Re: [RCSE] Molded Supra Antenna Placement - bottom placement

[Raschow]

In a message dated 2/16/2006 11:49:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I tried the thick walled plastic tube along the tailboom - works but only what I consider to be very marginal range (approx 120 feet). DARN!  I was hoping Hartmut/Dave/Simon were on to something, but I guess we're still groping around.    The next time you do a range test, plug up your Picalario - that nice itty-bitty lady in there will likely start saying "ATTENTION!" before you start seeing the controls twitch (particularly if you set the sensitivity up) so you won't have to walk so far/strain your eyes/get muddy.  Then, (for those antenna configurations in which you have the MOST confidence, PLEASE!) fly the airplane and keep track of of the number of "ATTENTION!"s (glitch/pulse omission reports) vs flight time for comparison.  That might take a pencil/notepad/assistant (or other talent, writing with your toes comes to mind), since AFAIK the Pic doesn't keep that data in memory (HELP Hartmut!).  There are other such (older & new) sensors out there that do (I've got one I bought from Mark Schwing (EMS) someplace, and RC guru George Steiner had DIY articles on such in RCM).   If enough folks do this and (carefully!) report the results, we might start to get a stochastic (yeh, eye are an injenyr two!) insight into the practical effects of carbon structure vs antenna performance, since the application of more elegant em theory is (as yet, apparently) inconclusive.  Maybe Gordy could do something REALLY useful by compiling the data.  Might be more helpful than the "I wrapped my antenna around a pair of needle-nose pliers and never had a problem" approach.  Good Lift!