# Extending the range of R/C



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

I'm a year away from actually acting on my plans for some outdoor railroading (guess why I don't call it "Garden" Railroading). At this point, I'm leaning toward Aristocraft units, brass rail, battery power and CSS remote control. Not sure about sound at this point. 

I've read comments about the distance that CSS is effective for. Since I plan to, at least eventually, have a mainline running most of the way around my 3/4 acre homestead with main operator station at the (rail)yard at the rear of the house, I expect I'll lose control of an engine that's passing by the front of the house. 

Thus, my question: has anyone tried an external antenna to get extra range from the unit? As a licensed amateur radio operator (here come the HAM jokes) I have lots of experience installing antennas on rooftops. That sounds like a good solution to the problem, at least for me. 

I realize that's a year or two down the road, but I'm trying to plan for the "big picture". 

Comments would be appreciated. Guffaws accepted. 

jack


----------



## pimanjc (Jan 2, 2008)

Jack, 
I have no knowledge to share on this topic, but would be highly interested in any possibilities. 
JimC.


----------



## terry_n_85318 (Jan 3, 2008)

I am not familiar with CSS. I know Airwire has a very good range. 

Terry


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

CSS? 

Range has mostly to do with how you arrange the receiver antenna. When I put a 27Mhz receiver in the boiler of my mallet to operate the sound, I ran the antenna along the inside of the boiler top. Had to lay the transmitter on the steam dome to work it Next time I had it apart, I wound the antenna wire around a piece of card and taped it to the backhead. Now it works from quite a ways away. 

You're a ham! You know more about antennae than me


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Jack, are you possibly meaning CVP? All I can find on CSS is Cascading Style Sheets (web site programming) and Corporate Safe Specialists who do have a remote control safe. 

The antenna situations are same as typical ham stuff, you get duckies for the 900 MHz stuff, and long wire for the 27 MHz stuff. Ground planes seem to be pretty ineffective, even though you have the rails (probably since not a good radial pattern). 

73 de N6RGZ


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm not sure what css is either. My experience with RC is far more limited than most people here and I have a smallish layout but so far I can find no rhyme nor reason to range. I have mostly the aristo 75 mhz system and I've tried all sorts of things to mess with range--extending the antenna, wrapping it over external handrails, installing motot noise suppressing chokes, using a "black kat" antenna, and it seems pretty random to me. I have one aristo loco with the antenna soldered to the track leads one with the antenna stretched out under the boiler shell, and they seem about the same. I have a usa trains loco where I just stuck the antenna inside the cab in a jumble and it gets excellent range. I have three old LGB engines and they all seem to get the same range even though the antennas are in different configurations. Probably the best in in this little engine, where I took the antenna and coiled it around a plastic tube and hot glued it to the coal bunker 



But it still seems only slightly different and it to vary with the orientation of the TX antenna or the position of my hand of sunspot activity or the phases of the moon or the stock market. 

I have one airwire tx/rx and it seems to get less eccentric range variations. It's got good range and seems more consistent


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

Sorry I added to the confusion. I meant RCS, not CCS or CSS or whatever else I may have typed in. 

Since my plan is for a long-distance railroad that circles the house, a roof antenna would eliminate the house as signal-blocker so I can maintain control of a train at the other end of the area. I also hope to install a color TV transmitter in the engineer's seat and I'll need a central receiving antenna because the transmitter is only good for about 300 feet of open space. My amateur radio license would allow me to add a power amp, but improving reception of the weak signal would be preferred. 

I'm thinking that the 27 mHz R/C units could have their range extended by swapping the whip antenna with an antenna on the roof. I'd be willing to bet that a simple CB antenna on the roof would offer a fair increase (CB band is on 29mHz: close, but a bit inefficient). Presuming the whip antenna is removeable from the xmtr unit, you'd only need to wire a similar connector to the CB antenna strapped to your chimney. (Roof work is dangerous; do so at your own risk.) Easiest would be a simple wire dipole which could be strung horizontally between two trees, or chimney and a tree, etc. 

Here's a link to instructions to build a simple wire dipole, courtesy of the ARRL (American Radio Relay League) website: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/pdf/9304064.pdf 

If you decide to look at it, notice the dimensions for the "10-meter band". That's 28 mHz, right between CB and your R/C! Close enough. 

jack


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

It will be virtully impossible to achieve good range if other types of RF transmitters such as colour TV cameras are installed inside a loco along with on board battery R/C and the batteries. 
Sound systems may also restrict range somewhat. 

