2.4ghz lockout today
12-03-2009, 02:18 PM
#51
My Feedback: (19)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Raeford, North Carolina
Posts: 3,988
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
Why didn't they do that FIRST?
Yeah, I mean, why didn't they just have them FIRST when we were flying AM radios in the 70's and 80's and getting shot down by train counters and automatic door openers? COME ON!
1. They come out with an awesome super-advancement for us. Beats all 72mhz by a mile..
2. They identify something that could be made even better, so they bend their backs to it and they get that done in record time, then give all of us loyal customers who bought the first version a FREE upgrade!!
(I think I just paid 800 dollars for the "next" version of Photoshop or Pagemaker...could've used THAT for free, I tell ya....)
3. You feel it's proper to complain that they didn't come out with the latest and greatest stuff FIRST.
4. This is where me and/or other folks just shake their head.
5. Then I tell you that I know literally hundreds of people with Spektrums, have never even MET anybody who has had any real problems with theirs, and that I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of the testimonials hastily posted here wouldn't stand up to any real scrutiny. Some people just do sloppy work, or do foolish things setting up their planes, or fly in areas where they should not. They also think that Spektrum should have come out with the latest and the greatest FIRST, while these same folks do things like fly Spektrums with amplifying "Y" harnesses and electronic "Y" harness servo reversers in their planes and never check the consumer notices that Spektrum provides to keep us in the know about the best setups.. Do you ever watch Dr. House? This is relevant, by the way. He says; "People lie, ALL of them lie, and they do it for themselves. But most importantly, they just LIE."
Yeah, I mean, why didn't they just have them FIRST when we were flying AM radios in the 70's and 80's and getting shot down by train counters and automatic door openers? COME ON!
1. They come out with an awesome super-advancement for us. Beats all 72mhz by a mile..
2. They identify something that could be made even better, so they bend their backs to it and they get that done in record time, then give all of us loyal customers who bought the first version a FREE upgrade!!
(I think I just paid 800 dollars for the "next" version of Photoshop or Pagemaker...could've used THAT for free, I tell ya....)
3. You feel it's proper to complain that they didn't come out with the latest and greatest stuff FIRST.
4. This is where me and/or other folks just shake their head.
5. Then I tell you that I know literally hundreds of people with Spektrums, have never even MET anybody who has had any real problems with theirs, and that I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of the testimonials hastily posted here wouldn't stand up to any real scrutiny. Some people just do sloppy work, or do foolish things setting up their planes, or fly in areas where they should not. They also think that Spektrum should have come out with the latest and the greatest FIRST, while these same folks do things like fly Spektrums with amplifying "Y" harnesses and electronic "Y" harness servo reversers in their planes and never check the consumer notices that Spektrum provides to keep us in the know about the best setups.. Do you ever watch Dr. House? This is relevant, by the way. He says; "People lie, ALL of them lie, and they do it for themselves. But most importantly, they just LIE."
12-03-2009, 02:34 PM
#52
My Feedback: (19)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Raeford, North Carolina
Posts: 3,988
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: RobinLeblond
TexasSkyPilot,
I somehow understood why they are taking ''a chance'' to fly over this kind of place...
Here in Quebec we have ''more then a lot'' of trouble to find a field since our gouvernment ''officialy'' forbiding
us to use ANY agriculturale place to practice our hobby, and as most of the flyable place are agriculture
we simply do not have any safe place to fly. And we have to consider public (and neighbourhood) security
before our plane security (I meen by that : Better choose a risky place for our plane but far away from any
neighbourhood then to choose a safer place for our plane but right in a residential proximity...).
But still, you have a point : Why taking a risk when you know their is a risk...
Sometime we dont have a lot of options...
TexasSkyPilot,
I somehow understood why they are taking ''a chance'' to fly over this kind of place...
Here in Quebec we have ''more then a lot'' of trouble to find a field since our gouvernment ''officialy'' forbiding
us to use ANY agriculturale place to practice our hobby, and as most of the flyable place are agriculture
we simply do not have any safe place to fly. And we have to consider public (and neighbourhood) security
before our plane security (I meen by that : Better choose a risky place for our plane but far away from any
neighbourhood then to choose a safer place for our plane but right in a residential proximity...).
