rcpilotny

We all know sailplanes go a long way up, I have been sailing with the easystar for a while now with the new hitec netron 6s 72mhz dual conversion autogain ultra narrow band bla bla bla - reciever, and I am constantly scared of someone else getting on the same channel since it's reciever range is 1 mile plus! There is certainly a possibility of interference. even when you get it way up in the air and someone else other than you switches your channel on even from a mile away.

[sm=drowning.gif]

Why is it I heard 2.4ghz radio systems can't go as far as the 72mhz standard ones? Then again I here someone said there is a 5mile 2.4ghz range one for sailplanes? Is this true and is it safe? and where can I buy?

I am thinking of maybe going to 2.4ghz for my sailplane ( I mean i love it being that safe freq. wise) but heard it has bad range?

72mhz
further range
not safe if someone tries to crash your $$$$[:@]


2.4ghz
piss poor range
safe if someone tries to crash your $$$$[sm=lol.gif]

see what i am saying here?

only if there was a 2.4ghz radio system for sailplanes with 5mile range...

IF THERE IS PLEASE LINK ME!

evan-RCU

There are short range park flyer transmitters and recievers and full range transmitters and recievers just like there are for 72MHz. Buy the right set up and you'll have as good or better range as 72MHz.

As with 72MHz carbon fuses can effect reception.

JetCatJimmy

I'm not sure where you heard that information, but I think it is incomplete. I fly a jet with my 2.4 and believe me, range can not be an issue with these planes.

Your range question may be related to the microlight receivers made for park flyers (AR6100e and lower). It is true that their range is diminished by design, but I use the Spektrum AR6200 in a hotliner and it has full range. [8D]

It is a very good feeling knowing that you're taking one risk off the table (frequency hit). The only thing I made sure to do, since my hotliner is carbon-fiber, is to place the remote receiver on the outside of the fuse. That way there's less chance of latency. I actually use that method on the jet as well. Good luck!!

rcpilotny

But when ever I look at 2.4ghz receivers it ALWAYS says "full-range" or "beyond visual range"

..They never says a darn thing about exact range like the 72mhz do..

well what exactly is "full range" on 2.4ghz 1,000 feet??? or less?

See what I'm saying? I don't think it would be a good idea for a sailplane that travels further.

Maybe I'm wrong and they have some 2.4ghz radios that can go up to a mile that's really what I'm looking for.

Safeness and Range.

-pkh-

My Feedback: (2)

What do you think the "exact" range is of 72MHz systems??

rcpilotny

depends on the reciever of course look up the hitec neutron 6s it is rated 1mile+.

evan-RCU

If anyone states a specific range you must assume it is only good for that moment in time at that place. Anyone that knows about propagation knows range is always changing. Under perfect conditions the average 72MHz can do 3 miles. I would expect a full range 2.4GHz to do at least as well. The problem is we never have perfect conditions and we impose conditions to reduce the signal reception in the way we mount the reciever(s), power them, and even the way we stand on the ground and hold our transmitters.

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

Well, lower frequencies do indeed mean "longer" range.

Whether or not we could see to control a model at the difference is another matter.

That said, I've seen some pretty big sailplanes, that I could barely tell what direction they were going, flown with 2.4

evan-RCU

Do you know what wattage the 2.4's put out? 72's were a half watt, are they still? The FCC limit is 0.75W.

There's very little info on the spektrum site for specs.

fishguide

My Feedback: (3)

I have been absent from RC for about 26 years. I recently got back in and bought the new 2.4 stuff. I also bought a new AVA sailplane with Elevator, rudder and flaps.

I proceeded to install the radio gear into a pretty small fuse. I really wondered about all the wires running past this little receiver (AR 7000 ). The order of installation in the plane was, starting at the nose was, batteries, servo's, receiver. Behind the receiver was a picolaro.

I range checked till I was ready to drop. I checked out great, 90 paces each time.

I took it to the field to do some trim launches. I decided to borrow a friends high start for short launches just to zero in the trim.

I had mixed the flap's with the elevator but did know how much down trim I would need.

So away we went.
First launch was ok height about 200 feet. I circled and came in to adjust the CG. Take lead out.

Second launch about the same results. Except when I went to pick up the plane , I saw the flaps go up and down..
The transmitter was laying on the ground behind me. I don't know if it was off or on. I think off but who knows for sure.

Third launch same deal same pattern except I pointed the ship right at me. Mistake! It was about 70 feet high and 600-700 feet from me. The left wing went low and it spun in destroying the AVA!

