RE: what 2.4 article
 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Greg Hahn's article in the November 2011 issue of Model Aviation.

After the DSM2 fiasco and the string of crashes at the Joe Nall 2011 event this was bound to come.

It is appalling that the die-hards can not take this and are calling for removal of Technical Director Greg Hahn.

If you do not like the message don't shoot the messenger.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

You may be on to something.. It's just crazy.. But that is why I own 2.4 now.. That solved the problem.. For now at least.. Thanks for the info and help.. Man I hate to think about it. Going back is not an option at this point, I guess we will have to wait and see. I will keep watching the forum on this topic..

RE: what 2.4 article
 

I share warbird72's concern. Even if we keep 2.4, will it exist as it does today? Will I have to replace my current 2.4 equipment? (I understand that the technology is always improving. But don't make me replace equipment before it reaches the end of it's useful life!) If it's to be replaced, 2.4 better be grandfathered, or I'm done too. I'm still in this hobby by a thread. I hope all this discussion about 2.4, is as I suspect - baloney. Between this and the FAA/AMA/UAV horse hockey, I'm getting close to the end of the line with this hobby.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Something is missing and it is a technical explanation to the statements in the article and how it may affect the future. So we should give up using 2.4 because one vendor had a problem with interference. One vender had problems with temperature......an so on......I also do not believe that the problems are only related to too many flyers using 2.4 at the same time. I had problems with DSM2 at only one field I fly at with no one else at the field. Spektrum is on it’s 3 version of DSM. I hope they have a more robust system with the DSMX. I am a user of DSM2, Futaba, Hitec, and Extreame Link and have no loyalty to any brand, I just use what works for me. DSM2 did not work for me and I do not use it in big planes. This is just my observation but Spektrum was one of the first to mass produce a 2.4 system and the companies that delayed the release of their system seem to have the least amount of problems. That is the problem with being first. I still use 72 but by next year I will all be 2.4 on everything and after just buying 10 new 2.4 RXs to do that the Hahn article (+fourms) telling me I am wasting my money and should have keep my 72 system or implies that a newer system will come out making 2.4 obsolete bugs me. I expect more out of the AMA.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

I wonder if this has anything to do with the FAA thing? That is a sure fire way to control us. Make our radios not work! Then they will have all of us gronded.. Have you noticed all of the tfr's latley? More than I have ever seen.. This year has been the worse on that issue I think.. I mean I get an email from the ama almost twice a month.. Im right in a no fly zone.. I live about 3 miles from camp David.. Then they say your not allowed to fly when TFR is issued.. So I take that time to work on my stuff. But It's geting to the point I just don't have any intrest anymore.. To much bs..

RE: what 2.4 article
 

I doubt this would happen for a while, but the last time it did it did not require replacement of all of your radio tranmitters. You send in the transmitter to have the RF deck and possibly the antenna to be replaced.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Wait a minute, people crashed at Joe Nall and blamed their radios? No friggin way........

A quick scan through the threads where people have radio issues quickly shows the vast majority of them did not install their systems properly (in some cases it was embarrasingly obvious they never took the time to read any setup guidelines whatsoever). In practice, not in Greg's mind, 2.4 has proven far more reliable than the 72mhz systems we used to run.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

I know some of the people from my neck of the woods that went to Joe Nall and believe it or not, they crash when they're not a Joe Nall and there aren't a bazillion planes in the air. Joe Nall is no Nats. Anyone can and does fly there. That being said, I have seen a lot of issues with Spektrum radios at my field over the past couple years. I think Horizon's strategy is to be first whether it's 2.4 or telemetry or any of the other bells and whistles while Futaba goes for reliability. Futaba employs it's radio systems in industrial applications, running cranes, factory automation. Not exactly situation where a glitch is acceptable.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

WE....will fly when and where THEY tell us. WE will use what THEY manufacture... on whatever frequency THEY decide. Or WE don't fly. WE are addicted to our toys...and THEY know this. RADIO CONTROL... THEY make the radio's...and CONTROL us. [sm=wink_smile.gif]

RE: what 2.4 article
 

We don't need new xmitters or receivers, we don't half-azzed, pseudo experts that have ancient cell phone sales training, scaring the bejesus out of some of the old timers, we do need new people at the AMA. Starting with the Technical Director.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

That is what Im thinking is going to come out of all of this.. Hope Im wrong...