No matter what brand or type of R/C equipment you intend to use, the easiest way of achieving the maximum range possible is to have the batteries and R/C equipment all mounted in a trail car of some description. 
The receiver part should be mounted up in the roof of the trail car as high as possible with the antenna stretched out around the perimeter of the roof. 
Doing this keeps the R/C receiver as far away as possible from any motor "noise" interference and magnetic fields. 
Depending on what type of ON - OFF switch and charge jack you install you will likely also need to add RF chokes to suppress that motor "noise". 
If you choose to use an RCS trail car installation kit the RF chokes are built in. 

The longest range of all, when compared to any proprietary brand of R/C such as RCS, TE, Locolinc and CVP, will be achieved by using a regular Digital Proportional R/C such as made by Futaba and Hi-Tec, married to my EVOLUTION R/C ESC's.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

A small point, you will probably be violating FCC law by putting a higher gain antenna on the transmitter. Anything that transmits must be FCC approved, and the output power is a combination of the electronics and the antenna. You probably won't be having the FCC bang on your door, but you could possibly cause interference to your neighbors. 

Just a small point, most likely nothing will happen. 

Regards, Gerg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, 
Just to be pedantic. 
Not everything transmitting requires FCC approval to be sold in the USA. 

On the 27 Mhz band, provide the transmitter output is crystal controlled and below the specified maximum power output, under FCC rule 95603b, formal FCC approval is not required. 

As an aside. 
I would be delighted if Jack could show me how to increase the power of the RCS TX-24 as it does not have a whip antenna that could be replaced by an antenna on the house roof?????


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually, it is approved as long as it radiates under a certain power output. Adding a higher gain antenna could cause it to radiate over that limit, and thus become illegal. Remember it's the radiated power, not the power at the antenna connector. Take a look at that rule, I'll bet you it says radiated power. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

I take a drive for a few hours to visit a new G layout and have much mail to respond to. Hmmmm.... 

I didn't want to be too specific lest it be perceived that I'm trying to advertise a product I sell (a little sideline of mine). My TV camera/xmtr transmits on 434 mHz (cable channel 59). Its signal is normally good for 3-400 feet in an open area; picture starts to get snowy around 300 ft. 434 mHz is in the amateur 440 band, so I, as a licensed operator, am allowed to use a power amp if necessary to get the job done. For the non-licensed user the unboosted unit is in that grey area of "too weak for anyone to care". Power amp would NOT be a good idea. 

Re: signal strength, different situations have different rules. Most transmitting devices, when outputting within their authorized limits (whether licensed amateurs or laymen), can use any type of antenna: beams, yagis, dipoles, etc. This is sometimes confused with broadcast stations who are licensed for very clearly defined power output and directionality in order to "protect" a neighboring station on the same or adjacent frequency. This is "ERP", effective radiated power. I happen to be the Chief Operator (not Chief Engineer) of a non-commercial station that uses an 11,000 watt transmitter and three-bay antenna to put out 5000 watts between SouthEast and South of our tower, and 15000 watts the rest of the compass. Be glad you don't have to deal with that stuff. 

Beyond all that, I do apprecaite your comments since I have yet to invest anything except thought into Garden Railroading. I'm gradually learning about the hobby to the point that I may break ground next summer, although I may take the plunge this winter and buy an RDC and install TV in it and try it out on a friend's layout next Spring. Your comments help me avoid re-inventing the wheel. 

jack


----------



## Paul Norton (Jan 8, 2008)

It’s amazing how 4 inches in antenna height can affect radio range. My FA-1 has a Black Kat antenna mounted above a 75 MHz receiver. 










This, along with the usual compliment of chokes, capacitors and a telescoping transmitter antenna, will give me reliable and responsive radio range of at least 135 feet. 

While working on the FA-1, I set my engine cradle on the ground with the engine in it upside down. The radio range was a dismal 10 to 15 feet. I flipped the engine over, set it on a test stand and radio range was instantly restored. 

Tony’s comment above lifting the receiver is interesting as I plan to build another Evans power car. Ordinarily I would mount the receiver on the floor of the boxcar and bend the Azarr M-27-L Micro Lite antenna to fit under the roof. 










Perhaps it would be better to mount both as close to the roof line as possible. However I do have a concern about the high center of gravity. 

