Solo Range

I guess that is a matter of opinion. I think the two directional antennas look way better than the stock ones.

Course I think this.
View attachment 428

Looks better than this
View attachment 427
Sure.. Had to go and use one of my favorite cars as an example (minus the extra sticking out of the hood). Take a look at my site below. They are all gone now but were all my cars in a 2yr period. All 60-73 american iron.Click on a picture for details and videos..I was buying/selling from home at the time.
http://www.jr56.com
 
Sure.. Had to go and use one of my favorite cars as an example (minus the extra sticking out of the hood). Take a look at my site below. They are all gone now but were all my cars in a 2yr period. All 60-73 american iron.Click on a picture for details and videos..I was buying/selling from home at the time.
http://www.jr56.com

Did not know you were a car guy. I was a purist for a long time but like the hot rodded stuff too.

My last muscle car was a 67 RS Z that I sold to fund our house. And yes it was a real one.

You have had way more nice cars than I have had. Very cool Jub.
 
Did not know you were a car guy. I was a purist for a long time but like the hot rodded stuff too.

My last muscle car was a 67 RS Z that I sold to fund our house. And yes it was a real one.

You have had way more nice cars than I have had. Very cool Jub.
In the 10 years I was buying and selling, probably sold between 200-300 muscle cars. Lived in Phoenix most of that time and had 8 in Barrett Jackson 1 year. Never was fortunate enough to find a real 67 RS Z car. No wonder you funded a house with it! The 69 Z was the car I gauged the market with. When I started a real #s Z in very good condition was in the mid 30s. When I quit buying they were closer to 70. But my personal favorite was always the 70 Chevelle SS LS6 convertible. Saw one at Barrett's go for a cool million!
 
In the 10 years I was buying and selling, probably sold between 200-300 muscle cars. Lived in Phoenix most of that time and had 8 in Barrett Jackson 1 year. Never was fortunate enough to find a real 67 RS Z car. No wonder you funded a house with it! The 69 Z was the car I gauged the market with. When I started a real #s Z in very good condition was in the mid 30s. When I quit buying they were closer to 70. But my personal favorite was always the 70 Chevelle SS LS6 convertible. Saw one at Barrett's go for a cool million!

Don't want to take this too far of topic but do you know my buddy Jerry MacNeish?
 
Don't want to take this too far of topic but do you know my buddy Jerry MacNeish?
The name sounds familiar, but not sure I have had the pleasure. Probably seen each other at shows, sales or auctions.
 
Hey David. Let us know some real stock antenna vs. DBSMOD distance comparisons when you get a chance. I'm assuming you got the antenna they've marketed for the P3, correct?

Thanks!
 
@KRVer yes they are the P3 antenna. He just doesnt have anything listed on site for Solo. But both 2.4 ghz systems.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

I was experiencing some RTH problems as well. So I stole my aftermarket antenna's off my wireless access point and gave those a try. Now I'm going 1500' away 400' up, and that's when I chicken out and bring it back lol. With the stock antenna's I couldn't get higher than 250' even with the limit set to 400'. I never really tested range since it was having trouble simply going up. I did move the antenna and that helped some, but I wasn't getting nearly the range I expected. The stock controller antennas are now on my access point lol.

I live in NH out in the woods, so lots of trees around and I can still get pretty far away. The antenna's I have are about $8 each with Prime shipping, worth the money IMHO.

Here's an Amazon link to the ones I am using now: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004UBUE2O
They screw right on, no adapter needed.
I was actually gonna get those but instead i got the alfa ones, seems to get a lot range give them a try as well, thanks for the info
 
So what is it with the distance thing?

I'm not knocking it, I'm genuinely curious. Coming at this from a film/video perspective, range just isn't that important. It's definitely not something I look for in a drone. For me it's about flight time and the camera/gimbal. The smart shots are what attract me to the Solo (also the ability to use a BlackMagic camera).

Any long range flight I ever fly is a mission planned in Tower or MP, with choreographed camera work (ROIs, Orbits, etc). To fly and work the camera from miles away is just not a feature I would need - it would be too difficult to get the shot.