RE: what 2.4 article
 

If I remember, last year it was Spektrums that supposedly had problems at Joe Nall and this year it was Futaba....remember the jet crash?

RE: what 2.4 article
 

For the record, here are the facts from Joe Nall:

This is a personal communication to me from a person who was there and has personal knowledge of the two incidents. So those are the facts.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Very true John, well said!

Greg Hahn knows quite a bit about the 2.4GHz technology in this hobby, more so than most. The FAA has nothing to do with why our hobby is getting out of the 2.4GHz system. It's the FCC that will encourage the AMA. That's not including all the reports of GHz failures that are pouring in from year to year.

Remember, the GHz operates on a light spectrum and MHz works on radio waves. If they're too many spectrum signals flooding the air at one time from other wireless systems, it can and will scramble a 2.4GHz system one is using. That is why Joe Nall and other major events is talking about impounding the GHz radio along with the MHz radios.

Actually the MHz system is more reliable because it focuses on only one channel and one radio wave. Depending on voltage of the batteries in the Tx and Rx, the signal is usually very strong and direct. The only time it fails or the signal gets crazy is when someone on the same channel turns on their radio, resulting in a possible "shoot down." Another way a MHz can fail is if the range between the outgoing and recieving signal is too distant, that's why the antenna needs to be pulled out, and we don't try to fly our planes out of range.

Because of the strict AMA Club Rules and everyone has respect for their fellow flyers- I have not ever been "Shot down" and I haven't once turned on my radio before getting a tag from impound. I also ask if anyone is on my channel. OMG that's is so hard to do! What ever am I going to do if I need to use a impound again? Time to quit the hobby those jerks! :eek:

When the light spectum becomes weak, it searches for a stronger light spectrum source aka channel. When the 2.4GHz TX scans for a stronger spectrum and is slow to find one a "brown out" will happen. If it can't find a strong enough signal at all because the spectrum is flooded, that's when the "black out" will happen and everone can say,"Bye bye to Mr. Airplane."

Greg Hahn knows this and much more. He's got his hands tied politically when it comes to manufacture sponsership and the AMA. He can't come out and say straight out that there is a major issue with the 2.4GHz system. Lawsuits would be flung from out of nowhere if he did that! Instead he hints to everyone who is smart enough to catch it to keep their 72Mhz radio's just incase their 2.4Ghz radio starts to become a issue during or before operation.

Sorry to burst anyones bubble, but the MHz systems are here to stay, like it or not. I don't mind new technology if it works and is dependable. When the first radios came out with the new 2.4GHz a few years ago, that's when my warning radar went off. It's like using the same system my wireless phone uses to fly my $1,000-$2,000 dollar aircraft, I'm just not going to do it.


Pete

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Time to return to the clown channel, as I would be banned for life if a proper response was given.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

When did this happen? We are now getting out of 2.4?? Really? Who is selling radios on a different band? Can you give me a link or something? This is astonishing news!

RE: what 2.4 article
 

So I guess someone that figured it out must have told you then.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Maybe a proper response would be no response at all unless you can forward a link to dispute the facts I have given. Usually the insults and "Shooting the Messenger" starts when the other person has no documents or background to prove a person wrong and doesn't like what was written. If you were somewhat educated in Electronics Physics 101 atleast, you wouldn't be so disturbed of the facts I have given.

There are Electronics Physics Majors in Electrical Engineering who agree to what I'm writing. I know of one who watches this thread and hasn't told me that I'm wrong yet.( I hope he does if I am or got anything twisted) It was about 3 years ago when I left AT&T so my memory isn't as sharp. (Got to use it so you don't loose it)

Some Electrical Engineers are employed by the phone companies doing the repairs, or teaching the 101 basics to new phone employees.

