Ron S

My Feedback: (2)

I now have 10 jet model flights on my TM-8 Futaba 8 ch. module and receiver, after having flown in a prop plane for a few weeks. I'm happy to have switched - it has breathed new life into my 12+ yr old 8UAP radio. [8D] Now to begin the switchover for the 14MZ... By the way, it was hot this weekend (94 deg F approx) - no issues. I need to shoot my temp meter at the receiver next time I go fly, to see what kind of temps the model is seeing inside, out of curiosity. The outside of the model is gray, so it probably isn't too bad. I do have an air passage, that would ensure some airflow during flying.

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

Gosh, some of you have had a handful of flights and are convinced the system is rock solid. I have been flying my jet for nearly 4 years, over 35 hours airborne time without a single twitch, it's completely coated in BVM metal-kote, with a rock solid connection. That's what I call testing, not 5 flights one afternoon. I use an amazing new invention, it's called 35 Mhz. What's more it's PPM too! I must get myself one of those 2.4Ghz sets, fly it for one afternoon and declare myself to be convinced by it!

But seriously folks....... I expect I will convert over to 2.4GHz at some time in the next couple of years, I can see the advantages of it. What I can't understand is why some people seem to think that a handful of flights on one afternoon proves that it is a better connection? Are other people suffering constant glitching or failsafes?

GrayUK

Interestingly strange post???
I personally would never put PPM in anything other than a parkfly, but hey you pay your money and make your choice. [X(]
I to have flown for more years than I care to admit, from valve sets, through single channel, superegen to superhett, galloping ghost, reads, proportional, AM, FM, PPM and to the previous pinnacle PCM.
Each one was a progressive improvement in reliability and interference rejection over the last, but they were all fundamentally based on the same type of transmission system. I have seen and had many unexplained crashes over the years, most were pilot induced, but some were some external interference of unknown origin, others some idiot switching on. Admittedly these incidents are rare, but it happens at club level more due to lack of TX impound.
Public show work is another issue, a tight TX control normally ensures a good level of flight safety but, you can still be shot down by some twat who buys a new set of gear at the trade stands and decides to test it!
The FASST system 2.4 takes us into another realm, interference rejection and security second to none.. (IMHO).
Now, no one can shoot me down, the last hang-up is gone, to me that is a peace of mind level that I want when flying in front of public. No problems with TX control, wrong pegs or even xtals. Wonderful!
No rushing around trying to get the peg as your slot approaches [>:]

That is some of the reasons I am enthusiast about it, but I have been flying FASST for about 8 months now in prop planes in all conditions over hundreds of flights and exhaustive ground/air tests, so perhaps I am qualified to be enthusiastic!
It is a great leap of faith to go to a new technology like FASST, so very often people see the benefits but prefer the comport zone of where they are. It is one thing to put it in a park fly but quite another to risk a £5000 or £15000 model. So I think the enthusiasm you see comes from a combination of, making the decision, doing it and it working!


Paul

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

But I have years and years of experience of its reliability and dependability, you have how many months with 2.4Ghz? Someone else can switch on their tx on my channel and in most cases I still have total control, not all 35Mhz PPM systems are the same!
Anyway, as I said I expect I will change to 2.4Ghz in a couple of years, I can see its advantages, you don't need to convince me of them.

My question remains though - Why do so many people post that they used 2.4Ghz this afternoon for 2 flights and it worked and so now they are completely converted to it? Was their other radio so bad that they couldn't get 2 flights in a row without glitching/failsafe? I have years and years of problem free flying my jets on 35Mhz PPM including at jet meets with lots of other radios and turbines operating, why would anyone think that no more than a handful of flights in one afternoon is enough to prove 2.4Ghz? I recall posts from people saying they had used their new XPS for a few flights that afternoon and it worked, how brilliant it is, they are completely sold on 2.4Ghz. Then a few weeks later posting that they had lock outs and crashes and were demanding their money back. Why do some people think that one afternoon of use proves it and makes them convinced of its long term dependability?

When I eventually change over to 2.4ghz I will get the advantages eg no peg, straight away. But it will take 5 or 6 years of failsafe free flying to be any more dependable than my current 35Mhz PPM set. (Probably tempting fate by saying that, will go into failsafe and crash next weekend!!)

Harry

altacom

My Feedback: (3)

I agree with that. People that change over probably are pretty pleased that they made a change, were not too sure of it, and voila!! I flew 4 perfect flights with it and I'm pretty satisfied with my choice. So why not brag a bit?
I've been on 2.4 for over a year now, first XPs, and now FAAST. Hundreds of flights, and 2.4 is the way to go. The safety thing is my biggest asset, and the more sensitive control is also nice.

