 04:00
you seem to know about antennas,would a taller base type antenna.improve range? just curios.iwas wanting to know how to improve range.

If you are talking about an external antenna,  then probably not, due to line loss in the coax.

I believe he means this:  



Erskine calls them a WET-11, and makes a point to say that they are not the same as the classic antenna we have on our controllers.  

Seems every time I buy a Sunhans amp, I get one of these included.  I've tried them and they have yet to impress me.  So they always end up in a drawer.  

Mark The Droner Posted at 2017-11-19 14:30
I believe he means this:  

[view_image]

Still a dipole antenna.  I doubt it would increase the range.  An rf amplifier would help a lot, but, sadly, they are frowned upon.

Kneepuck Posted at 2017-11-19 17:30
Still a dipole antenna.  ...

That's an easy assumption to make, but it's apparently wrong.  Erskine goes to a fair amount of trouble to make the point clear that it is NOT a dipole.  He even used three exclamation points!  

http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template/wet-11.jpg

Mark The Droner Posted at 2017-11-19 18:10
That's an easy assumption to make, but it's apparently wrong.  Erskine goes to a fair amount of trouble to make the point clear that it is NOT a dipole.  He even used three exclamation points!  

It appears he is basing his claim on the fact that it has a reflector behind the whip.  The whip is still a dipole, it appears to me.  It just has a reflector behind it, like a windjammer.    And his spec calling for "half as tall as it is wide" would appear to support my assumption.  If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it must be a duck, even with a mirror behind it.  
So far as I know, your only option for increased control range would be a directional antenna in open areas, or, my preference, an amplifier used with an omnidirectional antenna.  Omnidiorectional mainly because I am too lazy to bother with keeping the thing pointed at the aircraft all the time.  The downside is it requires an external battery to operate it, and a minor modifacation to the controller, you need to put a different pigtail on it  that has a bulkhead connector  that you can attach an antenna or, in this case, another coax that goes to the amplifier.  I have done this with my P3S and I get range similar to the Advanced or Pro.  I have never really had an issue with the fpv or telemetry dropping out, but the control signal will drop at all different distances and altitudes without the amp.  

Can you tell me why the whip is thin towards the top and fat at the bottom?  

Mark The Droner Posted at 2017-11-20 02:53
Can you tell me why the whip is thin towards the top and fat at the bottom?

So it looks more whiplike?  Take it apart, you will see  a coax with a bit of insulation and braid stripped off, exposing a tiny bit of center conductor.  Even if it has a small loading coil in the fat part, still a dipole antenna.  To be directional rrequires some sort of wave guide.