Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
05-08-2007, 01:44 PM
#76
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: Ron101
What about Weatronic Receivers and good old PCM.
I was hearing such good things about this combo... then with the influx of SS I haven’t heard as much
Would you put money into Weatronics PCM with spread spectrum on its way in?
What about Weatronic Receivers and good old PCM.
I was hearing such good things about this combo... then with the influx of SS I haven’t heard as much
Would you put money into Weatronics PCM with spread spectrum on its way in?
it goes really fast , check in about a year from now..
i am sure still 80% of all people will be using a "vintage" 35-70mhz system.........
05-08-2007, 02:09 PM
#77
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
"do you really think Weatronic has not allready designed or will be using spektrum chips for their next gen Receivers?
it goes really fast , check in about a year from now..
i am sure still 80% of all people will be using a "vintage" 35-70mhz system......... "
Very True...
I'll be watching... in about six months I will really need more than my futaba 9c
I hope it's sorted out by then
it goes really fast , check in about a year from now..
i am sure still 80% of all people will be using a "vintage" 35-70mhz system......... "
Very True...
I'll be watching... in about six months I will really need more than my futaba 9c
I hope it's sorted out by then
05-08-2007, 05:13 PM
#78
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MelbourneVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
A more appealing (ego trip for me) idea would be to make it "open source".
05-08-2007, 05:14 PM
#79
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Honolulu,
HI
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
How about the DPSI Twin by EMCOTEC?
http://www.rc-electronic.com/html/en.../englisch.html
You could use 2 receivers and 2 transmitters on different freq 2.4 on the main and 72 for the backup if you want to test it with some backup.
Desert aircraft is a dealer in the US, It's not cheap and you would have to have someone holding the other TX while you fly. But at least you could have some backup in the larger jets that this system could fit in.
http://www.rc-electronic.com/html/en.../englisch.html
You could use 2 receivers and 2 transmitters on different freq 2.4 on the main and 72 for the backup if you want to test it with some backup.
Desert aircraft is a dealer in the US, It's not cheap and you would have to have someone holding the other TX while you fly. But at least you could have some backup in the larger jets that this system could fit in.
05-08-2007, 05:32 PM
#80
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Honolulu,
HI
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
Jim
Is there any way to use the 72 mhz module in the TX, and have the 2.4 module transmit at the same time? Is there a way to make a splitter off of the pins off the back of the module plugin to enable the use of 2 modules? (For use with the dpsi twin)
Is there any way to use the 72 mhz module in the TX, and have the 2.4 module transmit at the same time? Is there a way to make a splitter off of the pins off the back of the module plugin to enable the use of 2 modules? (For use with the dpsi twin)
05-08-2007, 05:39 PM
#81
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MelbourneVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
BTW, in case you are unaware, both the Spektrum and XPS solutions already support multiple Rx in the one plane. Only one Rx provides servo outputs but the extra Rx provide path/polarisation diversity, significantly reducing the (already low) risk of losing the link. For Spektrum the AR7000 has two physically separate Rx and the AR9000 supports up to three. For XPS you can have up to 255 Rx in the one aircraft if you like and they can be independently powered 
05-09-2007, 02:53 AM
#82
Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: , SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: digitech
do you really think Weatronic has not allready designed or will be using spektrum chips for their next gen Receivers?
it goes really fast , check in about a year from now..
i am sure still 80% of all people will be using a "vintage" 35-70mhz system.........
ORIGINAL: Ron101
What about Weatronic Receivers and good old PCM.
I was hearing such good things about this combo... then with the influx of SS I haven’t heard as much
Would you put money into Weatronics PCM with spread spectrum on its way in?
What about Weatronic Receivers and good old PCM.
I was hearing such good things about this combo... then with the influx of SS I haven’t heard as much
Would you put money into Weatronics PCM with spread spectrum on its way in?
it goes really fast , check in about a year from now..
i am sure still 80% of all people will be using a "vintage" 35-70mhz system.........
