Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
05-15-2011, 05:34 PM
#1
Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
I wasn't there, but reading the thread about crashes at Nall, it sure looks like Futaba is having the most issues. Anyone know if this is the case?
I switched from JR/Spektrum six months ago over concerns about DSM 'pick-and-stick' technology and the superiority of FASST. But now I'm wondering if the FASST superiority is offset by having a receiver with two short whisker antennas, that I don't care how well you position them, in a jet it will be impossible to always avoid having them blocked by dense internal components. Seems like having satellite antennas positioned in various locations is a darn good idea.
I switched from JR/Spektrum six months ago over concerns about DSM 'pick-and-stick' technology and the superiority of FASST. But now I'm wondering if the FASST superiority is offset by having a receiver with two short whisker antennas, that I don't care how well you position them, in a jet it will be impossible to always avoid having them blocked by dense internal components. Seems like having satellite antennas positioned in various locations is a darn good idea.
05-15-2011, 06:01 PM
#4
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
I don't think I would blame it on futaba, because any receiver that has dense things in the way will lock out. So to say it's futaba is the wrong way to go about things. The only thing in a jet that is dense enough to block i signal, I would think is the turbine itself. It is possible to position a receiver that Would always have good signal. No matter what you do, there is room for this error with any brand. Is there any info on the location of receiver for the ones that crash? I posted a thread today about running dual futaba receivers, because I have never trusted 2.4, I still run 72mhz in my giant scale plane. Futaba allows you to bind two receivers at the same time and if you want you could split up the servos on each receiver.
05-15-2011, 06:37 PM
#8
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Curitiba, Parana, BRAZIL
Posts: 4,289
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
11 Posts
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Don´t like to comment at all on other people´s crashes but this post may perhaps help somebody.
A good friend of mine, lost a 2.6 meter Viperjet the week before I maidened mine. He is a very experienced jet modeler, and bought a brand new 12FG for this model. He was flying alone in our club, in the middle of the week.
He did the usual checks, including the range test and off he went to the maiden. Right after takeoff, the big VJ went into lockout and crashed, a total loss. Not having much left of the plane for sorting out the problem, he tested the radio with another two receivers and was able to replicate the problem, losing contact on them about in the same spot he lost control of the plane.. the effective range on this radio was less than 200 m, new in box.
Any equipment regardless of brand may have a problem , but the funny thing is that this radio passed the ground range check. What he told me is that he is going again to test any new single receiver/transmitter on a trainer before using them in the expensive stuff.
Have the video of the crash, not a pretty sight, also don´t think it is good idea at all to put it on youtube.
A good friend of mine, lost a 2.6 meter Viperjet the week before I maidened mine. He is a very experienced jet modeler, and bought a brand new 12FG for this model. He was flying alone in our club, in the middle of the week.
He did the usual checks, including the range test and off he went to the maiden. Right after takeoff, the big VJ went into lockout and crashed, a total loss. Not having much left of the plane for sorting out the problem, he tested the radio with another two receivers and was able to replicate the problem, losing contact on them about in the same spot he lost control of the plane.. the effective range on this radio was less than 200 m, new in box.
Any equipment regardless of brand may have a problem , but the funny thing is that this radio passed the ground range check. What he told me is that he is going again to test any new single receiver/transmitter on a trainer before using them in the expensive stuff.
Have the video of the crash, not a pretty sight, also don´t think it is good idea at all to put it on youtube.
05-15-2011, 06:54 PM
#9
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Just an observation , Speculation is Futaba is having more crashes, when the big probability is that in the past year or two most radio users that used JR among other brands made a radio brand switch . JR was mostly used by jet modelers since the transition to 2.4 many users switched from JR to Futaba which increases the amount of futaba users and Futaba crashes would statistically increase.
Do I think one is better than the other NO. I have been a JR junky for 20+yrs have a 9303 and still have my 10sxII.
Do I think one is better than the other NO. I have been a JR junky for 20+yrs have a 9303 and still have my 10sxII.
05-15-2011, 09:59 PM
#10
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Unfortunately no signal is a “Sure Thing”. Not even an ILS signal (Instrument Landing System) is 100% bullet proof.
I love my JR 12X’s and use them for my Jets. I also absolutely love my Futaba 14MZ’s and use them for my Scale Turbine Helicopters.
Fortunately I have had no issues with any of my equipment to date BUT I am leaning towards either WEATRONIC or JETI. Both these systems still allow you to use your TX’s but do provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
Just my opinion!!!
I love my JR 12X’s and use them for my Jets. I also absolutely love my Futaba 14MZ’s and use them for my Scale Turbine Helicopters.
Fortunately I have had no issues with any of my equipment to date BUT I am leaning towards either WEATRONIC or JETI. Both these systems still allow you to use your TX’s but do provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
Just my opinion!!!
05-15-2011, 11:12 PM
#11
My Feedback: (67)
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
I use both JR and Futaba systems for my fleet of jets. After my personal experiences and seeing other's experience. I just don't have very comfortable feeling on either one of them. Should you think that the best solution is to have 2 TX antenna and 2 RX receiver units?