But to each his own.

747drvr

My Feedback: (5)

Harry,

This is a forum to share our experiences with this new equipment so people are going to be reporting the good and the bad . The favourable reports by the early adopters give confidence to those who might be thinking of trying it . I waded in cautiously based on people's testing and positive experiences ( thanks Paul !) I now have 10 aircraft converted with more to go . This includes electrics , gassers , 3 jets and 1 turboprop . So far every one is perfect ! I don't need to be operating for months before I can proclaim that it works . If the system is fundamentally flawed , we would know pretty soon . I'm using almost all of the RX models . 607 , 617 , 608 and 6014 . Compared to the Spektum/JR system , the installation is a snap . It's cost me a few dollars to do the switch , but the writing is on the wall . This is the best technology available to us now and if it saves one aircraft from being shot down , it's paid for itself. The other benefit that I'm quite liking is no regard for frequency control . Ahhh ,the freedom

Marc

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

I agree, I have said that I expect to change over to 2.4Ghz as well. My question is still not answered - why do some people have a few flights one afternoon and on the basis of that proclaim that the system is great. I had 16 perfect flights on my jet this weekend, and one club member actually brought binoculars with him so he could watch it, because I go so far out on the turn arounds. Fantastic range and years of reliability are routine, why do some people think just one afternoon's use proves their new system is better? As in " I had 2 flights with my new 2.4Ghz today and it worked, I think this is incredible".

747drvr

My Feedback: (5)

You're right Harry . There's nothing wrong with 72 . It's been great for years . Surprisingly , I still suck at 3D and can't do a perfect slow roll 5 ft of the deck for the length of the runway because I switched to 2.4 . But unlike your system , I'm unlikely to get shot down and I don't have to get a pin ! People try the new system , it works and they report back here to add to the database . No one says that it controls the aircraft better than 72 Mhz...

Marc

rhklenke

My Feedback: (24)

Well Harry, I think that their confidence is built upon the FASST success posted here and that being achieved by the ever increasing use of FASST in high-performance jets. That makes them more comfortable to try it and when they experience it for themselves, they see that as just proof of its effectiveness.

As far as the benefits of 2.4 GHz, that is immediately obvious when you finally convert over. Noting beats the convenience of driving up to the field, getting out your planes and TX, and proceeding to assemble/set them up without a thought to "who has the pin" and "can I get it to put my gear down after I bolt on the wing." Just turn on your TX and have at it. The same applies to making adjustments to your radio setup in the pits. I find myself turning on the TX and "tweaking" between flights all the time now because its so convenient - even at meets with hundreds of pilots and on airplanes I been flying for 3 or 4 years.

This does however bring up a point and that is, I think when you switch, you should do it all at once. Switching back and forth is asking for trouble. Just yesterday I had to keep a friend, an excellent and careful pilot, from taking off his 40% Extra with the 72 MHz antenna collapsed. Go to 2.4 GHz all at once and leave all the old operating procedures behind - its the best way to do it...

Bob

altacom

My Feedback: (3)

Doing exactly what this forum is for. Apprising others that they are having success with the new gear. Nothing wrong with that. So what do we do now? Say you can't post in this forum any less than X number of successful flights?
I for one like seeing others success, no matter how small. And accompanied by images is frosting on the cake.

747drvr

My Feedback: (5)

Here's some frosting ! Two recent conversions to 2.4...

Marc

tahustvedt

Here are some of my successful conversions to 2.4. I also had a small F-16 that was impossible to eliminate glitches on with 35 MHz, but 2.4 is flawless. Not many jets yet, with emphasis on yet.

-Futaba 9CHP with a TM-8 module.
-608 in the P-40 and the Agusta.
-617 in the F-5 EDF.

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Well now hold on there! I used to fly brand F PCM and then I switched to MPX IPD (which is PPM). It was BY FAR the very best RF link with un-heard of range that I EVER had!!! Way better than my previous PCM performance.

I too think that 2.4 GHz is the future, but ain't nuttin' wrong with PPM (if implemented properly).

GrayUK

Busy thread!

Harry
Very pleased you have no issues with PPM, but it is not for me thanks, and you will find that at jet meetings, or public flying events almost all if not all are on PCM.
It’s the ‘intelligence’ in PCM that makes me feel happier, but anyway as I say if you are happy, that is fine. I did say ‘personally’.
The use of a public forum like this enables us to share our experience, so instead of 1 flyer clocking up a few flights we have the feedback from many, which gives us a total of many hundreds of flights not just 2 or 3.

