2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
06-01-2009, 09:37 PM
#26
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Tens of thousands of flight every year- a few problems and the problems can be related to a bunch of items in the plane or a single RF link whats the probability.
06-01-2009, 11:51 PM
#27
Thread Starter
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Hey Guys,
In my first post itself I specified the setup but I'll repeat it again.
Kingcat with JR DSM9 Tx, 9ch Rx, Powerbox Evolution, 2 x 2800mA Powerbox Batteries for Rx , 4000mA Powerbox Batteries for ECU, JR 8511s on all primary surfaces except Rudder and Flap and nosewheel (Hitec), Powerbox Smoke Pump, Jetcat Afterburner Ring, and Jetcat 160.
All equipment was brand new with 25 flights on the whole system.
Everything was checked out before takeoff including a voltage check with a 1amp load , this habit is from my Duralite days before I switched to Powerbox.
None of the surfaces were binding so excessive demand on batteries leading to a brownout was not a possibility.
Anyway ItsNOT the loss that irks me , its the WHY?
All possibilities of operator induced failure were ruled out.
My post is ONLYa Heads Up forall of us on 2.4gHZ, to remind us that the technology is still evolving and is not quite as bullet proof as the manufacturers would like us to believe.
Response from well regarded personalities in this hobbysuch as "No electronics are 100%" and quotes of Quantas' incident are ridiculous !
I've had 100s of flights too first with the Spektrum 2.4 conversion sets and lately with the JRDSM9
There are serious problems with this technology and all Im saying is we asa community have to find out - We cant just respond by sayin "Oh , Ive had 100s of flights with 2.4 so there cant be a problem !" or "It must be the setup "
We investthousands of dollars in this hobby , build and fly something that could be lethal and cause a lot of damage and trust it to a system that has IMO and experience atleast a 1% failure rate - Is this an acceptable risk ?
Xantos
In my first post itself I specified the setup but I'll repeat it again.
Kingcat with JR DSM9 Tx, 9ch Rx, Powerbox Evolution, 2 x 2800mA Powerbox Batteries for Rx , 4000mA Powerbox Batteries for ECU, JR 8511s on all primary surfaces except Rudder and Flap and nosewheel (Hitec), Powerbox Smoke Pump, Jetcat Afterburner Ring, and Jetcat 160.
All equipment was brand new with 25 flights on the whole system.
Everything was checked out before takeoff including a voltage check with a 1amp load , this habit is from my Duralite days before I switched to Powerbox.
None of the surfaces were binding so excessive demand on batteries leading to a brownout was not a possibility.
Anyway ItsNOT the loss that irks me , its the WHY?
All possibilities of operator induced failure were ruled out.
My post is ONLYa Heads Up forall of us on 2.4gHZ, to remind us that the technology is still evolving and is not quite as bullet proof as the manufacturers would like us to believe.
Response from well regarded personalities in this hobbysuch as "No electronics are 100%" and quotes of Quantas' incident are ridiculous !
I've had 100s of flights too first with the Spektrum 2.4 conversion sets and lately with the JRDSM9
There are serious problems with this technology and all Im saying is we asa community have to find out - We cant just respond by sayin "Oh , Ive had 100s of flights with 2.4 so there cant be a problem !" or "It must be the setup "
We investthousands of dollars in this hobby , build and fly something that could be lethal and cause a lot of damage and trust it to a system that has IMO and experience atleast a 1% failure rate - Is this an acceptable risk ?
Xantos
06-02-2009, 02:15 AM
#28
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
ORIGINAL: Xantos
Response from well regarded personalities in this hobbysuch as "No electronics are 100%" and quotes of Quantas' incident are ridiculous !
Xantos
Response from well regarded personalities in this hobbysuch as "No electronics are 100%" and quotes of Quantas' incident are ridiculous !
Xantos
As I said NO electronics are 100% proof against failure and I justified my comment by quoting the recent IRU problems on the A330 and 777.( so very sad that an A330 was lost yesterday just after my earlier post) If avionics designed, built and maintained to the very highest, life dependant, standards can fail (and failure is anticipated which is why there is never ONE critical system in aviation without at least one, sometime several, backups) rather suggests, confirms, that nothing electronic is 100% proof against failure and we risk a failure and the consequences EVERY time we get a model airborne with electronics built to consumer, or any other, standards. Thats the reality of it.