05-09-2007, 03:03 AM
#83
Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: , SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: kgfly
BTW, in case you are unaware, both the Spektrum and XPS solutions already support multiple Rx in the one plane. Only one Rx provides servo outputs but the extra Rx provide path/polarisation diversity, significantly reducing the (already low) risk of losing the link. For Spektrum the AR7000 has two physically separate Rx and the AR9000 supports up to three. For XPS you can have up to 255 Rx in the one aircraft if you like and they can be independently powered
BTW, in case you are unaware, both the Spektrum and XPS solutions already support multiple Rx in the one plane. Only one Rx provides servo outputs but the extra Rx provide path/polarisation diversity, significantly reducing the (already low) risk of losing the link. For Spektrum the AR7000 has two physically separate Rx and the AR9000 supports up to three. For XPS you can have up to 255 Rx in the one aircraft if you like and they can be independently powered
05-09-2007, 09:52 AM
#84
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Fresno,
CA
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
I would like to set the record straight on the crash of my F-100 at TG this weekend, as it seems many are drawing conclusions based on limited information and speculation.
First and foremost, I am 100% confident in the Spektrum RF link, and my next jet will also have a Spektrum system in it. I have been waiting my entire modeling life for a radio system to come along that offers the safety from someone turning on my frequency and shooting me down. Let me, also, state that I am 100% confident that pilot error was not the cause of the crash.
Through the use of the Spektrum flight log data, we know that the RF link was completely solid in all 10 flights prior to the crash, not to mention extensive range testing to verify solid operation in the Flite-metal environment. The flight log provides performance data on each of the 4 receivers in the airplane, as well as total frame losses and whether a failsafe occurred. The worst data we ever witnessed (during the initial flight) was 25 frame losses for an entire flight. We were able to use the data to optimize one of the receiver's location and were regularly seeing between 0 and 6 frame losses in an entire ten minute flight. To put this into perspective, they tell me it takes 44 consecutive frame losses to get a failsafe--slightly less than 1 second.
The fact that another F-100 went in on 72Mhz earlier--reportedly due to a single regulator that was not delivering good voltage under load, had us looking at other elements within the system. Through further discussion with the guys at Spektrum, I was alerted to the fact that the AR9000 receiver stops working much below a 3.5 volt threshold, a so called "brownout", and will go through a re-start once the voltage climbs back up. The bootup would have put the engine at idle (the smartsafe position)--a lockout would have killed the engine.
We quickly started to realize that we, too, may have been getting away with a very marginal power system with the 72meg Rx when we started adding up all the servos (19 of them) going through a single 7.5 amp regulator. Considering that we were about half way through the flight and that we had just completed a dirty pass and were in the process of cleaning up the airplane, starting to G-load for the base turn, we were certainly at a point in the flight where the regulator was likely at peak temperatures and most likely to start giving up. Add the fact that this was the hottest day and hardest we flew the system to date, I would conclude that the single, undersized voltage regulator is the root cause of the crash.
I consider this matter closed.
First and foremost, I am 100% confident in the Spektrum RF link, and my next jet will also have a Spektrum system in it. I have been waiting my entire modeling life for a radio system to come along that offers the safety from someone turning on my frequency and shooting me down. Let me, also, state that I am 100% confident that pilot error was not the cause of the crash.
Through the use of the Spektrum flight log data, we know that the RF link was completely solid in all 10 flights prior to the crash, not to mention extensive range testing to verify solid operation in the Flite-metal environment. The flight log provides performance data on each of the 4 receivers in the airplane, as well as total frame losses and whether a failsafe occurred. The worst data we ever witnessed (during the initial flight) was 25 frame losses for an entire flight. We were able to use the data to optimize one of the receiver's location and were regularly seeing between 0 and 6 frame losses in an entire ten minute flight. To put this into perspective, they tell me it takes 44 consecutive frame losses to get a failsafe--slightly less than 1 second.
The fact that another F-100 went in on 72Mhz earlier--reportedly due to a single regulator that was not delivering good voltage under load, had us looking at other elements within the system. Through further discussion with the guys at Spektrum, I was alerted to the fact that the AR9000 receiver stops working much below a 3.5 volt threshold, a so called "brownout", and will go through a re-start once the voltage climbs back up. The bootup would have put the engine at idle (the smartsafe position)--a lockout would have killed the engine.