Upset would not define my attitude at this point. Wife came over very up set and ask what happened? I told her I didn't know.

I sent the TX and the Rx to horizon to see if anything was wrong with the equipment.

While wait on their verdict, I keep trying to understand what had happened. The fact that all the wires alone would in my mind at least would be a very hostile environment for a radio of any kind. The AVA was 2.4 friendly, Is that supposed to be a joke? Meaning not carbon in the fuse. Not quite true. A 1 inch band runs around the rear end of the nose cone for strength.

Fail safe? What is fail safe? Well on the AR 7000 the only channel that fail safe works is the throttle channel. It will return the throttle to low idle. stick down.

That was my flap channel! The evaluator had not been trimmed from the proper amount of down.. Did my receiver go to fail safe?

With the plane coming straight at me meant the radio signal had to go thru my battery pack and servo's to reach the tiny antenna's.

The plane stalled and spun. I now know how to set the fail safe but I won't need it. I will not fly a sailplane on 2.4 again.
Horizon did not find any problem.

To use 2.4 in a sailplane will require major effort to locate it away from things that shadow the receiver. Put remote receivers in the wings? Carbon fiber in the leading edge their. How about in the nose?

One guy in our club fly's his sailplane on 2.4 successfully. I need to see his installation. ( Oops just found out he uses 72 mhz not 2.4)

Any one else have a way to place the antennas?

evan-RCU

Good post, sorry for your problems though...

Up until now I have resisted getting 2.4 because there have been "issues". The issues seem to be more than the glitch that we get now and then with 72mHz. A issue with 2.4 is system re-boot, total loss of signal. or worse. And someone saying hey it only happens once in a while is not acceptable. I can not afford to loose a $2k gasser, helo or pylon racer much less the thought of one going into pilots or spectators.

That said it does seem to be getting better and people are understanding reciever placements and I have gotten a DX-7 to try in a gasser. If it goes in or there's a problem with the reception someones getting a DX-7 for free though....

Flyfalcons

I think someone from Spektrum flew a plane at Nall to a pretty incredible distance to demonstrate range of the system. I'm sure with a proper installing that FASST and Spektrum/JR have similar ranges.

evan-RCU

I have heard great things like the range and I have heard of things like the mass fly at SEFF. But then you hear that they only had "X" issues with radio reception at the SEFF mass fly and you think, well that's pretty good as long it's someone elses foamy crashing and not my 200mph pylon plane going into the spectators....

People had less issues when we were on 27MHZ in the 60's (before C.B.)...

JetCatJimmy

I noticed that when I had both receivers in my jet (very little CF, but a turbine in the rear) I had range check concerns from directly behind. I ended up placing the remote receive on the outside of the fuse. Range check and flights are perfect now. It's not the perfect solution, but unless I can get an extension to the remote cable, that's where it's going.[:@]

I think your problem was the failsafe setting. On Spektrum radios, you set all your controls up how you want the failsafe to perform, then BIND. If you adjust a setting while you're flying and want that setting in the failsafe, you need to RE-BIND!

I'm so sorry to hear about your loss. I hope that this does NOT discourage you. Use this site to gain as much knowledge about your new system and get that in another plane.

**As for the distance issue from the owner of this post. if you have a large enough plane that you can see it clearly from 1 mile away, you might just be able to hop inside and fly it yourself. My hotliner is a 2m f5b style and I have flown it until it's a speck in the sky. Everytime I give an input, it responds, and it is entirely carbon fiber. One rx inside and the remote attached to the top of the fuse, just behind the wing. I highly recommend 2.4, but like any equipment there is a learning curve. One needs to respect that. I applaud the pilots that were the 'early adopters' of this technology, putting it in their $8k jets. That takes cohones!

pilotpete2

Even the Futaba FASST park flier receiver has a published range of 1000', I believe that it has been tested that far out at ground level, with a glider "specked out", it probably would be greater, as there is less attenuation when the receiver is away from the ground[8D]
Fearlessly flying FASSTer
Pete

