Do you use a ground plane for your radio?

[Steve Sands]

I am installing a Garmin GTR 200. The old radio had a ground plane about 2 inches by 3 inches tucked under the antennae. The Garmin says it needs a ground plane at least 18 x 18 with an antennae. What do you all use?

Thanks,
Steve Sands

[desertdave]

I very thin piece of aluminum is all you need.

[Steve Sands]

I very thin piece of aluminum is all you need.

Hi DesertDave, I would use very thin aluminum, yes, but do you have a ground plane and how big is it. Thank you.

[jiott]

I use a ground plane of 4 copper wires, about 18" long, in a cross pattern under my antenna. The wires are easy to zip tie to the structural tubing, and exact 90 degree quadrants are not required.

[efwd]

I use the airframe and the airframe only. Tony Bingelis of Experimental Aircraft fame suggested it (when talking about steel tube airframe) so I followed. I have not had anyone complain and I haven't any complaint either. I use that same radio. I suppose you would need to know what antenna I was using to get the truth as to whether you would get the same mileage. But, apparently a ground plane is unnecessary. Possibly I could get more range maybe but in this slow airplane I always reach my contacts within plenty of time before I reach their airspace.

[alexM]

18x18! Wow.

According to Garmin you'd have to locate your magnetometer about 50' from the aircraft for it to work properly. Yes joking, but they seem super conservative on their installation instructions.

[Steve Sands]

I use a ground plane of 4 copper wires, about 18" long, in a cross pattern under my antenna. The wires are easy to zip tie to the structural tubing, and exact 90 degree quadrants are not required.

Jim, thank you for the note. I like that idea as it seems a lot simpler than a rectangular sheet of thin Al. Hope to meet you at one of the Oregon fly-in's next year.

Steve Sands

[PapuaPilot]

I used aluminum discs for my plane and it has worked very well.

Here is another way using foil tape. There is a video on the EAA Hints for Homebuilders about this method at: https://www.eaa.org/Videos/Hints-for-Homebuilders/Electrical/6264738687001

29482

[jiott]

Eddie, I went for about 5 years without a ground plane in my SS7, and like you had no problems with range. However, 3 years ago I flew to Oshkosh and traveled side by side with a friend in an all metal airplane. We were tuned to the same frequencies and he seemed to be able to pick up ATIS information quite a while before it came thru on my radio (Garmin SL40). That's when I began to realize that my radio was plenty functional, but quite limited in range in comparison to others. After I got home I installed the ground plane and immediately noticed a increase in range. Your mileage may vary, but that was my experience.

[efwd]

Jim, I have an annual coming in February and I was going to do exactly as you have done just to see. I suspect I will gain distance as you have experienced. Just not sure I will ever look to pick up ATIS that far out. Having said that, it is ATIS that I have tried to receive from afar without success. I have to go through Ontario Intl airport airspace before they hand me off to Chino tower. I have tried to get ATIS from both facilities before making my first call but have not been able. So, I just wait and try to monitor Chino while up with ONT tower. Doesn't always work out, hence the reason I was anticipating taking your advice and was going to give it a whirl. I'll let you know.

[P Johnson]

I use the airframe and the airframe only. Tony Bingelis of Experimental Aircraft fame suggested it (when talking about steel tube airframe) so I followed. I have not had anyone complain and I haven't any complaint either. I use that same radio. I suppose you would need to know what antenna I was using to get the truth as to whether you would get the same mileage. But, apparently a ground plane is unnecessary. Possibly I could get more range maybe but in this slow airplane I always reach my contacts within plenty of time before I reach their airspace.

How slow, after an RV8, RV4 I thought with a 912is and Airmaster I would get reasonable cruise performance?

[airlina]

Paul , you are entering a whole new mission envelope with the Kitfox, and totally a different speed profile than your previos RV line . As a matter of fact the slogan for the Kitfox is "its not how fast , but how fun". While it is a great STOL perforner , FOR THIS CATEGORY of airplane its no slouch with the standard (not the STOL) wing airfoil and although I don't have a rotax on my Series 5 (Continental IO-240) , my plane is happy at a 120 MPH TAS cruise speed. I think you will see responses from more owners with differing powerplants that will verify that 120 MPH is pretty standard on the later model Kitfoxes. In my dream world , my Kitfox and an IFR capable RV-7 in my hangar would be the perfect fleet, but I haven't won the lottery yet. Bruce N199CL

[n85ae]

Decent antenna's, and a solid installation is really the key. Ground plane probably has influence
but I'm not sure it's that critical IF your installation is well grounded.

I have in N85AE a Garmin, and a Bendix King KX-155 with the identical Antenna on each (RAMI) I
simply made sure they are well grounded to the airframe and I get really good range with both.
I have been able to talk to KUGN tower from 50 miles away with the KX-155, the Garmin is not
quite as good for range but has never been a problem. KX-155 is pretty old school, but is a really
fine radio

Either Radio has more range than I will ever need in N85AE at normal speeds, and in areas where
I fly (Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota)

Jeff