But still, you have a point : Why taking a risk when you know their is a risk...
Sometime we dont have a lot of options...
I'm from Maine and many of my friends are from Quebec, and I don't believe I've ever heard of this "official" law forbidding you to fly your planes over an agricultural field. Besides, are all Canadian farmers unfriendly? I've seen many a field going to seed in Quebec, seems that with a little effort by a club to get to know the landowner/farmer that both parties could benefit. I've never yet met a farmer who wouldn't jump at the chance to make 600 bucks a year from a field he isn't going to be cultivating. That's 50 bucks a month for your club, literally chicken feed.
This is criticism, but please take it as constructive. I grew trying to figure out how to make ordinary pieces of plastic and tin and light wood into airplanes that would fly. As hobbyists we all had to think outside the box to complete a plane. As clubs, even more so. You have to look at what you have, then look at where you want to get to, then find a way to get there. Use your imagination. Get others in on solving this problem.
It CAN'T be harder than rebuilding all sorts of planes.
12-03-2009, 02:40 PM
#53
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: BaldEagel
Could be a Futaba set with a Spektrum, Act, Jeti or even a Weatroics module in it.
Mike
Could be a Futaba set with a Spektrum, Act, Jeti or even a Weatroics module in it.
Mike
Maybe John could let us know which before Paul risks his FASST at that field
Gordon
12-03-2009, 02:46 PM
#54
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St-Jean sur Richelieu,
QC, CANADA
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
TexasSkyPilot,
You have no idea how harder it is... but this is completly an other subject, but for your information, you can search on google this :
Quebec Clubs need your help CPTAQ
(as it is on an other newgroups website I can't give you the direct link... )
As you will see, this is H..L of a big probleme here... Fortunatly we are on a "good" way to get something better between them and us...
But, I seriously think about flying on the other side (USA) as I'm verry close to the border (Napierville/Lacolle)...
;-)
You have no idea how harder it is... but this is completly an other subject, but for your information, you can search on google this :
Quebec Clubs need your help CPTAQ
(as it is on an other newgroups website I can't give you the direct link... )
As you will see, this is H..L of a big probleme here... Fortunatly we are on a "good" way to get something better between them and us...
But, I seriously think about flying on the other side (USA) as I'm verry close to the border (Napierville/Lacolle)...
;-)
12-03-2009, 04:03 PM
#55
Senior Member
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: hyperdyne
Not really, you assume too much. The 6100 is a grand example of a terrible spektrum receiver. It was not a full range receiver, but you could never get a max range number out of Spektrum. Many of my parkflyers (and other guys planes) were lost to using this POS.
After I switched to the 6200 and 7000, problems disappeared. Hmmm, curious.
Being an engineer who designs and uses much more complex DSSS systems on a daily basis, I know more about them than the average joe. I just happen to call out a flaw when I see it. I still fly Spektrum to this day, but I also have some important issues I wish they would address.
Not really, you assume too much. The 6100 is a grand example of a terrible spektrum receiver. It was not a full range receiver, but you could never get a max range number out of Spektrum. Many of my parkflyers (and other guys planes) were lost to using this POS.
After I switched to the 6200 and 7000, problems disappeared. Hmmm, curious.
Being an engineer who designs and uses much more complex DSSS systems on a daily basis, I know more about them than the average joe. I just happen to call out a flaw when I see it. I still fly Spektrum to this day, but I also have some important issues I wish they would address.
12-03-2009, 04:07 PM
#56
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Superior, CO
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
Yes, why didn't they engineer it correctly in the first place. Why make the consumer crash planes and complain, only to fix the problem when critical mass ensues. That's the microsoft model, not a business model to have in this hobby. You are only as good as your RF link, and to leave something as basic as common reacquisition is a failure.
The old adage "There is never time to do it right but always time to do it over" comes to mind. Such a gaping hole in their system is a red mark. The first time I saw a spektrum I thought it was great. At the same time I said "I hope they can reacquire fast during a signal loss - if not this 2.4G is not as good as 72M in that regard".
Would you like your GPS receiver to take 13 minutes to give you a position every time you turn it on (which is the time it takes for full ephemeris to come in)? Probably not, but the GPS guys are smarter than that when designing a receiver.
