5.8GHz Circular Polarized spiroNet Antenna

 Roger 2210 points

The original cloverleaf antenna bi ibcrazy has a gain of 1.2dbi. This antenna is also based on that design and I assume the gain to be close to 1.2dbi too.

 Richtofen 276 points

Entre 1 e 2 Km.

 Richtofen 276 points

LOL - you avoided. the wrath of the ****or by spelling the brand with C instead of K

I use 2.4GHz for RC and 5.8GHz for video with these spironets, and I have no problems. In any case it is a good idea to place your video tx as far from your rc rx as you can.

 waterlogged 2280 points

By far the best available equipment to use is 5.8 ghz. It's is far removed from 2.4, Harmonics don't come into play so it is definitely the best. That's why so much of it is sold. I might mention that being caught with it in just about any country is an offense and does require an Amateur Radio to operate on 5.8. With an output of 200 watts in Australia. Now that would mess up 2.4 ghz :-)

 R/CNewbie 3806 points

Shhhh! No one needs to know we fly over 25mw on 5.8Ghz :D

 Richtofen 276 points

No - similarly to how regular antennae have a length proportional to their wavelength, loops on cloverleafs are proportional to wavelength as well. 2.4GHz cloverleafs are bigger than these. Google the key words and you'll find many sources (not as cute as these little domes).

 J.Ubeda 184 points

Respect to using the circular polarized antennas, that are made for 5,8Ghz on 2,4Ghz systems, it is a not good idea. On all types of antennas, they are made for a frecuency and can work well on nearest frecuencies with minor loss. This means that the antenna it is calculated and made for the central channel of a range of frecuencies and works better when more near to this central frecuency. A antenna made for 5,8 Ghz can not be used on 2,4Ghz systems or viceversa without very great loss.

 Richtofen 276 points

SMA? Yes.

 matthew 1 points

awesome cheers mate

 Richtofen 276 points

STCR351305? That set uses RP-SMA connectors. If you don't have rhem already buy the product 2770...05, same antennae but grey dome and RP-SMA connector. If you already have them, then get adapter.

 Matthew 23 points

Depends which one you mean Crashmaster, the receiver transmitter combo are RP-SMA but the seperate receiver_transmitters are SMA.. Confused yet? If you bought your tx and rx seperately then these antennas are for you.

 crash master 66 points

bought them seperatly so i guess this would work then! THANX!

 Dinny christian 1 points

Tx Rx sold seperate also have RP-SMA ! you need the grey antenna or adapter

 Richtofen 276 points

You should get a clear image over 1Km away with 250mw, but obstacles degrade 5.8 GHz signal sharply.

 waterlogged 2280 points

No problems with any of those power outputs. I'm surprised you're not getting better range than with the rubber duckie antenna. Check you are using the receive antenna and not the transmit. If you aren't getting better range with the correct antenna then raising the power will give little advantage. My 200 mw with these antennas leaves any rubber antenna for dead. I assume you are using the pair. One in the plane or quad and one on your Fatshark.

 srepfler 1111 points

I am using it on ImmersionRC 600mw and works excellent.

 Matus 26 points

it depends on interference in your area, you need to test it for yourself...

 waterlogged 2280 points

The antennas are designed for broadband transmissions but I'd tend to stay close to the center of the band. Just take the lowest and highest frequency and go for as close to the center of both. Some TX/RX units do differ in channels. Channel 4 or 5.800 ghz should do on the Immersion gear or 5.885 on the Boscam gear.

 Richtofen 276 points

I can only say these are excellent, a bit expensive, but excellent. Watch the connector though - these are SMA, but there is an identical product with RP-SMA connectors (same reference but ended in 5). An advantage ovr DIYs is the rf transparent dome that covers the cloverleaf.

 Jordan 6 points

Matt- These are cloverleafs just encased in a protective shell. advantage to a DYI would be saving a little bit of money but spending time on it. good luck

 srepfler 1111 points

Yes, but if you plug video tx without antenna it probably fried.

 MADMAXxxx 2 points

Nope. I am back at using the standard antennas. which shows that there is no problem with video tx or rx themselves.