If you cannot accept that the risk exists, and it might just be you to whom it happens,and if the risk is unacceptable, then perhaps this hobby is not for you.Some of us remember starting our R/C on single channel regen sets, the degree of reliability (and sophistication) which we now enjoy was beyond our wildest dreams in those days. and the new 2.4 systems are taking it even further forward with protection from " shoot down ".
That said, the new Weatronics 2.4 will certainly tell youexactly what the Rf link status was at all times as the data recording is crash proof, its in the transmitter ! No more guess work there.
Regards,
David Gladwin.
06-02-2009, 02:51 AM
#29
Thread Starter
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Dear David,
With due respect ,I do find your analogy ridiculous.
You are right when you say NO electronics are 100% proof,
Whatever IRUProblems with 330s or 777s you are refering to - ALLthose problems are orwere eventually IDENTIFIED and thenpin pointed to the failure ofaspecific component.
This is NOT the case with the 2.4 system !
Im happy that you've moved onto the Weatronics 2.4 system and it would be wonderful that you can thensit and analyse what went wrong post a crash , I just hope no one gets hurt when it happens.
Even if your RF link status is online and tells you with the little green light on the Weatronics antenna tells you that you have a good RF link , what are you going to do when it fails and you are 200ft high at 200mph.
My post is simply a Heads Up for all of us using 2.4 gHZ
Xantos
With due respect ,I do find your analogy ridiculous.
You are right when you say NO electronics are 100% proof,
Whatever IRUProblems with 330s or 777s you are refering to - ALLthose problems are orwere eventually IDENTIFIED and thenpin pointed to the failure ofaspecific component.
This is NOT the case with the 2.4 system !
Im happy that you've moved onto the Weatronics 2.4 system and it would be wonderful that you can thensit and analyse what went wrong post a crash , I just hope no one gets hurt when it happens.
Even if your RF link status is online and tells you with the little green light on the Weatronics antenna tells you that you have a good RF link , what are you going to do when it fails and you are 200ft high at 200mph.
My post is simply a Heads Up for all of us using 2.4 gHZ
Xantos
06-02-2009, 04:04 AM
#30
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Xantos,
You are right in pointing out these issues. But right cannot expect to be popular. Remember the average joe is well below average....
Like I said, no answers here. Electronics is not 100% failsafe for sure. However the knowledge applied when designing a certain level of competent electronics( as is required on jets IMHO ) requires more engineering skill than what seems to be the case with whoever designs JR systems. If you only have 20% of the skill required you certainly are going to fall a lot further short of the magical 100% the advertising material and reps would like you to believe..
There is a VAST difference between getting something that works most of the time and something that will fail only due to the uncontrolled odds that makes the 100% figure elude us.
The type of engineering that goes into Passenger Jets we all hope to God is of the latter type...
The Weatronics people seem to have a fair amount more competence than most other players in the market , if early reports are any indication.
You are right in pointing out these issues. But right cannot expect to be popular. Remember the average joe is well below average....
Like I said, no answers here. Electronics is not 100% failsafe for sure. However the knowledge applied when designing a certain level of competent electronics( as is required on jets IMHO ) requires more engineering skill than what seems to be the case with whoever designs JR systems. If you only have 20% of the skill required you certainly are going to fall a lot further short of the magical 100% the advertising material and reps would like you to believe..
There is a VAST difference between getting something that works most of the time and something that will fail only due to the uncontrolled odds that makes the 100% figure elude us.
The type of engineering that goes into Passenger Jets we all hope to God is of the latter type...
The Weatronics people seem to have a fair amount more competence than most other players in the market , if early reports are any indication.
06-02-2009, 07:11 AM
#31
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
ORIGINAL: Xantos
Whatever IRUProblems with 330s or 777s you are refering to - ALLthose problems are orwere eventually IDENTIFIED and thenpin pointed to the failure ofaspecific component.
This is NOT the case with the 2.4 system !
Whatever IRUProblems with 330s or 777s you are refering to - ALLthose problems are orwere eventually IDENTIFIED and thenpin pointed to the failure ofaspecific component.