You can shake your head all you want, that just confirms that you only accept data points that prove your point. Anything else must be false. My spidey sense tells me you are not an engineer (or disciplined in any scientific area) - but in fact you may actually work for the IPCC the way you perceive data. Let's face it, you've admitted that you have problems plugging futaba plugs into hitec jacks.
Heck by your own quote below you must be lying. And as such, I will weight your response appropriately.
The old adage "There is never time to do it right but always time to do it over" comes to mind. Such a gaping hole in their system is a red mark. The first time I saw a spektrum I thought it was great. At the same time I said "I hope they can reacquire fast during a signal loss - if not this 2.4G is not as good as 72M in that regard".
Would you like your GPS receiver to take 13 minutes to give you a position every time you turn it on (which is the time it takes for full ephemeris to come in)? Probably not, but the GPS guys are smarter than that when designing a receiver.
You can shake your head all you want, that just confirms that you only accept data points that prove your point. Anything else must be false. My spidey sense tells me you are not an engineer (or disciplined in any scientific area) - but in fact you may actually work for the IPCC the way you perceive data. Let's face it, you've admitted that you have problems plugging futaba plugs into hitec jacks.
Heck by your own quote below you must be lying. And as such, I will weight your response appropriately.
ORIGINAL: TexasSkyPilot
Why didn't they do that FIRST?
Yeah, I mean, why didn't they just have them FIRST when we were flying AM radios in the 70's and 80's and getting shot down by train counters and automatic door openers? COME ON!
1. They come out with an awesome super-advancement for us. Beats all 72mhz by a mile..
2. They identify something that could be made even better, so they bend their backs to it and they get that done in record time, then give all of us loyal customers who bought the first version a FREE upgrade!!
(I think I just paid 800 dollars for the ''next'' version of Photoshop or Pagemaker...could've used THAT for free, I tell ya....)
3. You feel it's proper to complain that they didn't come out with the latest and greatest stuff FIRST.
4. This is where me and/or other folks just shake their head.
5. Then I tell you that I know literally hundreds of people with Spektrums, have never even MET anybody who has had any real problems with theirs, and that I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of the testimonials hastily posted here wouldn't stand up to any real scrutiny. Some people just do sloppy work, or do foolish things setting up their planes, or fly in areas where they should not. They also think that Spektrum should have come out with the latest and the greatest FIRST, while these same folks do things like fly Spektrums with amplifying ''Y'' harnesses and electronic ''Y'' harness servo reversers in their planes and never check the consumer notices that Spektrum provides to keep us in the know about the best setups.. Do you ever watch Dr. House? This is relevant, by the way. He says; ''People lie, ALL of them lie, and they do it for themselves. But most importantly, they just LIE.''
Why didn't they do that FIRST?
Yeah, I mean, why didn't they just have them FIRST when we were flying AM radios in the 70's and 80's and getting shot down by train counters and automatic door openers? COME ON!
1. They come out with an awesome super-advancement for us. Beats all 72mhz by a mile..
2. They identify something that could be made even better, so they bend their backs to it and they get that done in record time, then give all of us loyal customers who bought the first version a FREE upgrade!!
(I think I just paid 800 dollars for the ''next'' version of Photoshop or Pagemaker...could've used THAT for free, I tell ya....)
3. You feel it's proper to complain that they didn't come out with the latest and greatest stuff FIRST.
4. This is where me and/or other folks just shake their head.
5. Then I tell you that I know literally hundreds of people with Spektrums, have never even MET anybody who has had any real problems with theirs, and that I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of the testimonials hastily posted here wouldn't stand up to any real scrutiny. Some people just do sloppy work, or do foolish things setting up their planes, or fly in areas where they should not. They also think that Spektrum should have come out with the latest and the greatest FIRST, while these same folks do things like fly Spektrums with amplifying ''Y'' harnesses and electronic ''Y'' harness servo reversers in their planes and never check the consumer notices that Spektrum provides to keep us in the know about the best setups.. Do you ever watch Dr. House? This is relevant, by the way. He says; ''People lie, ALL of them lie, and they do it for themselves. But most importantly, they just LIE.''
12-03-2009, 04:16 PM
#57
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Superior, CO
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
I tried flying 2 differently built strykers and an HZ spitfire. Electrical system was fine, only a couple servos on each plane. And they had BECs that were more than sufficient. I am an electrical engineer by day so I have a pretty good handle on electrical know how.