I am looking into other European solutions that offer duel TX/RX solutions. I won't be saying which system that I plan to use, so any political issue can be avoided.
Any Suggestions? 2 TX/RX redundancy as a near bullet prove solutions?
Mike
05-15-2011, 11:56 PM
#12
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SevenoaksKent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 5,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Mike, I hear what you're saying but will you run 2 TX batteries too? There's always a point of failure somewhere..........[
]
]
05-16-2011, 03:45 AM
#13
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: darryltarr
...WEATRONIC or JETI... provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
...WEATRONIC or JETI... provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
05-16-2011, 05:25 AM
#14
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: flyinfool1
As far as the antennas, You can get from Futaba longer antennas so that you can get them away from bad things.
They are not expensive an plug into the RX.
As far as the antennas, You can get from Futaba longer antennas so that you can get them away from bad things.
They are not expensive an plug into the RX.
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10515987
05-16-2011, 05:47 AM
#15
My Feedback: (39)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Erie,
PA
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
I was at Joe Nall, and flew a cheapo Futaba 7C, on 2.4. The float plane site is in the middle of everything. It's not a big bad jet, but it worked great with no issues. Also, I didn't hear anything of radio issues.
05-16-2011, 06:05 AM
#16
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: VF84sluggo
How so? I'm not familiar with either, but if the 2.4 band only has so much 'room', how do these overcome this limitation?
ORIGINAL: darryltarr
...WEATRONIC or JETI... provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
...WEATRONIC or JETI... provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
im using Airtronics SD-10G and a Futaba 9C with the 2.4 mod.
05-16-2011, 06:25 AM
#17
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Champaign,
IL
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi. The owner was advised against it, but a range check led him to believe it was safe to fly. Unfortunately it was proven to not be the case.
Steve
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi. The owner was advised against it, but a range check led him to believe it was safe to fly. Unfortunately it was proven to not be the case.
Steve
05-16-2011, 06:35 AM
#18
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Steve, maybe you know about this: I try to get the 'whiskers' of the Futaba rx to the sides of the fuselage, with different orientation, one vertical, one horizontal. But this Skymaster L-39 fuselage is too wide to do this. I can place the rx body such that one whisker is mounted to the fuselage side, but the other is in the middle. Would the 400mm antenna be ok to use? have you heard anything about reduced range with the longer antenna, as I referenced in my previous post?
Thanks,
Randy
Thanks,
Randy
05-16-2011, 07:29 AM
#19
Senior Member
My Feedback: (55)
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: Skaluf
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi. The owner was advised against it, but a range check led him to believe it was safe to fly. Unfortunately it was proven to not be the case.
Steve
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi. The owner was advised against it, but a range check led him to believe it was safe to fly. Unfortunately it was proven to not be the case.
Steve
Howard
05-16-2011, 07:59 AM
#20
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: Skaluf
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi.
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi.
This is a very definitive statement. How do you know for sure this was the case?
05-16-2011, 09:12 AM
#21
My Feedback: (13)
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: darryltarr
Unfortunately no signal is a “Sure Thing”. Not even an ILS signal (Instrument Landing System) is 100% bullet proof.
I love my JR 12X’s and use them for my Jets. I also absolutely love my Futaba 14MZ’s and use them for my Scale Turbine Helicopters.
Fortunately I have had no issues with any of my equipment to date BUT I am leaning towards either WEATRONIC or JETI. Both these systems still allow you to use your TX’s but do provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
Just my opinion!!!
Unfortunately no signal is a “Sure Thing”. Not even an ILS signal (Instrument Landing System) is 100% bullet proof.
I love my JR 12X’s and use them for my Jets. I also absolutely love my Futaba 14MZ’s and use them for my Scale Turbine Helicopters.
Fortunately I have had no issues with any of my equipment to date BUT I am leaning towards either WEATRONIC or JETI. Both these systems still allow you to use your TX’s but do provide possibly the most reliable RF link to date.
Just my opinion!!!
Ron
05-16-2011, 09:13 AM
#22
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: mr_matt
This is a very definitive statement. How do you know for sure this was the case?
ORIGINAL: Skaluf
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi.
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi.
This is a very definitive statement. How do you know for sure this was the case?
It seems to me that the RF environment at the Joe Nall is the toughest out there - especially on the main flight line where the jets and large aircraft are flown at maximum ranges. In addition, as you fly away from the flight stations on the main flight line, you actually get closer (or even go right over) the float plane area, the heli flight line, and the 3D flight line. At the same time, on the heli and 3D lines, the pilots fly much closer in and on the float plane line, you fly away from all of the other flight lines, not towards them.
Has anyone gathered statistics (or thought about doing so) on the number of lock-outs experienced on the other flight lines? Also, it would be a very easy thing to monitor the 2.4 GHz spectrum at the Nall and see what it looks like at the height of operations. I'm a bit surprised that the manufacturers aren't doing that - just to see what kind of worst-case environment they have to live in - or maybe they are doing it?