 Richtofen 276 points

I know polarization is not the same, but if you check a couple of standard/spiro combinations (i.e. use the standard on the tx and test both spiros in the rx) you may detect if one of the Spironets is damaged if you get a significant range difference. Caution: If you use a broken spiro on the tx you may fry it.

 Sawdust 1603 points

I don't understand. Why would you use two 5.8ghz transmitters together anyway? Two receivers makes good sense with something like the Eagletree ground station for diversity, but I don't get why you'd use two transmitters. Am I missing something?

 Nicolas 1 points

sorry i meant to don`t use a 600mw near by another person who use a 200mw transmitter....

 Richtofen 276 points

And using a 600mw near another 600mw (if they are ever in stock agin)? Just use a different channel, although there aren't that many to choose from. So: don´*t buy these products, lest we run out of free channels - Ok, let's not be selfish: buy and enjoy it, it is worth it.

 drBOR 1 points

5.8 is very sensitive to it. With stock whip antennas (on 500mw transmitter) I fly at most on 1km, fuzziness were at any distance.
When began to use circular polarization - I fly on 3km with a clever skew planar set, and more then 5km with clever helical
for example on this video similar antennas are used: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwiRRKPYIqk

 Roger 2210 points

I think you got the RP-SMA connector, the gray colored spironets.

 George 5 points

Yes it is grey is that ok or did I order the wrong set dangit

 Roger 2210 points

The grey spironets are for the generic tx/rx sets, the black ones are for the fatshark devices.

 George 5 points

So o need to buy the black ones ? Thanks for your help

 Roger 2210 points

That or just buy the rp-sma to sma adapter. That will enable you to use the grey spironets in your fatshark products. search ebay for rp-sma to sma adapter.

 JaredReabow 52 points

rather than buy adapter, just make a pin for the center out of wire

 Roger 2210 points

PRODUCT ID: 277000005 will work straight put of the box (without any adapter) with the HK 5.8 200mw tx/rx kit.

 Roger 2210 points

It will not. different connectors. get this one instead. RP-SMA 5.8GHz Circular Polarized spiroNet Antenna PRODUCT ID: 277000005

 Roger 2210 points

It doesn't matter, both antenna works either on rx or tx. but ibcrazy recommends to use the cloverleaf (3 lobe) on the tx and the skew planar (4 lobes) should be used in the rx and its pretty much the convention.

 Tobias 7 points

Thanks Roger for explaining that for me, i assume that the shorter one is the 3 lobe?

 Roger 2210 points

Yes, you can also see how many lobes are when the antennas are upside down.

 tazmadman 22 points

it says under the antennas which is tx and rx so I assume it matters which antenna is used

 Roger 2210 points

No, this CP antenna was designed for 5.8ghz. The 900MHz CP antenna will be bigger than this by a huge margin. :)

 Can'tFly 18 points

A mod is required for the older airwave Rx. It's a bit fiddley but basic and effective. Refer the discussion on the fatshark forum at fpvlab. You remove a tiny 0 ohm resistor that links the DC and RF. I've completed the mod on my sharks using a pair of long nosed pliers. This antenna 10 mins labour is a cheap way of upgrading an old system.

 Can'tFly 18 points

Answered my own question. I went to the fatshark forum at FPVLab. Indeed my version of sharks do not work with spironets. There is however a basic mod that will solve the issue - removing the link b/w DC and RF. See the forum for full details. Basic but fiddly. Alternatively an upgrade rx board will be available. Anywho, I'm off to crack open my sharks... Thanks sandman and waterlogged for your interest.

 sandman_br 483 points

this antennas have a closed loop, which means that positive and negative are connected.

 Can'tFly 18 points

My standard whip antennas are open loop and they work fine. These antennas don't work on my fatsharks. If it's not the closed loop, could it be another problem? I'm running them on hobbyking item:RCV922_5G8_E. Anyone else have same setup? Please let me know if any problems.

 Can'tFly 18 points

Perhaps I should explain... with the vtx on and antennas attached, I get a black screen. Nothing, not even static. It looks the same as AV IN mode with no video lead attached. That means its grounded but no signal. When I remove the antenna I get full picture - with no antenna at all its all clear at close range. Also, I get the same clarity with no antenna on the vtx, so I can't tell if the antenna is actually doing anything at all. Anyone got any advice or similar problem you've already solved? Is it a connection problem or something to do with my goggles can't take closed loop antenna? Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

 sandman_br 483 points

try testing one spiromet and one whip at time, maybe one of the antennas its defective.