We quickly started to realize that we, too, may have been getting away with a very marginal power system with the 72meg Rx when we started adding up all the servos (19 of them) going through a single 7.5 amp regulator. Considering that we were about half way through the flight and that we had just completed a dirty pass and were in the process of cleaning up the airplane, starting to G-load for the base turn, we were certainly at a point in the flight where the regulator was likely at peak temperatures and most likely to start giving up. Add the fact that this was the hottest day and hardest we flew the system to date, I would conclude that the single, undersized voltage regulator is the root cause of the crash.
I consider this matter closed.
05-09-2007, 10:09 AM
#85
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Posts: 3,713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
Mark,
for safety's sake, what is the brand name of this regulator?
Joe Kelley
for safety's sake, what is the brand name of this regulator?
Joe Kelley
ORIGINAL: Mark Taylor
(19 of them) going through a single 7.5 amp regulator. I would conclude that the single, undersized voltage regulator is the root cause of the crash.
I consider this matter closed.
(19 of them) going through a single 7.5 amp regulator. I would conclude that the single, undersized voltage regulator is the root cause of the crash.
I consider this matter closed.
05-09-2007, 10:13 AM
#86
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
Usually the duratite one is rated for 7.5 and the MPI or batteries america one is rated for 10! Sounds to me that this airplane would have been a great candidate for smart-fly or duralite powerbox or weatronics. Sorry to hear of such a loss over such an easy place to beef the system up. What a shame, and I am so sorry you lost your airplane, duratite regulators, I'm bummed.
05-09-2007, 10:29 AM
#87
Senior Member
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
Wel, well, well. Looks like the 2.4 Bandwagon will be reloading.
Hope none of you got hurt jumping to conclusions
Sad to hear of your loss Mark. That was one fine mount.
Hope none of you got hurt jumping to conclusions
Sad to hear of your loss Mark. That was one fine mount.
05-09-2007, 10:40 AM
#89
Banned
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, NJ
Posts: 3,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: VLAMGAT
Multiple antennas and rx's or even antenna diversity systems is not something we tested or researched on our projects and may very well offer a good cheaper solution albeit at the expense of more complication. I assume the XPS system has a network protocol to support this, seeing they dont use the zigbee stack? My antenna designer also has a tx dipole which has the capability to focus RF in a 180 deg area. Maybee a good proposition on the TX side since any signal behind you has not really much purpose...
Multiple antennas and rx's or even antenna diversity systems is not something we tested or researched on our projects and may very well offer a good cheaper solution albeit at the expense of more complication. I assume the XPS system has a network protocol to support this, seeing they dont use the zigbee stack? My antenna designer also has a tx dipole which has the capability to focus RF in a 180 deg area. Maybee a good proposition on the TX side since any signal behind you has not really much purpose...
Back ???
05-09-2007, 10:43 AM
#90
Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: , SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: Mark Taylor
I would like to set the record straight on the crash of my F-100 at TG this weekend, as it seems many are drawing conclusions based on limited information and speculation.
First and foremost, I am 100% confident in the Spektrum RF link, and my next jet will also have a Spektrum system in it. I have been waiting my entire modeling life for a radio system to come along that offers the safety from someone turning on my frequency and shooting me down. Let me, also, state that I am 100% confident that pilot error was not the cause of the crash.
Through the use of the Spektrum flight log data, we know that the RF link was completely solid in all 10 flights prior to the crash, not to mention extensive range testing to verify solid operation in the Flite-metal environment. The flight log provides performance data on each of the 4 receivers in the airplane, as well as total frame losses and whether a failsafe occurred. The worst data we ever witnessed (during the initial flight) was 25 frame losses for an entire flight. We were able to use the data to optimize one of the receiver's location and were regularly seeing between 0 and 6 frame losses in an entire ten minute flight. To put this into perspective, they tell me it takes 44 consecutive frame losses to get a failsafe--slightly less than 1 second.
The fact that another F-100 went in on 72Mhz earlier--reportedly due to a single regulator that was not delivering good voltage under load, had us looking at other elements within the system. Through further discussion with the guys at Spektrum, I was alerted to the fact that the AR9000 receiver stops working much below a 3.5 volt threshold, a so called "brownout", and will go through a re-start once the voltage climbs back up. The bootup would have put the engine at idle (the smartsafe position)--a lockout would have killed the engine.