This is NOT the case with the 2.4 system !
Could you perhaps tell us what you mean by "the 2.4 system"?
Are you referring to a generic problem with 2.4gig transmission and reception?
Are you referring to a generic problem with 2.4gig transmission and reception?
Paul
06-02-2009, 07:38 AM
#32
Thread Starter
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Hi Paul,
When I say 2.4 system Im referring to the JRDSM9 and RX as available commercially .
I dont know in too much detail about the Transmission /Reception theory , but I do know JRlocks on to 2 spots in the 2.4 spectrum whereas Futabas FAAST system hops frequencies.
I really cant offer an opinion on which of the two is better
Im merely using the JR2.4 system as available commercially and adding to it peripheral components such a redundant battery systems,Powerboxes, extra remote extensionsetc in the hope of making it more reliable.
Now what are the chancesthat allthe extra bits could have all failed together at the same time.
Who Knows ?
Xantos
When I say 2.4 system Im referring to the JRDSM9 and RX as available commercially .
I dont know in too much detail about the Transmission /Reception theory , but I do know JRlocks on to 2 spots in the 2.4 spectrum whereas Futabas FAAST system hops frequencies.
I really cant offer an opinion on which of the two is better
Im merely using the JR2.4 system as available commercially and adding to it peripheral components such a redundant battery systems,Powerboxes, extra remote extensionsetc in the hope of making it more reliable.
Now what are the chancesthat allthe extra bits could have all failed together at the same time.
Who Knows ?
Xantos
06-02-2009, 07:58 AM
#33
My Feedback: (309)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Loveland,
CO
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
ORIGINAL: Xantos
We investthousands of dollars in this hobby , build and fly something that could be lethal and cause a lot of damage and trust it to a system that has IMO and experience atleast a 1% failure rate - Is this an acceptable risk ?
Xantos
We investthousands of dollars in this hobby , build and fly something that could be lethal and cause a lot of damage and trust it to a system that has IMO and experience atleast a 1% failure rate - Is this an acceptable risk ?
Xantos
I seriously doubt that there is a 1% failure rate with JR 2.4 systems though, when there are 1,000's of successful flights on JR2.4 systems every day.
I would guess the failure rate is closer to about .01%, and then 90 to 95% of that is caused by improper/poor set ups, so failures of the actual JR 2.4 systems is really closer to .0005%.
Is that acceptable? I would say so. It will never be 100% reliable. Nothing is 100% reliable.
Jim
06-02-2009, 09:47 AM
#34
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Going back to the original question: "Is 2.4G technology right for this hobby?" (with respect to reliability).
It seems the debate has been revolving around the 2.4 since it is a new entry into this hobby. Toultimately answer the question, however, one has to compare the failure rate of 2.4 vs.72MHz (or other older) technologies. Regardless of the reasons, if there is higher failure rate with 2.4, then there is cause for concern regardless of the reason (familiarity issues requiring experience and training, actual system glitch, etc., etc.)
The question is, do facts (not emotion) exist that illustrate the failure rate of new technology vs. old? It is easy to criticize a new technology for the simple fact that it is new and unfamiliar. Plane losses caused by Tx/Rx issues have existed as long as the "RC" has been around, but do we simply accept this as a fact of life with older technologies simply because we are used to them? How many times has someone lost a plane simply because someone else turned on a Tx with the same frequency in the area?
Idon't have the answers,not sure anyone does (Iam sure manufacturers would love to get their hands on the "real"data to accelerate the perfection ofthe technology) just asking the questions to ensure the debate is focused on the right issue.
It seems the debate has been revolving around the 2.4 since it is a new entry into this hobby. Toultimately answer the question, however, one has to compare the failure rate of 2.4 vs.72MHz (or other older) technologies. Regardless of the reasons, if there is higher failure rate with 2.4, then there is cause for concern regardless of the reason (familiarity issues requiring experience and training, actual system glitch, etc., etc.)
The question is, do facts (not emotion) exist that illustrate the failure rate of new technology vs. old? It is easy to criticize a new technology for the simple fact that it is new and unfamiliar. Plane losses caused by Tx/Rx issues have existed as long as the "RC" has been around, but do we simply accept this as a fact of life with older technologies simply because we are used to them? How many times has someone lost a plane simply because someone else turned on a Tx with the same frequency in the area?