I could fly 2 different receivers in the same area and the 6100 would be the one to fail. It wasnt a boot-up issue (even though they are glacial) but a reacquisition problem. By the time the RF link was re-established the plane was on the ground in pieces. When I got up to the wreck the servos worked fine then - link was back up. Pretty cut and dry after this happened multiple times.
The experiments I did were pretty conclusive. Sure, some people state they never had a problem with the 6100. But that in of itself does not invalidate what I have seen. There are some people that can hand wave it away all they want, but at the expense of throwing away the scientific method. It's not worth wasting breath on those people since you will never convince them otherwise...
I could fly 2 different receivers in the same area and the 6100 would be the one to fail. It wasnt a boot-up issue (even though they are glacial) but a reacquisition problem. By the time the RF link was re-established the plane was on the ground in pieces. When I got up to the wreck the servos worked fine then - link was back up. Pretty cut and dry after this happened multiple times.
The experiments I did were pretty conclusive. Sure, some people state they never had a problem with the 6100. But that in of itself does not invalidate what I have seen. There are some people that can hand wave it away all they want, but at the expense of throwing away the scientific method. It's not worth wasting breath on those people since you will never convince them otherwise...
ORIGINAL: Socomon
How do you claim the 6100 was flawed? It did have a slower re-boot time, but that only ever came into play if your electrical system was inadeuate to start with - ie - trying to run too many servos off a linear BEC, binding servos, etc. What planes were you attempting to fly with a 6100? Were they parkflyers?
ORIGINAL: hyperdyne
Not really, you assume too much. The 6100 is a grand example of a terrible spektrum receiver. It was not a full range receiver, but you could never get a max range number out of Spektrum. Many of my parkflyers (and other guys planes) were lost to using this POS.
After I switched to the 6200 and 7000, problems disappeared. Hmmm, curious.
Being an engineer who designs and uses much more complex DSSS systems on a daily basis, I know more about them than the average joe. I just happen to call out a flaw when I see it. I still fly Spektrum to this day, but I also have some important issues I wish they would address.
Not really, you assume too much. The 6100 is a grand example of a terrible spektrum receiver. It was not a full range receiver, but you could never get a max range number out of Spektrum. Many of my parkflyers (and other guys planes) were lost to using this POS.
After I switched to the 6200 and 7000, problems disappeared. Hmmm, curious.
Being an engineer who designs and uses much more complex DSSS systems on a daily basis, I know more about them than the average joe. I just happen to call out a flaw when I see it. I still fly Spektrum to this day, but I also have some important issues I wish they would address.
12-03-2009, 04:17 PM
#58
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Covington,
TN
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
I have a friend that recently crashed a 38% extra on its first flight. He was using the DSM2 module in a XP9303 for the first time. While rolling his plane he noticed that it wanted to stay in the roll when he tried to come out of it. He regained control but before he could land he lost control again. It went into a slow roll down into the field. We checked both of the 6v Rx batteries and they were both good. Even if one battery was bad he should have still had control of one side of the plane. Anyone know if the DSM2 module could have caused this? We have NEVER had any type of radio hits at our flying site.
12-03-2009, 04:27 PM
#59
Senior Member
My Feedback: (11)
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: hyperdyne
I tried flying 2 differently built strykers and an HZ spitfire. Electrical system was fine, only a couple servos on each plane. And they had BECs that were more than sufficient. I am an electrical engineer by day so I have a pretty good handle on electrical know how.
I could fly 2 different receivers in the same area and the 6100 would be the one to fail. It wasnt a boot-up issue (even though they are glacial) but a reacquisition problem. By the time the RF link was re-established the plane was on the ground in pieces. When I got up to the wreck the servos worked fine then - link was back up. Pretty cut and dry after this happened multiple times.
The experiments I did were pretty conclusive. Sure, some people state they never had a problem with the 6100. But that in of itself does not invalidate what I have seen. There are some people that can hand wave it away all they want, but at the expense of throwing away the scientific method. It's not worth wasting breath on those people since you will never convince them otherwise...