My background job was working for AT&T as a Wirless Phone Sales/Technical Assistant. My job was also to ping towers to know if there was a malfunction. Then I would contact the Tech Team and they would diagnose and repair the transmitters in the tower, even if the tower was owned or leased.

I usually worked through a BOSS system.

So my education does have a small background in what we are discussing, the rest I'm using common sense.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

LOL.... IMO 72 mhz is more viable now than ever...not because of any shortcomings of 2.4...I have both...I enjoy all... it has never been better, either way you go...

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Huh?? Firstly radio waves are light waves, whether they are at Ghz or Mhz they are light waves.
Secondly, how is a Tx impound going to help. All the 2.4 Tx work at a similar power output (regulated btw) therefore none is sending out a signifacantly stronger signal than another. You also forget or did not know that Rx sensitivity plays a huge role in system performance.

don;t tlet the fact cloud a good story heh.... Interference can come from many sourcs not just another Tx.... but you knew that.

Err no, now you forget the whole GUID thing.. IF an Rx loses the signal it either isn't there or something has failed. The Rx onlyresponds to the signal that carries the GUIDit has been bound to.....remember that? 2.4 Rx don;lt gong looking for other Tx is their Tx signal is too weak, they go to failsafe, at least FASST Does :)

ah Greg Han can;t say it so he deligated you to run out ans shout about it. A bit like Jesus telling the 12 Apostles to go forth and multiply because he could'nt... His hands were tied apparently

Ah the penny drops. You're a ludite. Are you Armish? just asking

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Pull out the antenna to reduce the range...........

I get it now!! It's just like using a longer shotgun to get closer to the ducks.

How cheap can the radio manufacturers get? AMAshould make a rule that requires longer antennas on 2.4 GHz radios, like the ones that used to be supplied with 72 MHz radios. Problem solved.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

I think I wrote a few pages back that the new system is under development. Did I not?

I guess you didn't read between the lines, but that's OK. The responses have been quick in here and it's easy to just skim over what has been written.

I got my info right from the AMA. I can tell you it is going to be replaced and why, I can not tell you what it's being replaced with. I promised Dave that I wouldn't. Dave reads the AMA forums and I'm not going to break his trust by writing the info he asked me not to publish.

What I can tell you is the AMA will be making changes, and that the 2.4 will be replaced by what is now being developed and currently in the testing phase. They are replacing the 2.4GHz system before the phone companies request the higher spectum channels, and has the FCC notify the AMA that they can't have 2.4 GHz radios using what was once open channels.

I can not tell you any more info than that so don't bother trying to get it out of me. All you need to know is that the AMA is aware of the 2.4GHz problems and has known about it for the last 3 years and the new 2.4GHz replacement is under development. It's finally now that they mentioned it in MA that issues do exist. Anyone who knows how to read between the lines can comprehend what the article was truly saying.

Again, about time!


Pete

RE: what 2.4 article
 

I will start believing the stuff about 2.4 when I see JR, Futaba, etc making 72 again. The few people panicing dont make the market.

All I know is that most everyone in my club is on 2.4 and there were no crashes or mishaps this year that could be attributed to 2.4.

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Who said JR, Futaba and etc. were going back to making 72MHz radios? So far all I've read was most of us are keeping our 72MHz and or refusing to operate their aircraft with a 2.4GHz system. I don't know where you got that info from. But that would be nice if the did go back to making them again. I think people should have a choice in type of radio they want.

The crashes contributing to the 2.4 that you are aware of, not known for sure correct? I'm glad that you're not having problems, that's usually the case if you fly out away from any urban areas and only a handful of radios are on at one time. But once the airwaves gets flooded with the light spectrum like at Joe Nall, Bye bye birdie.


Pete

RE: what 2.4 article
 

Light waves are radio waves but radio waves may not be light waves. 

So what why does it matter?  Radio waves near the light spectum  (405 THz to 790 THz.) behave more like light and 2.4 Ghz is a very long way from a light wave.  Sitll it is more reflective as light is, and moisture will diffuse the ray, just as light becomes hazy on a humid day so do 2.4 Ghz waves.