Will aluminum fuselage interfere with electronics
03-03-2014, 08:06 AM
#51
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anytime anyone on these forums says it worked and therefore it should always work, he simply knows nothing about statistical analysis.
Its the ultimate statement of arrogant ignorance.
It only says it worked under these conditions at this time.
Now we all know someone that flew an aluminum aircraft and got away with it.
So is there a test that will assure me that my aluminum airplane will survive?
Here is one that will make you feel better.
Obtain a radio that telemeters the received strength and logs it. It should also allow you to reduce the transmitted strength to save walking all over the county. A Fr-Sky Taranis will do this, maybe the Jedi will do it also . I dont know though as I dont have a Jedi.
Set the AC on a table at least 3' high and reduce the tx power. Walk out until the signal strength is below threshold with vertical polarization. Repeat with horizontal polarization.
With the Tx held to the polarization that produces the lowest received signal level, walk 360 degrees around the AC maintaining the distance.
Tilt the AC 10 degrees and repeat. Repeat this test for every 10 degrees of the aircraft horizontal attitude. (360 times)(X axis)
Repeat this test for every 10 degrees of vertical attitude(Y axis)
Examine your log, If the received signal stays above the threshold 90% of the time I would say you are safe to fly
Its the ultimate statement of arrogant ignorance.
It only says it worked under these conditions at this time.
Now we all know someone that flew an aluminum aircraft and got away with it.
So is there a test that will assure me that my aluminum airplane will survive?
Here is one that will make you feel better.
Obtain a radio that telemeters the received strength and logs it. It should also allow you to reduce the transmitted strength to save walking all over the county. A Fr-Sky Taranis will do this, maybe the Jedi will do it also . I dont know though as I dont have a Jedi.
Set the AC on a table at least 3' high and reduce the tx power. Walk out until the signal strength is below threshold with vertical polarization. Repeat with horizontal polarization.
With the Tx held to the polarization that produces the lowest received signal level, walk 360 degrees around the AC maintaining the distance.
Tilt the AC 10 degrees and repeat. Repeat this test for every 10 degrees of the aircraft horizontal attitude. (360 times)(X axis)
Repeat this test for every 10 degrees of vertical attitude(Y axis)
Examine your log, If the received signal stays above the threshold 90% of the time I would say you are safe to fly
03-03-2014, 08:43 AM
#52
I have to agree with Dirtybird on this one. Ultimately it's the range test that will determine if the particular setup will work in that specific environment. I do close to the same range check as described. I set my TX to low power and do a ranch check with the engine off. Once I get to the edge of range in low power mode, I have a helper rotate the airplane. I will usually get way past the manufacturers safe distance as described in the manual. I repeat this test with the engine running. If I get more then a 10% reduction with the engine running I don't fly.
I also spoke with an antenna engineer that also fly's R/C about an hour ago. He said it would be very difficult to seal up an aluminum model fuselage enough to the point to impede signal followed by a disclaimer of " It would be interesting to see what happens "
I also spoke with an antenna engineer that also fly's R/C about an hour ago. He said it would be very difficult to seal up an aluminum model fuselage enough to the point to impede signal followed by a disclaimer of " It would be interesting to see what happens "
03-03-2014, 08:55 AM
#53
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tampa,
FL
Posts: 650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well dirty bird why does it work then why have pepole done it why have i seen it done ? why is acer posting videos of it being done
so you're telling me you know more about radios metal bodyed airframe's then the guys doing it ? I'm thinking your full of it , i think your a washed up old dude who just needs attention and need's his ego to be justified becouase your peak at this hobby has long passed you decades ago . .. because " back in the day i walked up the hill both ways to get to school mentality "
this is just as dumb as the time you came on RCU calming to know that lipo batterys where the most unreliable battery tech available .. that's dumb.. and you're theory of this thread is dumb too.. because it's alreayd been done over and over again .. by NONE SKILLED people , and i betting you don't own a metal bodyed airframe .. but yet your a subject matter expert , how in the hell does that work ?