 Can'tFly 18 points

Thanks for the interest sandman and advice sandman. I've tried both antennas in the fatshark goggles with no success. I found another 5.8G reciever and used the spironet antennas. I plugged the video out into the AV IN on the goggles. Success! The antennas are working ok. Its my fatsharks that don't work with the spironet antennas. I'm gonna keep testing, and any other feedback would be appreciated, but at this stage I have to conclude with a big WARNING! These antennas don't seem to work with Fatshark RCV922_5.8G goggles...

 waterlogged 2280 points

The fact is you've found something which stumps every person starting out with building antennas. Arrrrggghhh A dead short acros my feed and shield. Not a problem. It is a dead short to DC but not to RF. The antenna will run perfectly connected to an RF surce such as a transmitter but put you multimeter probes across it and it back to a dead short. Don't worry, That's electronics for you. :-)

 waterlogged 2280 points

Sorry your Fatsharks would need looking at before a conclusion could be made. Make sure you're using the correct plugs and adapters, check all wiring for broken cables (swap and test) An antenna is an antenna on any receiver, If it's picking up a definite signal fully plugged in then it's OK. If you can't get a signalvia your Fatshark then it sounds likw a problem with it not the antenna.Try just running a thin piece of insulated wire from the center conducter of the socket in the Fatshark preferably not being held by your fingers. See if you get any sort of reaction from the Fatshark. Try putting the tranmitter on and wear the Fatsharks up close to the transmitter and see if there's a signal, you may have to just toch the center conducter with a small screwdriver or piece of wire and you should have signal by the ton. If you still get nothing then double check power to the Fatshark check all switches are correct, get someone else to check them. Only then you'll know if you have a fatshark fault.

 Can'tFly 18 points

Waterlogged, it sounds like I've virtually done what you've suggested. I've checked both fatsharks and antenna indivdually and they are both working. Let me explain the procedure: With no antenna on the sharks at all I get a good signal (to about 50m, impressive), a wire gives even better. Next I screw the spironet on all the way. When it makes contact BOOM! no signal, just a blank screen. Not even static. The lights are on but nobody's home. Just a black screen. When I remove the antenna again, as soon as the connection with the sharks is broken, BOOM! I get full signal back again. The connection is fine, its somehow the signal that doesn't get through. In summary, The antenna works on any other reciever, the sharks work with any other antenna, BUT sharks plus antenna = fail. I just had a thought, could it be something with the direction of signal, ie ground and RF are back to front. So the center pin would have to be ground and sheild is signal? On a standard antenna that wouldn't matter but on polarized that might... Just a thought, what do you think?

 waterlogged 2280 points

No, there's just no way they can be wired up back to front the way you describe. In fact it would be very hard to do it on purpose, by accident, no way. Are you by chance using any sort of adapter which is used when you plug that antenna in just to that Fatshark but not used when you use it elsewhere. I'm trying to find something which is different when you try it on anything it works on. Let's be logical. you have two fatsharks and two antennas. Antenna 1 works with FS (fatshark) A, Antenna 1 works with FS B. Antenna 2 works with FS A but Antenna 2 won't work with FS B. That sounds the same as you've said above. We can disregard antenna 1 and FS A and FS B Therefore the fault has to lie with antenna 2, you with me? OK is there anything different between antenna 1 or 2? . Maybe an adapter or angle piece, some Fatsharks were built with the antenna socket sticking out horizontally and the latest I believe are vertical. So an angle piece is often used to make the antenna stand upright in one but not the other. When you swap antennas is there anything which is removed from the antenna base. When the antenna is working is it in the same position as when it isn't? Like horizontal when it is or vertical when it isn't? When the antenna is working is it 100% working every single time it's plugged in If you give it a tap whilst it's working does it vary the signal? I'm trying to find out what on earth could cause an antenna to work in one situation but not in another. There just has to be a difference of some sort. Otherwise there is no way it could be faulty, but we know it is so it has to be. My friend has just turned up and has read my attempt and agrees that what you're presenting is, barring a difference in setup is impossible. Can you feed me any more info by chance. One connection is tight whilst the other is loose. I'm clutching at strawers but it has to be staring us in the face.