I tried flying 2 differently built strykers and an HZ spitfire. Electrical system was fine, only a couple servos on each plane. And they had BECs that were more than sufficient. I am an electrical engineer by day so I have a pretty good handle on electrical know how.
I could fly 2 different receivers in the same area and the 6100 would be the one to fail. It wasnt a boot-up issue (even though they are glacial) but a reacquisition problem. By the time the RF link was re-established the plane was on the ground in pieces. When I got up to the wreck the servos worked fine then - link was back up. Pretty cut and dry after this happened multiple times.
The experiments I did were pretty conclusive. Sure, some people state they never had a problem with the 6100. But that in of itself does not invalidate what I have seen. There are some people that can hand wave it away all they want, but at the expense of throwing away the scientific method. It's not worth wasting breath on those people since you will never convince them otherwise...
Personally, I appreciate seeing reasoned input like yours, from a number of guys on ALL sides. Input like that is much more valuable than the blind and almost religious devotion that some insist on.
Gordon
12-03-2009, 04:36 PM
#60
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Superior, CO
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
I appreciate it. I am not one to just play the religious brand game. I even said I still fly Spektrum. But it was a rough start when I used the 6100. I just try to call it like I see it.
There are so many variables involved in an RF lock out I had to eliminate most of them to make such a conclusion. I think I did that. Others can certainly disagree, it doesnt matter to me. I was just passing along my findings. While some of my planes paid the ultimate price, in the end it avoided me from making the same mistake with more expensive models.
There are so many variables involved in an RF lock out I had to eliminate most of them to make such a conclusion. I think I did that. Others can certainly disagree, it doesnt matter to me. I was just passing along my findings. While some of my planes paid the ultimate price, in the end it avoided me from making the same mistake with more expensive models.
ORIGINAL: Gordon Mc
As Ayn Rand said : “Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone.â€
Personally, I appreciate seeing reasoned input like yours, from a number of guys on ALL sides. Input like that is much more valuable than the blind and almost religious devotion that some insist on.
Gordon
ORIGINAL: hyperdyne
I tried flying 2 differently built strykers and an HZ spitfire. Electrical system was fine, only a couple servos on each plane. And they had BECs that were more than sufficient. I am an electrical engineer by day so I have a pretty good handle on electrical know how.
I could fly 2 different receivers in the same area and the 6100 would be the one to fail. It wasnt a boot-up issue (even though they are glacial) but a reacquisition problem. By the time the RF link was re-established the plane was on the ground in pieces. When I got up to the wreck the servos worked fine then - link was back up. Pretty cut and dry after this happened multiple times.
The experiments I did were pretty conclusive. Sure, some people state they never had a problem with the 6100. But that in of itself does not invalidate what I have seen. There are some people that can hand wave it away all they want, but at the expense of throwing away the scientific method. It's not worth wasting breath on those people since you will never convince them otherwise...
I tried flying 2 differently built strykers and an HZ spitfire. Electrical system was fine, only a couple servos on each plane. And they had BECs that were more than sufficient. I am an electrical engineer by day so I have a pretty good handle on electrical know how.
I could fly 2 different receivers in the same area and the 6100 would be the one to fail. It wasnt a boot-up issue (even though they are glacial) but a reacquisition problem. By the time the RF link was re-established the plane was on the ground in pieces. When I got up to the wreck the servos worked fine then - link was back up. Pretty cut and dry after this happened multiple times.
The experiments I did were pretty conclusive. Sure, some people state they never had a problem with the 6100. But that in of itself does not invalidate what I have seen. There are some people that can hand wave it away all they want, but at the expense of throwing away the scientific method. It's not worth wasting breath on those people since you will never convince them otherwise...
Personally, I appreciate seeing reasoned input like yours, from a number of guys on ALL sides. Input like that is much more valuable than the blind and almost religious devotion that some insist on.
Gordon
12-03-2009, 04:42 PM
#61
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Superior, CO
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
Not sure about the dsm2 module.
If both battery packs were connected in parallel then what happens if one shorts out, has a bad cell, etc? The entire electrical system shuts down then. Those types of situations cause catastrophic failures that appear to be RF link related. If he had control at one point it could of been a lock out or battery issue. Which receiver was he using? I always use the spektrum flight logger to see how many frame losses and antenna fades I have when flying at a site. Its good to do a range check and see if you start getting frame losses before going up. Anything below 45 consecutive frame losses is ok. After that you will start getting holds.