dude your a expert troll is what you are
so I want to hear it troll why has it been done why am i seeing it done why ? the guy didn't even have a fancy RX man he didn't have power safe he didnt have extra recivers or anything just a normal Futaba fast 2.4 RX and he flew the plane just fine .. and he did it more then once and at more then one airfield .. so lets here the B.S
it's dumb to say something doesn't work when it clearly does .. specialy when your speculating and you dont have ANY first hand knowledge
this is my openion that you're a troll .. but it's a fact that it's been done that's NOT MY OPINION
agian my club member freaking did it . and i was there .. and it pisses me off your aloud to talk trash on RCU with nothing to any validation ,
so you're telling me you know more about radios metal bodyed airframe's then the guys doing it ? I'm thinking your full of it , i think your a washed up old dude who just needs attention and need's his ego to be justified becouase your peak at this hobby has long passed you decades ago . .. because " back in the day i walked up the hill both ways to get to school mentality "
this is just as dumb as the time you came on RCU calming to know that lipo batterys where the most unreliable battery tech available .. that's dumb.. and you're theory of this thread is dumb too.. because it's alreayd been done over and over again .. by NONE SKILLED people , and i betting you don't own a metal bodyed airframe .. but yet your a subject matter expert , how in the hell does that work ?
dude your a expert troll is what you are
so I want to hear it troll why has it been done why am i seeing it done why ? the guy didn't even have a fancy RX man he didn't have power safe he didnt have extra recivers or anything just a normal Futaba fast 2.4 RX and he flew the plane just fine .. and he did it more then once and at more then one airfield .. so lets here the B.S
it's dumb to say something doesn't work when it clearly does .. specialy when your speculating and you dont have ANY first hand knowledge
this is my openion that you're a troll .. but it's a fact that it's been done that's NOT MY OPINION
agian my club member freaking did it . and i was there .. and it pisses me off your aloud to talk trash on RCU with nothing to any validation ,
Last edited by zacharyR; 03-03-2014 at 10:46 AM.
03-03-2014, 09:30 AM
#54
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tallevast,
FL
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look Guys!!
THIS is a 40% All aluminum Beaver... 200 punds worth of metal, and a five cyl ignition,, NO ISSUES
Again, this are facts, not assumptions or guesses. If Radio installation is done properly, Aluminum airplanes work as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrOZsQRkFL4
THIS is a 40% All aluminum Beaver... 200 punds worth of metal, and a five cyl ignition,, NO ISSUES
Again, this are facts, not assumptions or guesses. If Radio installation is done properly, Aluminum airplanes work as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrOZsQRkFL4
03-03-2014, 09:35 AM
#55
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Look Guys!!
THIS is a 40% All aluminum Beaver... 200 punds worth of metal, and a five cyl ignition,, NO ISSUES
Again, this are facts, not assumptions or guesses. If Radio installation is done properly, Aluminum airplanes work as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrOZsQRkFL4
THIS is a 40% All aluminum Beaver... 200 punds worth of metal, and a five cyl ignition,, NO ISSUES
Again, this are facts, not assumptions or guesses. If Radio installation is done properly, Aluminum airplanes work as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrOZsQRkFL4
03-03-2014, 09:53 AM
#56
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I am an washed up old dude that the hobby has passed me by. I dont fly $10000 Chinese toys. I also dont fly my models where it looks like I threw a cat up in the air.
I dont think that has anything to do with the laws of physics,though
bye
I dont think that has anything to do with the laws of physics,though
bye
Last edited by dirtybird; 03-03-2014 at 12:18 PM.
03-03-2014, 02:13 PM
#57
Thread Starter
I noticed that all the "all metal" scale planes have big windows in the fuselage that are not metals, I assume that will yield a very different result in the cases where some were talking about the whole enclosure being totally enclosed by aluminum. i think it is my fault that i started the question assuming all components were being totally enclosed in an all aluminum fuselage while in reality, no flying scale plane was fully enclosed by metals. So i think both sides of arguments are right. If all sealed up, it impedes signals; if not totally sealed up, it is not so bad.
03-03-2014, 10:08 PM
#61
Thread Starter
03-03-2014, 10:48 PM
#62
Thread Starter
Last edited by Kentli22; 03-03-2014 at 10:56 PM.