Here are a couple of hard lessons learned over the years that are worth repeating for those looking for better radio range. 

1. If you intend to use the 75 MHz receiver on-board a locomotive, not in a trailing power car or B unit or tender, radio noise will interfere with receiver’s reception and limit its ability to slow the locomotive down. RCS sell a small circuit board (RK-CHK) that provides the proper radio noise suppression components to overcome this problem. 










If you want to read more, there is an article in the MLS archives about 
Radio Noise Suppression. 

2. The Azarr Antennas, Black Kat for 75 MHz receivers and M-27-L Micro Lite for 27 MHz receivers, are inexpensive but an excellent way to obtain good radio range. Both are small and much easier to install than metre/yard long wires. 

3. A telescoping antenna on a transmitter will dramatically increase radio range. I recently sold Dougald my RS-3 and we attempted to run it using his new transmitter which had the infamous short rubber antenna. Range was a dismal 10 to 15 feet. I removed the antenna and replaced it with a 3 foot length of light wire with a washer on the end. Radio range jumped to 75 feet. When that was later replaced with a telescoping antenna, range of 135 feet (the length of his railway) was reliable and responsive.


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

An excellent and helpful summary, Paul; trualy, #3 should be plenty for most situations. 

I made a rudimentary map of my lot today to get a better feel for the distances and obstacles involved. The back yard is easy, about 100 hundred feet from patio to farthest the mainline is likely to go. Good, so far. But the mainline running around to the front of the house could be, from the patio operating position, 75 feet as the crow flies (through the house!). For the sake of dependable communication, I suspect I'll be strapping a six-foot vertical to the chimney. 

jack 

Let's see....A square + B square = C square.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi Paul. 

Jack was referring specifically to increasing the range of RCS. I use a separate receiver which makes it very simple to raise up high. 

Jack. 

Whilst I certainly agree that a longish extending section antenna would certainly improve the range of RCS, unfortunately it is not possible to fit one to the RCS TX handpiece. There just isn't room in the TX handpiece case. 
Also, mounting a long "poke your eye out" antenna on the RCS TX would kind of defeat the purpose of having the smallest TX on the market. 
When RCS is properly installed, the range will be more than adequate given the layout dimensions quoted. 

I have no idea how mounting an antenna on the roof of the house would benefit on board battery powered locos.


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

Tony - 

Maybe it's because I grew up in the days of AM radio. Your car goes under a bridge and you momentarily lose the radio station. I work in a one-story building where most cell phones can't connect with the outside world. I've been dealing with a Wi-Fi company that wants to put their antennas on our tower because it's the highest spot for miles. 

But if you say I can expect to have good reception 75 to 100 feet away, with the house in between, I'll gladly accept your say so. I don't really NEED another lightning rod up there. 

Regards, 
jack


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Jack, 
75 - 100 feet is perfectly achievable, perhaps even with a house in between. 
How do you propose seeing what the train is doing on the other side of the house? 
Letting any LS locos run unattended and out of view is fraught with danger. 

I still don't understand how you would expect a house mounted antenna to improve the range/reception of a hand held transmitter and an on board mounted battery R/C receiver.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Putting the antenna up high is an attempt to improve the range, but that really only applies when there is something that might get in between the transmitter and the receiver... like the cuvature of the earth, or a building that has a lot of RF absorbing material in it (aluminium siding?). I can understand putting the antenna on the chimney to get the signal down around the sides of the house, but only of the train is not right against the foundation. 

Another problem would be, if the transmitter only has, say 100 ft of range, and the antenna is placed on a 101 ft tower, then the signal will never reach a train on the ground. Also consider the diagonal distance from the transmitter antenna and the receiver in the train on the ground. if the base of the transmitter antenna is 99 ft from the farthest point on the railway and the antenna is 25 ft up in the air, the diagonal distance from the antenna to the train is 102.1 ft. 

There is also the problem of a cable from the handheld transmitter to the antenna. Kind of defeats the purpose of a handheld. You'd need a couple hundred feet of coaxial cable so you can walk to the locomotive while still holding the controller. That miuch coax might have enough loss as to result in very little signal at the antenna end to be radiated.


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

I don't recall saying anything about a 100 ft. tower. It's a single-story house. And I did refer to the various angles involved (that little postscript "A square + B square = C square). 