Idon't have the answers,not sure anyone does (Iam sure manufacturers would love to get their hands on the "real"data to accelerate the perfection ofthe technology) just asking the questions to ensure the debate is focused on the right issue.
06-02-2009, 11:31 AM
#35
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
been flying r/c since 1963.
went to PCM systems in 85 or 86.
since switching to PCM systems of the 2 major brands, i have had 0 radio related failures. no glitch, no lock out, no shoot down, no unexplained crash.
now
i moved to 2.4 as soon as the tm12 system for futaba came out, and i expect, actually demand, that it be as reliable as the PCM system i left, and so far, it has been.
went to PCM systems in 85 or 86.
since switching to PCM systems of the 2 major brands, i have had 0 radio related failures. no glitch, no lock out, no shoot down, no unexplained crash.
now
i moved to 2.4 as soon as the tm12 system for futaba came out, and i expect, actually demand, that it be as reliable as the PCM system i left, and so far, it has been.
06-02-2009, 11:34 AM
#36
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Anchorage,
AK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Oh my goodness, Xantos. Wait until the users dirtybird, dick Hanson and onewasp get a look at this discussion. There have been several suchthreadsstarted expressing doubts over the reliability of 2.4 GHz systems. Their responses: name-calling. Just preparing you for the impending excrement storm.
I agree that there are some problems, and there has been enough doubt or confusion expressed by guys that have doing this much longer than I (like you, for instance. A King Cat is not a beginner's plane) over proper setup and operation of the various spread spectrum systems that Ihave decided to keep my 72MHz stuff (United States) and leave the headaches to others. Sorry about the loss.
I agree that there are some problems, and there has been enough doubt or confusion expressed by guys that have doing this much longer than I (like you, for instance. A King Cat is not a beginner's plane) over proper setup and operation of the various spread spectrum systems that Ihave decided to keep my 72MHz stuff (United States) and leave the headaches to others. Sorry about the loss.
06-02-2009, 12:17 PM
#37
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Also, the term "2.4" is not that descriptive, it only refers to the allocated ISM band we are using.
When you go down one level of description, there is a bit of understanding of things like FHSS, DSSS but not much. Frequency diversity, spacial diversity (the multiple antennas and the satellite RXs) all play an important role in how the system performs in different applications and different environments.
I saw significant problems only once, at the recent Best in the West. It was a virtually inescapable conclusion that something was wrong, on that day, with multiple SS equipped planes (planes that have since flown with no other changes except field location).
In my book that is not a failure of the hardware, but a link failure at that location AT THAT TIME. That is what is scary, I don't think anyone knows what really caused that. The stories I have heard I think are a bit of a stretch, and designed to make people sleep better at night. Just my .02c
When you go down one level of description, there is a bit of understanding of things like FHSS, DSSS but not much. Frequency diversity, spacial diversity (the multiple antennas and the satellite RXs) all play an important role in how the system performs in different applications and different environments.
I saw significant problems only once, at the recent Best in the West. It was a virtually inescapable conclusion that something was wrong, on that day, with multiple SS equipped planes (planes that have since flown with no other changes except field location).
In my book that is not a failure of the hardware, but a link failure at that location AT THAT TIME. That is what is scary, I don't think anyone knows what really caused that. The stories I have heard I think are a bit of a stretch, and designed to make people sleep better at night. Just my .02c
06-02-2009, 02:12 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vasteras, SWEDEN
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Hi
I am very interested in this case of several reasons.
I also believe that weshould try to find a reason for this and maybe the result could solvea future problem for other guys..
XantosI amvery sorry for your lost of AC.
Is it possible that your transmitter not had optical sight to the AC? Like a person in front of the antenna...car... fence...house...
How was your transmitter antenna located? Pointing on aircraft, pointing to the ground, left-right?
Was the place you were flying on a airfild with secondary/ primary-radar located near bye?
I do remember that we had several problem in the beginning with our Jets and the link even on 35 Mhz when we did not know how tolocate the antennasand what type of antenna to use for optimized result.
I do also believe that we not yet have all the knowledge about the installations and riskswith the 2,4Ghz system so far.