We quickly started to realize that we, too, may have been getting away with a very marginal power system with the 72meg Rx when we started adding up all the servos (19 of them) going through a single 7.5 amp regulator. Considering that we were about half way through the flight and that we had just completed a dirty pass and were in the process of cleaning up the airplane, starting to G-load for the base turn, we were certainly at a point in the flight where the regulator was likely at peak temperatures and most likely to start giving up. Add the fact that this was the hottest day and hardest we flew the system to date, I would conclude that the single, undersized voltage regulator is the root cause of the crash.
I consider this matter closed.
I would like to set the record straight on the crash of my F-100 at TG this weekend, as it seems many are drawing conclusions based on limited information and speculation.
First and foremost, I am 100% confident in the Spektrum RF link, and my next jet will also have a Spektrum system in it. I have been waiting my entire modeling life for a radio system to come along that offers the safety from someone turning on my frequency and shooting me down. Let me, also, state that I am 100% confident that pilot error was not the cause of the crash.
Through the use of the Spektrum flight log data, we know that the RF link was completely solid in all 10 flights prior to the crash, not to mention extensive range testing to verify solid operation in the Flite-metal environment. The flight log provides performance data on each of the 4 receivers in the airplane, as well as total frame losses and whether a failsafe occurred. The worst data we ever witnessed (during the initial flight) was 25 frame losses for an entire flight. We were able to use the data to optimize one of the receiver's location and were regularly seeing between 0 and 6 frame losses in an entire ten minute flight. To put this into perspective, they tell me it takes 44 consecutive frame losses to get a failsafe--slightly less than 1 second.
The fact that another F-100 went in on 72Mhz earlier--reportedly due to a single regulator that was not delivering good voltage under load, had us looking at other elements within the system. Through further discussion with the guys at Spektrum, I was alerted to the fact that the AR9000 receiver stops working much below a 3.5 volt threshold, a so called "brownout", and will go through a re-start once the voltage climbs back up. The bootup would have put the engine at idle (the smartsafe position)--a lockout would have killed the engine.
We quickly started to realize that we, too, may have been getting away with a very marginal power system with the 72meg Rx when we started adding up all the servos (19 of them) going through a single 7.5 amp regulator. Considering that we were about half way through the flight and that we had just completed a dirty pass and were in the process of cleaning up the airplane, starting to G-load for the base turn, we were certainly at a point in the flight where the regulator was likely at peak temperatures and most likely to start giving up. Add the fact that this was the hottest day and hardest we flew the system to date, I would conclude that the single, undersized voltage regulator is the root cause of the crash.
I consider this matter closed.
Good info, I am real glad since I would really like to use the JR spectrum technology. The brownout situation you described we have also planned for during testing of our UAV and the RF link thus got its own (backed up supply) I am asuming your regulator is of the linear type. I can also confirm that our project used about 4 JR8511's per control surface. These were originally linked together using matchboxes. Big problem the "idle" current was 5 AMPS for 4 servos. By electronically (hacked) linking all the amplifiers together we got this down to one amp at idle. Under stall this went to 20 Amps+ on a 3700maH 5 cell pack. Linear regulators by nature act like resistors and heat up due to simple physics dictating thet the input versus output voltage difference multiplied by the amperage will give you X heat dissipation in Watts. So if you regulated say 8 volts to 5 volts and you have 5 amps ( A real minimal load for a few digital servos) you have to dissipate 3V x 5A = 15 Watt of heat. A good regulator of the type usually used in these regulators has a heat transfer to ambient of 75 dec C for every watt, thats 75 x 15 = 1275 deg C. Now obviously that is not the case since a good heatsink will reduce this factor many times. HOWEVER a good regulator usually has a thermal shutdown of say 150 deg C at the chip die to prevent its own demise. Now in a dynamic situation it is possible for the silicon die to get to this temperature momentarily and shut down if the heat transfer capacity of the device and heatsink to air system is exceeded.
Do I use regulators, NEVER. If you have to fit one to every primary servo. 7.5 amps wont do it.
You already know that but maybe another opineon will help the rest of the gizmo-believers.
Also inform your mates at the Spectrum design team they may want to consider a buck/boost switching regulator for the RX. This way anything from 1V to 30V will keep the RX happy. Its cheap, all cellphones use them, a linear regulator here is a bad idea with a common power bus shared by servos.
Could you elaborate on the flight log capabilities of the RX system you described?