If both battery packs were connected in parallel then what happens if one shorts out, has a bad cell, etc? The entire electrical system shuts down then. Those types of situations cause catastrophic failures that appear to be RF link related. If he had control at one point it could of been a lock out or battery issue. Which receiver was he using? I always use the spektrum flight logger to see how many frame losses and antenna fades I have when flying at a site. Its good to do a range check and see if you start getting frame losses before going up. Anything below 45 consecutive frame losses is ok. After that you will start getting holds.
ORIGINAL: SystemX
I have a friend that recently crashed a 38% extra on its first flight. He was using the DSM2 module in a XP9303 for the first time. While rolling his plane he noticed that it wanted to stay in the roll when he tried to come out of it. He regained control but before he could land he lost control again. It went into a slow roll down into the field. We checked both of the 6v Rx batteries and they were both good. Even if one battery was bad he should have still had control of one side of the plane. Anyone know if the DSM2 module could have caused this? We have NEVER had any type of radio hits at our flying site.
I have a friend that recently crashed a 38% extra on its first flight. He was using the DSM2 module in a XP9303 for the first time. While rolling his plane he noticed that it wanted to stay in the roll when he tried to come out of it. He regained control but before he could land he lost control again. It went into a slow roll down into the field. We checked both of the 6v Rx batteries and they were both good. Even if one battery was bad he should have still had control of one side of the plane. Anyone know if the DSM2 module could have caused this? We have NEVER had any type of radio hits at our flying site.
12-03-2009, 04:48 PM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , CA
Posts: 4,900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
It sounds like perhaps what is needed for absolute safety would be a multi-band system or a way to facilitate that. Ie. something that runs with the 2.4GHz band and if that dies you can fall back on a 75MHz, 50MHz, system or something similar. At least for long enough to safely land or get out of harm's way. No radio system is going to be absolutely perfect and the only reasonable way to approach perfection would be with multiple backup systems like that.
12-03-2009, 05:07 PM
#63
Senior Member
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: hyperdyne
I appreciate it. I am not one to just play the religious brand game. I even said I still fly Spektrum. But it was a rough start when I used the 6100. I just try to call it like I see it.
There are so many variables involved in an RF lock out I had to eliminate most of them to make such a conclusion. I think I did that. Others can certainly disagree, it doesnt matter to me. I was just passing along my findings. While some of my planes paid the ultimate price, in the end it avoided me from making the same mistake with more expensive models.
I appreciate it. I am not one to just play the religious brand game. I even said I still fly Spektrum. But it was a rough start when I used the 6100. I just try to call it like I see it.
There are so many variables involved in an RF lock out I had to eliminate most of them to make such a conclusion. I think I did that. Others can certainly disagree, it doesnt matter to me. I was just passing along my findings. While some of my planes paid the ultimate price, in the end it avoided me from making the same mistake with more expensive models.
12-03-2009, 05:30 PM
#64
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
Talk to anyone who had the early XPS system (IFS in Europe) the system was fundermentaly incapable of doing what it was supposed to i.e. hop frequencies when experiencing interferance, but hundreds of people had succesful flights with it until the enivitable happened, normally at a differnt site, the early system has now been redesigned and is totaly different to the original, what has this to do with Spektrum you may ask, well think about it, Spektrum was brought to the market with a design flaw, this flaw has not been designed out, it has been modified so it does not last as long???????????????????????????? I will not trust my expensive airframes to this equipment, only those that are expendable.
Before you jump all over me, read the first two sentences again.
Mike
Before you jump all over me, read the first two sentences again.
Mike
12-03-2009, 05:39 PM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: cheltenham, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: johnls
Paul, Are you at C/Jets next Friday? If so I'll speak to you then.
John
Paul, Are you at C/Jets next Friday? If so I'll speak to you then.