03-03-2014, 11:45 PM
#63
Thread Starter
03-04-2014, 05:32 AM
#64
I noticed that all the "all metal" scale planes have big windows in the fuselage that are not metals, I assume that will yield a very different result in the cases where some were talking about the whole enclosure being totally enclosed by aluminum. i think it is my fault that i started the question assuming all components were being totally enclosed in an all aluminum fuselage while in reality, no flying scale plane was fully enclosed by metals. So i think both sides of arguments are right. If all sealed up, it impedes signals; if not totally sealed up, it is not so bad.
03-04-2014, 05:49 AM
#65
Carlos, nobody is arguing with your success. Obviously it works for you and I think we are starting to understand why. Still a question was asked if you did anything different then a typical install and I had suggested that you put some thought into the placement of your satellite receivers. I think your comments would have carried more vitality had you answered those questions rather then just stating " I've done it and it works ". IMO and I mean no offense that's like a parent telling their teenager ' because I said so ". As a parent of 4 teenagers I can assure you that doesn't work well at all. Supporting your statements with actual facts would have been better received. Now as for why I resist such construction is that it appears in this thread that some would believe that aluminum would have no affects at all. I can assure everyone that it does. I build literally a thousand + antennas for full scale aircraft per year. All of them have aluminum housings to shield the back end of the antenna. This keeps signal exiting only the front of the antenna as desired. We also have an antenna that uses aluminum to reflect signal so thinking that metal of any kind is not going to have an effect is wrong. I have access to some of the best antenna designers in the world. A couple of them agree that a signal will get into the structure via " Leaks " in the airframe. Basically means any opening in the structure no matter how small but it would be an unknown at exactly how much the range would be affected and it would be different for each aircraft. The both however agreed that it would have some effect, it's just impossible to know how much without getting the structure into a test chamber and running some patterns.
03-04-2014, 06:22 AM
#66
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Carlos, nobody is arguing with your success. Obviously it works for you and I think we are starting to understand why. Still a question was asked if you did anything different then a typical install and I had suggested that you put some thought into the placement of your satellite receivers. I think your comments would have carried more vitality had you answered those questions rather then just stating " I've done it and it works ". IMO and I mean no offense that's like a parent telling their teenager ' because I said so ". As a parent of 4 teenagers I can assure you that doesn't work well at all. Supporting your statements with actual facts would have been better received. Now as for why I resist such construction is that it appears in this thread that some would believe that aluminum would have no affects at all. I can assure everyone that it does. I build literally a thousand + antennas for full scale aircraft per year. All of them have aluminum housings to shield the back end of the antenna. This keeps signal exiting only the front of the antenna as desired. We also have an antenna that uses aluminum to reflect signal so thinking that metal of any kind is not going to have an effect is wrong. I have access to some of the best antenna designers in the world. A couple of them agree that a signal will get into the structure via " Leaks " in the airframe. Basically means any opening in the structure no matter how small but it would be an unknown at exactly how much the range would be affected and it would be different for each aircraft. The both however agreed that it would have some effect, it's just impossible to know how much without getting the structure into a test chamber and running some patterns.
03-04-2014, 09:12 AM
#73
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Sunshine state, when it's not raining!
Posts: 8,131
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I have another Rx'er coming today. I am going to make a sealed aluminum box and see how far the Rx'er will operate vs without the box. Or at least how far on a 2 mile stretch of road.
03-04-2014, 09:31 AM
#74
One upon a time at my club site we had a fairly sizable group of IMAC pilots. None of us would put our TX in the impound. A clear violation of the club rules. One day a member challenged us on that stating that is one of us left our TX on there was no way of it being caught. We countered stating that a couple of us had our TX messed with while in the impound and we were locking them up in our aluminum cases so that even if on they would not pose a threat. The club member asked how we knew it would not interfere, so we turned on my airplane, shut my 10X in my case ( Antenna off as that is the way it was stored between flights ). I got approx 30 feet away from the airplane and it went into fail safe. Now granted this was one of the fancy JR TX cases that has a tongue and groove type interaction between the case and lid. After that nobody bothered us about not using the impound.