05-09-2007, 10:46 AM
#91
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MelbourneVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: bevar
Guys,
I have heard the new Futaba 2.4 system will be able to "jam" the Spektrum system so word on the street is. Any idea if this is true?
Beave
Guys,
I have heard the new Futaba 2.4 system will be able to "jam" the Spektrum system so word on the street is. Any idea if this is true?
Beave
05-09-2007, 11:13 AM
#92
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Riyadh, , SAUDI ARABIA
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
I have mentioned before, Why didn't JR affix its name on the specktrum if it is very reliable???????
I have the specktrum X7 ( didn't use it yet) and I am a user for the JR 10X both the plane and heli versions (35Mhz).
Regards,
I have the specktrum X7 ( didn't use it yet) and I am a user for the JR 10X both the plane and heli versions (35Mhz).
Regards,
05-09-2007, 11:38 AM
#93
Banned
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, NJ
Posts: 3,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: VLAMGAT
Dunno any details about Weatronics but at first glance seems well engineered and a thought through design.
Dunno any details about Weatronics but at first glance seems well engineered and a thought through design.
05-09-2007, 11:46 AM
#94
Banned
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, NJ
Posts: 3,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: VLAMGAT
You already know that but maybe another opineon will help the rest of the gizmo-believers.
You already know that but maybe another opineon will help the rest of the gizmo-believers.
05-09-2007, 11:51 AM
#95
Banned
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, NJ
Posts: 3,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: Mark Taylor
I consider this matter closed.
I consider this matter closed.
Finally............sorry about the losses guys..........its the time more than anything that we all can't replace. In the meantime back to the lab guys..............word has it J is planning on taking on the entire planet with his Russian beast...............Team Scale of course.
It's a nice day out..............I think I'll go flying..............Parkflyer for now, until this is all sorted out.
Don't trust anything else at the moment.
Bryce
05-09-2007, 01:57 PM
#97
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Honolulu,
HI
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
Hi Mark
Sorry for your loss of the F-100, and thank you for the explanation of what happened. I know it doesn’t help what happened to you but at least your sharing of the cause might save some of our jets in the future.
Sorry for your loss of the F-100, and thank you for the explanation of what happened. I know it doesn’t help what happened to you but at least your sharing of the cause might save some of our jets in the future.
05-09-2007, 04:12 PM
#98
Banned
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, NJ
Posts: 3,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: SDCrashmaster
That's a fabulous looking "Super" Bryce (the bigger one in your image).
Got any scale LG plans
Paul
That's a fabulous looking "Super" Bryce (the bigger one in your image).
Got any scale LG plans
Paul
], besides it's the only thing I can fly right now until all this radio chatter gets cleaned up................back to the old radar dish scanner I guess.Don't need any work on the Supa gear this time, but seriously, I think I will be using your services on the next set of "Sic-Teen" legs................we'll be in touch.
Well my Lipo is charged back up for the foamy.............time to hit the park again before these kids take over.......................damn................... here they come.[
]Later guys,
B
05-09-2007, 05:32 PM
#99
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MelbourneVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
ORIGINAL: Flying Arrow
I have mentioned before, Why didn't JR affix its name on the specktrum if it is very reliable???????
I have the specktrum X7 ( didn't use it yet) and I am a user for the JR 10X both the plane and heli versions (35Mhz).
Regards,
I have mentioned before, Why didn't JR affix its name on the specktrum if it is very reliable???????
I have the specktrum X7 ( didn't use it yet) and I am a user for the JR 10X both the plane and heli versions (35Mhz).
Regards,
However now, JR have adopted "Spektrum Inside" as their 2.4 technology and their new 9303/2.4 and 12x/2.4 do indeed use Spektrum solutions. These are effectively the DX9 and DX12 products but now JR is integrating technology from Spektrum instead of the other way around. [8D]
05-09-2007, 08:01 PM
#100
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Venice, FL
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spektrum and F-100 ( heads up )
Mark,
Very sad you lost your beautiful F-100. I know you will be back in the game.
I will try to E-mail you the photo I have.
(Happier times!) [&o]
David
Very sad you lost your beautiful F-100. I know you will be back in the game.
I will try to E-mail you the photo I have.
(Happier times!) [&o]
David