Xantos, your question should be asked and we should always analyse all possible data in a safety reason. I remember many years ago a friend of mine had a transmitter that stopped transmitting intermitent once every 5-10 ouers, that was not easy to find and did also use a lot of the pilots skillduring normal flight and worst of all he did not feel comfortable flying after that. Today he is flying with a new system and is now comfortable flying again.
Yes, I am flying with a 2,4 Ghz system and must say that I am very pleased so far.
Ragards
Anders
I am very interested in this case of several reasons.
I also believe that weshould try to find a reason for this and maybe the result could solvea future problem for other guys..
XantosI amvery sorry for your lost of AC.
Is it possible that your transmitter not had optical sight to the AC? Like a person in front of the antenna...car... fence...house...
How was your transmitter antenna located? Pointing on aircraft, pointing to the ground, left-right?
Was the place you were flying on a airfild with secondary/ primary-radar located near bye?
I do remember that we had several problem in the beginning with our Jets and the link even on 35 Mhz when we did not know how tolocate the antennasand what type of antenna to use for optimized result.
I do also believe that we not yet have all the knowledge about the installations and riskswith the 2,4Ghz system so far.
Xantos, your question should be asked and we should always analyse all possible data in a safety reason. I remember many years ago a friend of mine had a transmitter that stopped transmitting intermitent once every 5-10 ouers, that was not easy to find and did also use a lot of the pilots skillduring normal flight and worst of all he did not feel comfortable flying after that. Today he is flying with a new system and is now comfortable flying again.
Yes, I am flying with a 2,4 Ghz system and must say that I am very pleased so far.
Ragards
Anders
06-02-2009, 05:25 PM
#39
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: palm harbor,
FL
Posts: 2,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
I stayed away from spectrum trchnology ubtil last year when I bought my DX7 and I have to say while its been reliable I have had two incidents with brownouts.I also am certain I lost my last 3D plane to a binding sequence.I think 2.4 is very good for our hobby and I can remember back going to rc meets and being told this or that frequency was bad.usually truckers using jacked up frequencies.So do I trust 2.4 entirely ???well,I am about to install a futaba receiver into my new extra 260 and will use my 9C as the set up.I have full confidence and when in a doubt I still go back to 72 frequency.Sometimes I wonder if we really know all the cons ..but I feel having to do away with a frequency pin is a very very good thing!!!!
06-02-2009, 09:14 PM
#40
My Feedback: (106)
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Xantos, Very glad you started this thread. There is not a think wrong with questioning anything we do in this sport/hobby. Like another said upstream, electronics is just not 100 % Although like Mongo I have had 0 probs with my 10X 72 megs. I am right now in the middle of both depending on what I'm flying. For prop planes 30% and down all the way to park flyers I'm 2.4 on some of them. My turbines is still on 72 with my 10X. I fig. if everyone else at the field is on 2.4 my 10X 72 megs is much safer than it was 24 months ago. Never had a single glitch with it anyway. Just my two pence. I hope you get it drawn out and no more unexplained crashes for a while.
Roy
Roy
06-03-2009, 11:24 AM
#41
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: palm harbor,
FL
Posts: 2,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
hey hooker ...I was laughing as I thought the same thing.If everyone else is on 2.4 that leaves me free on 72.I am also questioning my batteries too.I want to try A123 on my big bird.I am gradually elminating all my 4.8 stuff regardless of capacity and thinkinfg nanophosate batteries are the future just as 2.4 is becoming.I am finally comfortable with lipos although I do have a healthy respect for what can happen they are abused.
06-04-2009, 05:06 AM
#42
Thread Starter
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
Hi Anders !
No there was nothing between the pilot and aircraft. Transmitter antenna was straight pointing away from the pilot like the instructions on the JRRadios website
The field is like a dry lake bed with a 1000' x 40' tarmac , there are no primary /secondary radars for atleast 3-4 miles.
This is our regular flying site .
Anyway Ive stopped trying to figure out the cause ,!
Hope to see you again at JetPower this year again.
Any new developments with Hawk turbines ? Any bigger turbines in the works ?