747Dvr
Thanks for the thanks, and I agree, one model saved is enough to justify it.

My flying has not improved either….dammed 2.4 must be crap![&o]
Love the pics, nice looking ride on the left![sm=thumbs_up.gif]

Bob
Yes, that convenience is brilliant.
Love the story of the collapsed aerial, we had the opposite on Sunday where one guy snapped his, we immediately accused him of trying to go 2.4 on the cheap!

Altcom
Agreed, that is what threads like this are about, it helps people rather than, (as in some threads) knocking everything!

tahustvedt
Thanks for the post, glad you are having success, can I ask what lower temp you have flown FASST at?

Woketman
What can I say? PPM is not for me, but it sounds like you have had great success, so that is good no matter how you look at it.

Keep up the feedback guys, and thanks for all the PM’s I have had. [8D]

Paul

tahustvedt

Not very cold. I got the module after it started warming up. I flew my F-16 EDF far away, and the Agusta in close range hovering in temperatures down to -5°C with FASST.

-20°C is the normal temperature during winter here, and it can drop as low as -40°C during the extremes, but I never fly when it's anywhere near that cold.

jeanfi

Hello to all 2.4 users,

Here in France, we have a power limitation of 100mW (outdoor) and 10mW (indoor) for 2.4 giga systems.

You in US, what is your emitting power ? Someone told me about 500mW

Thanks for help..

Jean Fi

GrayUK

Hi and welcome.
Are you sure about thses figures?

The USA and UK are around the 100mw level, but France (my understanding) is limited to a lower power.
In the back of the 6EX there is a switch to turn the power down for France. i will get Julez to pop on with the technical stuff.


Paul

tahustvedt

I thought the France-switch just eliminated a few of the channels in the 2.4 GHz band that are reserved for other uses in France.

In Norway the limit is 100 mW for hopping systems and 10 mW for non-hopping I believe.

jeanfi

You are right, the french switch eliminate a few of the channels in the 2.4 GHz band that are reserved for other uses in France.
I know this is the french specificity


Anyway, many modellers in the US are pretty glad of their 2.4 system..but what is the real power ? 100mW like Europe or 500mW ?

Thanks you GrayUK to ask for technical answers....

Thanks again
Jean Fi

GrayUK

There does seem to be some confusion over this, i heard that the USA was higher but others say it is the same?
I know Julez has done measurements of both systems, and i think.... if i remember ...they are both the same.

I have emailed Julez so he may pop on later to clear this up.

Paul

Julez

Hi!

In contrast to Spektrum, all Fasst systems have the same power level, regardless where they are sold. This power level is slightly below 100mW (around 90somethingmW).
You can read about it here in the FCC test sheet.
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/f...ive_or_pdf=pdf
(page 42)

Sorry, I did not do any measurements concerning RF power, I just compare the results of other guys

In France, not the power level, but the frequency range is limited. When operated in "france mode", Fasst uses less channels.

Normal mode:


France mode:


Cheers,

Julez

GrayUK

Thanks Julez.
What is the 2 peaks in the top planar view?

Paul

jeanfi

HEllo Julez,

Thank you very much ! Your answer is clear and very professionnal.

Thanks again
JeanFi

FILE IFR

Like Paul and many others, I thought the US destined radios had a higher output.

Futaba talks about region codes and I thought that was the difference....What does "Region Code" mean in Futaba speak?

mick15

I believe I have something to contribute to this thread now as I have a lot of flights logged on several different aircraft.

I first flew my new system (14MZ) in my Boomerang Elan at a site I new to be a problem. I have lost three jets there over the years, I had seven flights that day and although I could not detect the better resolution I have heard about, I did feel the model rock solid and bread increasing confidence. I have now clocked 20 flights with the Elan.

Next to get the treatment was my venerable old scratch built DH110 twin. This model has always been a problem, I lost count of the number of lockouts it suffered over the years, I seemed to always be landing it dead stick! Well not any more, I fitted two 6014 Rx’s and a Powerbox Champion again each flight produces more confidence.

I have just completed my Airworld Hawk and this again is fitted with a 6014 Rx, it has completed several flights now, including two public displays, again confidence grows.

I also fly a 3W Yak 54 with a Moki 215 radial engine (five cylinder petrol) this too has had a number of flights including one public display. Same as before, rock solid.

I have made a simple little bracket to move the cg of the transmitter down a bit as it felt awkward on the neck strap.

m