Nor did I mention "walkaround" at all. The goal in this case, at least occasionally, would be to control the train while seated with adult beverage in hand. The TV camera/transmitter would keep the engineer informed of what's going on from the 1:29 engineer's perspective. A picture leaning to one side would surely indicate a problem that needed attention. 

Curvature of the earth is not the question, it's the walls of my house that might dimish the effective signal. (FYI - the Wi-Fi company I referred to does indeed want as much height as possible even though their signal will be nowhere near the 50 mile horizon.) 

Anyway, I guess we've pretty well beaten this to death. When I get up and going next summer, I'll let everyone know if I make any unexpected discoveries. I do appreciate everyone's thoughts on the matter. 

jack


----------



## Steve Stockham (Jan 2, 2008)

I was talking with Dave Goodson (who has done five RCS r/c installs for me) and was commenting on the receiving distance that I was achieving. Dave told me that, when properly installed, the reception _should_ be at least 75 ft. minimum. He also showed me that the track itself becomes an antennae. This is significant because taking a piece of wire and attaching it to one side of the track and then running it up to about 6 ft. in height will dramatically increase the distance whereby you can control all functions (as much as 150 ft.+!) The transmitter is powerful enough for the range. The trick seems to be in the reception. I was already using this technique for providing track power (which I no longer use) and noticed significant improvement in reception! No 100 ft. towers and no extra antennae!


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By JackM on 08/11/2008 12:24 PM
I don't recall saying anything about a 100 ft. tower. It's a single-story house. And I did refer to the various angles involved (that little postscript "A square + B square = C square). 
Nor did I mention "walkaround" at all. The goal in this case, at least occasionally, would be to control the train while seated with adult beverage in hand. The TV camera/transmitter would keep the engineer informed of what's going on from the 1:29 engineer's perspective. A picture leaning to one side would surely indicate a problem that needed attention. 
Curvature of the earth is not the question, it's the walls of my house that might dimish the effective signal. (FYI - the Wi-Fi company I referred to does indeed want as much height as possible even though their signal will be nowhere near the 50 mile horizon.) 
Anyway, I guess we've pretty well beaten this to death. When I get up and going next summer, I'll let everyone know if I make any unexpected discoveries. I do appreciate everyone's thoughts on the matter. 
jack 




Sorry, wasn't calling into question your expectations... merely pointing out that a tower is only of value if the curvature of the earth interferes with the communications. Some folk that might just skim this thread might tend to think that if an antenna is needed then a taller tower will cure problems, when in fact it will make things worse and they will waste money and time on trying to get the antenna higher. 

As for "walkaround"... you WILL want the controller in your hand at some point in time when you are at the location of the train and not relaxing on the patio. That is the "why" of a handheld remote controller for the train! The folk using track power realized this quite early on when garden layouts went beyond the little circle of track with the power pack close at hand. 

I also see that you are also considering the opposite of what I have been thinking... not only do you want radio control TO the train, but radio response FROM the train (the video system). But the same distance problems are in effect that way too. I have a 2.7MHz video camera that will transmit through the walls of my house, UNLESS "I" am standing between the two antennas! I had the receiver sitting on the VCR in the very front of the house and I took the camera out in the yard by hand. As long as I stood to the side I could get about 125-ft of range, but when I was walking away from the house with the camera (and its antenna) held in front of me, the VCR recorded very snowy pictures. When I turned to walk along the back property line it cleared up pretty good.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Jack, 
I hope you don't think any one is having a go at you. 
I am the manufacturer of RCS and I am always open to ideas to improve the range. 
Far from the subject being beaten to death I still don't understand how you expected a house mounted antenna to work. 
Specifically how you would connect the TX handpiece to the antenna? 
What would it then do? 
It is possible to have a relay station that can amplify the TX signal, but that requires: 
1. A TX handpiece on one frequency the dual frequency amplifier and the loco receiver on a different frequency. 
2. The data transmisssion is slowed down considerably. 
3. Only one combination can effectively be used at a time. 
I doubt very much it would be possible to have a colour TX transmitter and a RCS receiver very close to one another inside a loco and expect both to work correctly. Hence I suggested a trail car install would be the best way to go for the R/C controller.


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

Tony, C.T., et al., 

Let's go back to my original post, which asked: "has anyone tried an external antenna to get extra range from the unit? As a licensed amateur radio operator....I have lots of experience installing antennas on rooftops. That sounds like a good solution to the problem, at least for me." I never said I wanted to put up a 100 ft. tower. However, for about ten years I manufactured and sold a line of outdoor antennas (PVC and CPVC encapsulated) for amateur radio. 
All things being equal (that's the qualifier), I'll take a rooftop antenna to a rubber ducky any day. I raised the question because I plan to have my mainline get out pretty far, often without my personal supervision. 