Best regards,
Nandan
No there was nothing between the pilot and aircraft. Transmitter antenna was straight pointing away from the pilot like the instructions on the JRRadios website
The field is like a dry lake bed with a 1000' x 40' tarmac , there are no primary /secondary radars for atleast 3-4 miles.
This is our regular flying site .
Anyway Ive stopped trying to figure out the cause ,!
Hope to see you again at JetPower this year again.
Any new developments with Hawk turbines ? Any bigger turbines in the works ?
Best regards,
Nandan
06-04-2009, 11:18 PM
#43
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
ORIGINAL: Xantos
Hi Guys ,
Ilost a Kingcat yesterday due to what I can attribute to unexplained 2.4 issues.
I was using a JR DSM9 radio with the 9ch Rx and 2 extra remotes , the kingcat was rigged with 2 x Powerbox 2800mA batts for Rx , 4000mA Powerbox batt for ECU , Powerbox evolution , Powerbox smokepump , Jetcat Afterburner ring and a Jetcat 160.
Aircraft had 25 flights on it without incident data logger had shown Rx and receiver location to be OK - No fades or holds.
Here was an aircraft that was perfectly setup , redundant systems etc and a troublefree history flying at theand same airfield,but on Sunday , on the first flight after takeoff and into the 2nd circuit the Gear dropped and turbine shutdown and no control was restored until impact.
Everything was detroyed !
This is the 2nd time a similar thing has happened to me with a 2.4 system, the first time was with a large Gas heli which went into Failsafe but regained control after a few scary seconds , never flown the heli after that.Again the set up was a fully redundant power system, additional remote extensions and over 10 incident free flights to prove the system
The point is- the 2.4 system seems to have too many quirks and bugs most of which are encountered during setup i.e while binding or after binding some systems will cycle the gear on powering up or a bound system will require to be recycled or have to go thru the binding process again because lights on one remote will keep flashing etc .
Or even worse you could just randomly get hit by the system going into failsafe for no assignable reason whatsoever.
I know there was ahuge controversy about Ali's Hunter crash on RCU sometime agoand the thread ran into many many pages with various people pointing out to the cause of the crash and advocating redundant power supply systems etc.
Itdefinitely beyond doubt that the weakest link today appears to be in addition to batteries , also our preferredprimary control systems
My post is not JRor Spektrum specific , I know Futabaalso has its own issuesin high operating temperatures etc but I have nofirst hand experience with Futaba
I also know that there are many people out there that have many successful flightswith 2.4 systems
I myselfhave logged probably more than200 flights since the spektrumconversion modules came out
IMHO I think if we look at pure percentages,the older 35, 40 , 72mHZ systems are relatively troublefree whencompared to the2.4gHZ technology out there.
The percentage failure rate on the 2.4gHZ seems to be unacceptably high !
In my 20yrs experience with the older FM/PCMsystems I've NEVER had a failure that could not be explained
Interestingly the Europeans do not seem to have switched over wholeheartedly to the 2.4gHZ tech.
My observation is from 3 consecutive years that I have visited the JETPOWER show in Germany - most of the pilots (90%) seemed to prefer the 35 or 40mHZ system - I wonder if there is a reason for this ?
My question for all of us to consider is :
Hi Guys ,
Ilost a Kingcat yesterday due to what I can attribute to unexplained 2.4 issues.
I was using a JR DSM9 radio with the 9ch Rx and 2 extra remotes , the kingcat was rigged with 2 x Powerbox 2800mA batts for Rx , 4000mA Powerbox batt for ECU , Powerbox evolution , Powerbox smokepump , Jetcat Afterburner ring and a Jetcat 160.
Aircraft had 25 flights on it without incident data logger had shown Rx and receiver location to be OK - No fades or holds.
Here was an aircraft that was perfectly setup , redundant systems etc and a troublefree history flying at theand same airfield,but on Sunday , on the first flight after takeoff and into the 2nd circuit the Gear dropped and turbine shutdown and no control was restored until impact.
Everything was detroyed !
This is the 2nd time a similar thing has happened to me with a 2.4 system, the first time was with a large Gas heli which went into Failsafe but regained control after a few scary seconds , never flown the heli after that.Again the set up was a fully redundant power system, additional remote extensions and over 10 incident free flights to prove the system
The point is- the 2.4 system seems to have too many quirks and bugs most of which are encountered during setup i.e while binding or after binding some systems will cycle the gear on powering up or a bound system will require to be recycled or have to go thru the binding process again because lights on one remote will keep flashing etc .