Bob
05-16-2011, 09:24 AM
#23
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: farnborough, , UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
Hey guys,
Yep, #2 now for me at the Nall. Here is what happened, I installed a new custom mirrored cockpit (receivers & powerbox royal underneath in stock location). I did range checks and flew with no issues. I flew late Wednesday and did a long slow roll, finished the roll and pulled up but the last input received was my aileron to stop the roll. It luckily went into an opening and scattered into the woods, no fire, unfortunately a total loss. Basically I was 2000' away (guess) looking up the tailpipe, through the motor, full fuel tanks and to top it off the mirror plexiglass cockpit floor over the RX's. I checked one of my 4,000mah lipo's that was still together and it read 8.05v under a load so battery wasn't an issue.
I saw one Spektrum lightning (classic) lockout and go in Thursday and this morning a Skymaster T-45/Hawk go into the woods and fireball (assuming it was DSMX cause of the pilot/owner but not sure).
There were many more lockouts and losses with prop planes that were quite scary.
My Tuono, Turbinator & Ultra Flash flew awesome and I didn't let my crash spoil my trip.
_____________________________
Shui - Team Futaba, Shulman Aviation, Airworld, AMT NL, Comp-ARF, Pirotti Jets, JetCat, Jet Central, KingTech, Moki + more
Yep, #2 now for me at the Nall. Here is what happened, I installed a new custom mirrored cockpit (receivers & powerbox royal underneath in stock location). I did range checks and flew with no issues. I flew late Wednesday and did a long slow roll, finished the roll and pulled up but the last input received was my aileron to stop the roll. It luckily went into an opening and scattered into the woods, no fire, unfortunately a total loss. Basically I was 2000' away (guess) looking up the tailpipe, through the motor, full fuel tanks and to top it off the mirror plexiglass cockpit floor over the RX's. I checked one of my 4,000mah lipo's that was still together and it read 8.05v under a load so battery wasn't an issue.
I saw one Spektrum lightning (classic) lockout and go in Thursday and this morning a Skymaster T-45/Hawk go into the woods and fireball (assuming it was DSMX cause of the pilot/owner but not sure).
There were many more lockouts and losses with prop planes that were quite scary.
My Tuono, Turbinator & Ultra Flash flew awesome and I didn't let my crash spoil my trip.
_____________________________
Shui - Team Futaba, Shulman Aviation, Airworld, AMT NL, Comp-ARF, Pirotti Jets, JetCat, Jet Central, KingTech, Moki + more
marcs
05-16-2011, 09:25 AM
#24
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: rhklenke
I'm wondering the same thing - especially in light of the claim that there were a number of other lock-out caused crashes of FASST equipped jets. Now before anybody piles on, I'm a dedicated FASST user and I've posted a lot about the very positive experiences I've had with FASST in some really RF-challenged UAV applications - I just wonder why there's no discussion of the other crashes that happened and what the causes might be.
It seems to me that the RF environment at the Joe Nall is the toughest out there - especially on the main flight line where the jets and large aircraft are flown at maximum ranges. In addition, as you fly away from the flight stations on the main flight line, you actually get closer (or even go right over) the float plane area, the heli flight line, and the 3D flight line. At the same time, on the heli and 3D lines, the pilots fly much closer in and on the float plane line, you fly away from all of the other flight lines, not towards them.
Has anyone gathered statistics (or thought about doing so) on the number of lock-outs experienced on the other flight lines? Also, it would be a very easy thing to monitor the 2.4 GHz spectrum at the Nall and see what it looks like at the height of operations. I'm a bit surprised that the manufacturers aren't doing that - just to see what kind of worst-case environment they have to live in - or maybe they are doing it?
Bob
ORIGINAL: mr_matt
This is a very definitive statement. How do you know for sure this was the case?
ORIGINAL: Skaluf
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi.
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi.
This is a very definitive statement. How do you know for sure this was the case?
It seems to me that the RF environment at the Joe Nall is the toughest out there - especially on the main flight line where the jets and large aircraft are flown at maximum ranges. In addition, as you fly away from the flight stations on the main flight line, you actually get closer (or even go right over) the float plane area, the heli flight line, and the 3D flight line. At the same time, on the heli and 3D lines, the pilots fly much closer in and on the float plane line, you fly away from all of the other flight lines, not towards them.
Has anyone gathered statistics (or thought about doing so) on the number of lock-outs experienced on the other flight lines? Also, it would be a very easy thing to monitor the 2.4 GHz spectrum at the Nall and see what it looks like at the height of operations. I'm a bit surprised that the manufacturers aren't doing that - just to see what kind of worst-case environment they have to live in - or maybe they are doing it?
Bob
05-16-2011, 09:50 AM
#25
Senior Member
RE: Futaba, or just 2.4, problems at Joe Nall?
ORIGINAL: Skaluf
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi. The owner was advised against it, but a range check led him to believe it was safe to fly. Unfortunately it was proven to not be the case.
Steve
Hi guys,
The jet crash that took place at Nall was caused by the radio installation under a metalized piece of plexi. The owner was advised against it, but a range check led him to believe it was safe to fly. Unfortunately it was proven to not be the case.
Steve
.