 Can'tFly 18 points

Waterlogged, thanks for your interest in this little conundrum. I think perhaps you havn't fully read my comments above. Let me explain the situation again for clarity and I'll be very specific: I have two types of antennas, the standard "rubber-ducky" type and these new polarized ones. The "rubber-duckys" work with the goggles no problem. The "rubber-duckys" also work with another reciever I have. So the recievers all work with the "rubber-ducky" antennas. Now for the polarized antennas, they don't work with the fat sharks but do work with the other reciever. That much I have already stated. Now as for the difference in the connection, physically there is none - no difference, that is why all the antennas are equally interchangeable between the two recievers - the connections are all the same. Now, as far as the only DIFFERENCE between the antenna connection - I've noticed with a multimeter the "rubber-duckys" are an open circuit between signal pin and shield, whereas the polarized antennas are closed, i.e. i get about 3-5 ohms accross them. This is the only difference I can see, but in the earlier comments I've been led to believe this is not a problem, but I'm wondering if this has been the problem all along. I'm certain the connection is good - thats precisely why the screen blacks out as soon as they antenna is connected - if the antenna was not connecting, it would do anything, there would be no change. Now I'm wondering if the problem is that the signal leaks to the sheild, since as you said any difference at all must be the cause. Could it be that the antenna is shorting out the reciever in the goggles?

 Can'tFly 18 points

Confirmed! As it turned out the problem was always the antenna is a closed circuit. The antenna is shorting out the reciever - meaning the video link to the goggles drops out, hence the goggles are on but with no video from the reciever its only a black screen. I replicated the same result by shorting the antenna plug with the end of a screw driver. As it turns out the reciever that has always works can't be shorted out in the same way. So the goggles don't have the same insulation. Which is why the "rubber-duckys" always worked - they are better insulated. My question then is this - how do I better insulate the antenna so it doesn't short, or how do I better insulate the reciever in my goggles so they are not affected?

 mr.sneezy 263 points

Sounds like you need a RF Coaxial DC blocker inline with the antenna in your setup. Can be found on Ebay. Used to stop DC from a power feeding type receiver that might use a masthead amp or LNB.

 waterlogged 2280 points

An RF Coaxial DC Blocker. Wow! that's a good name. Would you by chance be referring to the: L-C Power Filter for FPV A/V Systems? If you wish to help anyone please give the correct name for the part as making one up is confusing and wasting the time of the OP. The unit is by no means a DC blocker, it is simply a filter which will remove small amounts of DC noise from a common DC feedline, caused by other components sharing the feedline. I doubt very much this unit would assist in this matter. One way to prove it would be to power the Fatshark completely by it's own battery or power supply. A small amount of DC noise on the line feeding the Fatshark would at worst put noise in the form of lines or dots across the screen. A far better method to remove this noise would be to use a dedicated power supply or battery for the Fatshark. But in this instance simple DC noise wouldn't be causing the problem being experienced. I'm quite certain that nobody using FPV equipment would be in the habit of using either an LNB. LNA or masthead amplifier. Just as a matter of interest, would you mind directing us to this so called DC Blocker as the only one I can possibly think of is a common switch.

 Can'tFly 18 points

Nothing more is required to fix the problem than what I've already described(see the more recent posts above). The fatshark forum at fpvlab gives the full procedure plus some nice pics. 10 minutes and its fixed.

 sandman_br 483 points

with my dji f450 quad i have reached 750m with 250mw stock transmitter. you can expect around 1km withou trees in path. The wire of antenna is flexible and can be bent without break.

 sandman_br 483 points

This antennas is the skew planar and clover leaf ones. The only difference is that the spironets have one cap to protect the lobes to be bent after a crash. I have crashed my dji f450 and teh antenna lost the cap but do not bend the lobes.

 gueko 22 points

We need FPV in Netherlands Warehouse! NOW!

 srepfler 1111 points

Yes, you get two.

 sandman_br 483 points

yes, you get the two antennas. Ome for rx and other for tx.