But that's just me. I'm curious why others seem to be so concerned about range. This was the most popular thread on this site over the last week. I guess maybe if I lived in one of the plains states with nothing but miles of flat farmland I might get into it - but just for fun. I'm having trouble imagining a use case where being able to fly out miles away while *maintaining RC control* is so important (as opposed to a pre-planned long range mission).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doug Benson
Erik,
I have to agree with you. I think the flyers here are split, don't know what the ratios are but some want to get really interesting perspectives of their subject, refine it, produce something they are proud of. At the other end of the continuum are those that the intrigue is seeing just how "far out" they can go and that's the measure of how "good or bad" a product is. No one is right or wrong, just a matter of what we are each looking for. For me, I want to be able to reliably send SOLO either on a controlled mission to an in sight point For example, the start of a sailboat regatta, and capture a multitude of aerial shots. Also, I like the fun of sending SOLO on an extended TOWER mission over terrain that would be un-accessible to me. It is clear the "THE GIMBAL" holds the key to success or failure for a large percentage of the folks here. I just cant imagine it will be a failure, but yet, there are many that have extremely high expectations. In the end, I love this thing and it will provide me with hours of fun and enjoyment. Jus' sayin
 
Erik, I like cruising and seeing sites without leaving home.. I live about a mile from a popular lake and I like taking off and seeing what is going on as I fly up the river, over the dam and to the lake. So a quad to me without range is useless.

Not to mention when you are filming its nice to gut under a tree or turn in a way the sun does not cause glare. The solo is very lacking in this area.
 
So what is it with the distance thing?

I'm not knocking it, I'm genuinely curious. Coming at this from a film/video perspective, range just isn't that important. It's definitely not something I look for in a drone.

But that's just me. I'm curious why others seem to be so concerned about range.

Hey Erik. I too am primarily planning on using the drone for close work videography. My concern with stronger antennas is a more reliable connection to the controller no matter how close I am to the bird. If I choose to fly under a tree canopy or a building overhang (FLY:Manual so not relying on GPS), the last thing I want to happen is a loss of connection to controller resulting in the bird initiating a RTH and attempting to shoot up to it's RTH altitude - that would not be pretty.

In the area I've primarily flown, there is a lot of wifi interference and my indicated signal strength is not particularly strong - I'm looking to beef that up for reliability AND peace of mind.

(Oh yeah... there's also a part of me that just wants to just play with this bird and see how far out it can go... [emoji3] )
 
Hey Erik. I too am primarily planning on using the drone for close work videography. My concern with stronger antennas is a more reliable connection to the controller no matter how close I am to the bird. If I choose to fly under a tree canopy or a building overhang (FLY:Manual so not relying on GPS), the last thing I want to happen is a loss of connection to controller resulting in the bird initiating a RTH and attempting to shoot up to it's RTH altitude - that would not be pretty.

In the area I've primarily flown, there is a lot of wifi interference and my indicated signal strength is not particularly strong - I'm looking to beef that up for reliability AND peace of mind.

(Oh yeah... there's also a part of me that just wants to just play with this bird and see how far out it can go... [emoji3] )
What I'd really like to test at some point is the benefit of omni-directional antennas for the kind of filming I do, vs the long range antennas which are directional, and therefore more sensitive to how the controller is pointed. It will take a bit of testing, but I am guessing that I will probably go for a combo of one panel and one omnidirectional. That's worked pretty well on my black perl monitor.

There hasn't been much discussion of setting up repeaters or relays, but I'll probably be doing that as well if a shoot requires it.
 
Interesting -- hadn't thought of that as a possibility.
Yeah, I'm of two minds on the panel antennas. Or even the circulars. Yes they give you range, but you definitely need to think about which way you are aiming your controller. When you have a complex shoot, the less you have to think about, the better.

Instead of a combo, now I'm thinking I'll probably have a couple sets of antenna. I'll switch in whatever is best for the type of shoot I'm doing.

Back on the range topic. Do you guys who go for distance find altitude makes a difference? ie. can you get more range at sea level vs 3,000 feet.
 
Yes they give you range, but you definitely need to think about which way you are aiming your controller. When you have a complex shoot, the less you have to think about, the better.

Yes, I agree. Theory would tell us that the gain comes from being directional. It has to as antennas do not amplify they just redirect the signal.

My gut instinct is the DBS panel is working better all around. Maybe the stock dipoles are shielded by the tablet. I dont know.

I am going to test later today flying 500 to 750 around me in all directions without turning around and see how it acts.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
13,096
Messages
147,751
Members
16,067
Latest member
Minh44