John
Hi johnls
I flew at classic jets in october had six flights on the last flight on the down wind turn lost control for split second landed and put logger on and had two holds and lost 153 frames
running dsx9 and jr921 with 1 remote i put another remote in the fin now had test flights and it gets readings of about the same as the others, but i have noticed that i get very high readings at jet meets compaired to down the local field. anyway iam flying at classic jets next friday so see if my extra remote reciver works any better.
nigel
12-03-2009, 05:46 PM
#66
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dunstable, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: Gordon W
Good point Mike Maybe John could let us know which before Paul risks his FASST at that field Gordon
ORIGINAL: BaldEagel Could be a Futaba set with a Spektrum, Act, Jeti or even a Weatroics module in it. Mike
Maybe John could let us know which before Paul risks his FASST at that field Gordon
Paul
12-03-2009, 06:55 PM
#68
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
It's to bad about the Spektrum lock outs. I lost two planes this summer with a Futaba on ch 46, we have some very high radio /microwave towers less than a mile from the flying sight. I rushed into and replaced it with a Futaba 2.4 Fast system recently, I like the system but would like to hear of any thing to look out for or if any one has had problems with it.
12-03-2009, 11:11 PM
#70
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Maumelle,
AR
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
To Johnls ... Why not give yourself the best chance for success by ordering your Tx and Rx's from a U.S. dealer? You said over in the UK your radio equipment is required to be of lower power/signal output than the radios from the U.S., .. so why not make the small investment to swap out. May or may not solve all your probs, but should certainly help if you are flying expensive birds in an already noisy environment. UK X9303's look just like ours don't they? UK AR9100's look just like ours don't they?
12-04-2009, 04:38 AM
#72
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: Socomon
Which is?
ORIGINAL: BaldEagel
Spektrum was brought to the market with a design flaw
Spektrum was brought to the market with a design flaw
Mike
12-04-2009, 04:41 AM
#73
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: Mitsu1
To Johnls ... Why not give yourself the best chance for success by ordering your Tx and Rx's from a U.S. dealer? You said over in the UK your radio equipment is required to be of lower power/signal output than the radios from the U.S., .. so why not make the small investment to swap out. May or may not solve all your probs, but should certainly help if you are flying expensive birds in an already noisy environment. UK X9303's look just like ours don't they? UK AR9100's look just like ours don't they?
To Johnls ... Why not give yourself the best chance for success by ordering your Tx and Rx's from a U.S. dealer? You said over in the UK your radio equipment is required to be of lower power/signal output than the radios from the U.S., .. so why not make the small investment to swap out. May or may not solve all your probs, but should certainly help if you are flying expensive birds in an already noisy environment. UK X9303's look just like ours don't they? UK AR9100's look just like ours don't they?
Mike
12-04-2009, 04:54 AM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: , CA
Posts: 4,900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: Tommygun
Nothings 100%, I'm sure even military grade UAV systems that cost millions of dollars have issues.
Nothings 100%, I'm sure even military grade UAV systems that cost millions of dollars have issues.
12-04-2009, 08:34 AM
#75
Senior Member
My Feedback: (11)
RE: 2.4ghz lockout today
ORIGINAL: BaldEagel
I don't think that the way the first Spektrum Rx's worked I.e. switching themselves off when the voltage got to just over 4 volts can be called anything else, but a design flaw!!!!!!!!
Mike
ORIGINAL: Socomon
Which is?
ORIGINAL: BaldEagel
Spektrum was brought to the market with a design flaw
Spektrum was brought to the market with a design flaw
Mike
The ability to use a dedicated little RX battery doing nothing but keeping the RX alive, with the power to the servos coming from a separate battery, could have allowed Spektrum to be at least as voltage tolerant as the JR equipment it was marketed to be a drop-in replacement for - you could then be back to having surfaces just become soft / sluggish when the servo power demands exceeded what the battery could supply (for whatever reason). A 'soft' failure like that is always preferable to a hard failure in which the RX simply goes out to lunch for a while.
Even the Spektrum 'fixes' have not addressed the problem IMO - they's simply masked the symptom a bit more, by (a) first trying to stabilize the supply voltage for a very brief period only, by selling you an overpriced capacitor, then (b) rebooting faster, rather than taking sensible & easy steps to avoid the reboot happening in the first place. To me, that's like MS Windows simply rebooting faster after each crash, instead of working to address the root cause that causes the crash (and possible loss of valuable data) in the first place - a definite improvement over the previous version, but not really the correct fix... however, with suitable marketing spin, hordes of users can be convinced otherwise.
Gordon