elmog

How far away are you planning on flying? If you're using a 2.4 and concerned about range issues, make sure you get one of the AR6200, AR7000 or AR9000 rx's that have the secondary satellite rx's. These as far as I know are the only full range rx's from Spektrum. All the other 2.4 rx's with the single antenna are really only short range/park flyer capable. Do not even consider putting them in something other than a park flyer that will only be flown close in. I know, I know, there are folks using park flyer rx's in much bigger ships and this is only proving that even the park flyer rx's have decent range (at the risk of losing your plane due to misapplication of this most important component). The extra money spent on getting a full-range rx is definitely worth the peace of mind that you gain. You will quickly forget the small amout extra that you paid once you are flying with no range concerns.
I fly gliders and own both the AR6200 and AR7000 and have yet to have a glitch. I followed the instructions for setting up the rx's verbatim. I see all kinds of problems arise when people perform non-standard installations and then complain about the glitch they had that completely destroyed their ship and now they're getting rid of their 2.4 radio. There are issues if you intend to use 2.4 in fully-enclosed carbon fuselages and you should be aware of low battery/excessive voltage drops (just like you would with 72 mhz) that could cause a signal loss. These issues have been printed to death in this forum and are now common knowledge. No radio system out there is going to satisfy you 100%.

Note: You should study and see if 2.4 or 72 is right for your application. Many people own both systems. I read up and educated myself on the 2.4 system before I ever installed it in my planes and decided that the places that I fly (slopes, beaches, around houses) have no frequency boards and the possiblity of getting hit is high. So it's 2.4 for me. I'm sorry if I sounded a bit rough on those who have had radio glitches with 2.4. I like the advantages that 2.4 offers (not getting shot down, no external antenna dragging behind the ship, a short transmitter antenna that you'll never forget to extend, never having to walk a quarter mile just to ask "what frequency are you on?") and hope that all the horror stories circulating on how "unreliable" the system is doesn't keep people away from experiencing the new technology. Set it up per the manual and it's as reliable as anything out there. Try to re-engineer the rx installation or use a rx that's not rated to the task and run the risk of losing your ship.

anuthabubba

My Feedback: (102)

Don't know about the rest of you guys but I find it funny/strange/sad that people who are trying to encourage the use of 2.4GHZ say... "you MUST use the multiple, properly oriented (even outside the airplane!) secondary satellite rx's". In almost 40 years of flying RC (pulse, AM and FM) I've NEVER used more than ONE receiver INSIDE an airplane! Antennas have been inside and out with VERY FEW 'radio' problems that were mostly related to battery condition. Which is ANOTHER BIG ISSUE with 2.4 technology!

I did spend about $150 on a conversion module and a 6200 rx w/satellite rx to eventually try in an expendable plane. Now I gotta decide which plane I'm willing to gamble with.

Terry in LP

Flyfalcons

Terry, no remote receiver needed (or even available) with FASST.

All 2.4 pilots should remember when range checking a new setup to have a helper rotate the plane in all directions when you are range checking to make sure there are no dead areas. Try and get as much metallic or carbon model crap between the transmitter and receiver and see how it preforms in its worst case scenario.

rcpilotny

so im guessing sailplanes and 2.4ghz = NOT GOOD.

Flyfalcons

Guess again. With a proper install it is as good or better than 72mhz.

rcpilotny

well certainly not range-wise.. I'm not gonna fly a 2.4ghz sailplane in a dinky 100 foot park and say it's great for sailplane people...

anuthabubba

My Feedback: (102)

Nice try, Ryan.

Yeah, Futaba uses only one receiver. That's a plus but I still read about voltage/brown out, heat and other issues with them. Some of the problems can surely be attributed to people getting into RC without knowledge/instruction of the 'basics' of successful installations/operation of the equipment.

Terry in LP

Flyfalcons

What are you talking about? The receiver mentioned above with the 1000' range is a park flyer reciever from Futaba. They (Spektrum/JR, Futaba, Airtronics) have a variety of full-range receivers to choose from. When I make another FASST receiver purchase (done 4 already), I'll be including in the order an 8 channel receiver for my 13' Discus.

Flyfalcons

Terry, the voltage/brown out issue was with Spektrum, not FASST. FASST receivers operate down to an extremely low voltage (something like 2V) while the Spektrum receivers have had brownout issues with marginal power supply problems (generally not a problem in a sailplane with standard or mini servos). JR/Spektrum has also come out with a fix for the brownout issue with a fast reconnect time in the event that the receiver does brown out. The only FASST receivers to have gone offline due to extreme heat were sitting under a large bubble canopy in a plane with exposed cannisters in the desert. Sounds like more research may be in order?

anuthabubba

My Feedback: (102)

The brown outs I read about were stated to have happened with Fuaba FASST. Maybe they were misstated? No exhaustive research efforts needed here. I've got plenty of reliably functional radio gear and am not interested in spending a bundle changing it all out for 'the next big thing' just yet.

Terry in LP