Actually, from my professional broadcast experience, when dealing with hundreds or thousands of watts, greater height beats the same signal from less height. I like rooftop antennas, so I'll slap one up there in a minute. I was asking if it'd be a good idea in this case. 

At this point, I don't know the power output of ANY R/C system, so I don't know whether loss would be prohibitive thru 50 feet of RG-8, ladder line, or Heliax for that matter. If the antenna isn't attached to the handpiece via an "F" or other connector, I guess I'd have to open 
'er up and see what's what. I'm handy with a soldering iron and printed circuit boards don't scare me (but LSIC does). As to having both R/C and TV xmtr in the same unit, I know how funky intermod can be. Maybe yes, maybe no. My color TV xmtr is about the size of half a stick of chewing gum with a lens stuck to it. For all I know, a piece of tin foil might be all I need to get the spurious emissions, motor noise, etc., out. If I can't get it right, I know the guy who designed it. He might be able to help me. 

Slow down data transmission? That's something I never thought of. You might have me on that one. 

Steve S's suggestion at the bottom of the first page of this thread seems like the best yet for my situation. Makes sense, easy to do, and I won't have to drag out the extension ladder. 

jack 

Funny - right below the box where I'm writing this is an ad that says: "Buy Hi-gain WiFi and Wlan antennas - Booster your internet signal." Doesn't everybody want a stronger signal?


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

OK Jack. 
Now I understand. 

You are not aware of how any of this on board battery R/C for model trains stuff works. 

I respectfully suggest you do some research before spending any money.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

I'll bow to your experience as I don't have that much myself... I only worked for Collins Radio, Inc. (now Rockwell Collins, Inc.) for 40 years, but I got out of the RF stuff abut when Art left and went on to digital avionics and computers. 

But, yes getting at least one of the antennas (transmitter or receiver) away from mother earth usually helps a bit by reducing the effect of ground reflections and signal absorbtion from vegetation (broad succulent leaves absorb RF wonderfully!). But at the usual low power levels of the typical consumer R/C system, much more than twice head height adds little to the usable distance they work at. 

Yet, putting the antenna on the chimney may be a good idea if it is in the middle of your layout... not the physical middle, but the point of "least-obstructions-between-transmitter-and-receiver" middle. 


As for "Doesn't everybody want a stronger signal?"... 

I have set the power level on my wireless router down a couple of notches. I only need enough signal to get from the dining room (where the telephone line is) to the living room (where I can sit in my easychair or the rocker with my laptop PC) and the basement shop (directly under the dining room, where I can reference the web for plans, conversion data, etc.), and I specifically do NOT want "more power" to reach my neighbor kid's bedroom (so that he can chew up my bandwidth trying to break the secure wireless encryption scheme /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/angry.gif ).


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

C.T. - 
"putting the antenna on the chimney may be a good idea if it is in the middle of your layout... not the physical middle, but the point of "least-obstructions-between-transmitter-and-receiver" middle." 
Agreed. I never indicated it was in an inadvantageous location. 

"I have set the power level on my wireless router down a couple of notches....I specifically do NOT want "more power" to reach my neighbor kid's bedroom (so that he can chew up my bandwidth trying to break the secure wireless encryption scheme" 

I did not indicate I wanted to boost my signal to run someone's train a mile away. You missed the irony of that ad popping up during this discussion. 

"yes getting at least one of the antennas (transmitter or receiver) away from mother earth usually helps a bit by reducing the effect of ground reflections and signal absorbtion from vegetation (broad succulent leaves absorb RF wonderfully!). But at the usual low power levels of the typical consumer R/C system, much more than twice head height adds little to the usable distance they work at." 

At last, the kind of information I was looking for! 


Tony - 
"I respectfully suggest you do some research before spending any money." 
Maybe that's why I asked the original question.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Jack. 

So I take it you do understand that it will not be possible to add an external antenna to an RCS TX handpiece to increase range? 

Even if you could increase the range substantially by adding an external antenna, I strongly urge you to reconsider planning to let battery powered trains to run out of sight from the operator for an extended period. 
It will be fraught with danger.


----------