Or even worse you could just randomly get hit by the system going into failsafe for no assignable reason whatsoever.
I know there was ahuge controversy about Ali's Hunter crash on RCU sometime agoand the thread ran into many many pages with various people pointing out to the cause of the crash and advocating redundant power supply systems etc.
Itdefinitely beyond doubt that the weakest link today appears to be in addition to batteries , also our preferredprimary control systems
My post is not JRor Spektrum specific , I know Futabaalso has its own issuesin high operating temperatures etc but I have nofirst hand experience with Futaba
I also know that there are many people out there that have many successful flightswith 2.4 systems
I myselfhave logged probably more than200 flights since the spektrumconversion modules came out
IMHO I think if we look at pure percentages,the older 35, 40 , 72mHZ systems are relatively troublefree whencompared to the2.4gHZ technology out there.
The percentage failure rate on the 2.4gHZ seems to be unacceptably high !
In my 20yrs experience with the older FM/PCMsystems I've NEVER had a failure that could not be explained
Interestingly the Europeans do not seem to have switched over wholeheartedly to the 2.4gHZ tech.
My observation is from 3 consecutive years that I have visited the JETPOWER show in Germany - most of the pilots (90%) seemed to prefer the 35 or 40mHZ system - I wonder if there is a reason for this ?
My question for all of us to consider is :
- [*]Is the 2.4 technology really ready for the hobby ?[*]Or are we enthusiasts guinea pigs for a evolving technology where the manufacturers are doing their R&D at our cost ?[/list]I am definitely pulling out all my old but reliable 35mHZ receivers and possibly go with a twin Rx RRS system - No more 2.4 for me !
Xantos
Roger
06-04-2009, 11:31 PM
#44
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
One thing Ikeep hearing , receiver in hold because of power spikes , needing better batteries and such,
This is a problem I will never have , and the reason is very simple, Ido not ever connect any servos directly to the receiver. The receiver has its own small battery (300ma would be enough)
The servos have there own battery/ies. Oh and one more thing there is no direct electrical connections from the servo/battery to the receiver. so nothing can ever feed back to the receiver causing lock ups , failsafe or anything like this.
Why aren't more people doing something similar???
Roger
This is a problem I will never have , and the reason is very simple, Ido not ever connect any servos directly to the receiver. The receiver has its own small battery (300ma would be enough)
The servos have there own battery/ies. Oh and one more thing there is no direct electrical connections from the servo/battery to the receiver. so nothing can ever feed back to the receiver causing lock ups , failsafe or anything like this.
Why aren't more people doing something similar???
Roger
06-05-2009, 12:52 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vasteras, SWEDEN
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4Ghz - Is it really ready for Hobby use ?
ORIGINAL: Xantos
Hi Anders !
No there was nothing between the pilot and aircraft. Transmitter antenna was straight pointing away from the pilot like the instructions on the JRRadios website
The field is like a dry lake bed with a 1000' x 40' tarmac , there are no primary /secondary radars for atleast 3-4 miles.
This is our regular flying site .
Anyway Ive stopped trying to figure out the cause ,!
Hope to see you again at JetPower this year again.
Any new developments with Hawk turbines ? Any bigger turbines in the works ?
Best regards,
Nandan
Hi Anders !
No there was nothing between the pilot and aircraft. Transmitter antenna was straight pointing away from the pilot like the instructions on the JRRadios website
The field is like a dry lake bed with a 1000' x 40' tarmac , there are no primary /secondary radars for atleast 3-4 miles.
This is our regular flying site .
Anyway Ive stopped trying to figure out the cause ,!
Hope to see you again at JetPower this year again.
Any new developments with Hawk turbines ? Any bigger turbines in the works ?
Best regards,
Nandan
Hi Nandan
You might be doing the right thing , putting it behind you.
But you know that I do notlike to have a unsolved problem...
We will participate at Jet Power as usual, and also let your wishes come through this year.
I am looking forward to meet you all guys at JP and show the news.
Best Regards
Anders
