|
RE: what 2.4 article
I can remember my grandad yelling at me when I was a kid lol. He couldnt see or hear his show haha..When I had the helis he was really yelling at me..I was bringing in some fm rock station.. I guess by line of sight. The tv was about 20 ft from me and the radio..
|
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot I have two 2.4 systems neither use lipo batteries one of them is a module system that I can switch between 72 and 2.4 that is why I know that 2.4 uses less power. |
RE: what 2.4 article
guy's I didn't want to start anything..
|
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: TimBle ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot ORIGINAL: TimBle the beauty of progress is that it takes care of itself. No fear mongering necessary Sorry this is about politics. You don't get a frequency allocation by siting on your ass and hoping for progress. There is a lot of competition for radio frequencies. When you consider the toy's and toy manufactures we have a lot more clout than you seem to think. We already have done this before. Many functions have moved up the frequency ladder vacating the lower frequencies. Not many asking for those. I have even heard that broadcast TV would like to do this, if so then that would vacate a lot of area in the 70 to 75 Mhz area. |
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: aa78 ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot I have two 2.4 systems neither use lipo batteries one of them is a module system that I can switch between 72 and 2.4 that is why I know that 2.4 uses less power. I suspect it may be that 2.4 Mhz doesn't need as much power to go long range, or that the higher frequency oscillators use less energy. The last 72 Mhz systems are only a few years and has integratedcircuits. The older recievers have a fairly large crystal and coil that won't fit into the newer 2.4 Ghz recievers, that might be an indication of how much power they needed. But not sure about this. |
RE: what 2.4 article
What are you talking about?
|
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: flycatch What are you talking about? Ithink about inviting the HiTec rep. |
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot ORIGINAL: TimBle ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot ORIGINAL: TimBle the beauty of progress is that it takes care of itself. No fear mongering necessary Sorry this is about politics. You don't get a frequency allocation by siting on your ass and hoping for progress. There is a lot of competition for radio frequencies. When you consider the toy's and toy manufactures we have a lot more clout than you seem to think. We already have done this before. Many functions have moved up the frequency ladder vacating the lower frequencies. Not many asking for those. I have even heard that broadcast TV would like to do this, if so then that would vacate a lot of area in the 70 to 75 Mhz area. We have clout as a user group. Thats it. Moving back to MHz range transmissions is going to create a hug e problem for people who have bi directional systems. Say bye bye to telemetry. The beauty of operating in the 2.4 GHz band is that for the same time more data can be transfered. Same reason why mil coms uses a wide range of frequencies depending on the environment the information that needs to be transfered. sure the higher the frequncy the more range becomes a problem but range is not a problem for RC because we are short range users <1km, some gliders exceed that yes... The RC industry has a lot invested in 2.4GHz technology currently so Ihighly doubt they will want to move back to an archaic frequency. I can see 700MHz to 900MHz being attractive but doesn;t TV transmissions use that currently..? So depsite more and more users being cramed into the 2.4GHz band I can't see RC moving on in a hurry,not unless the rcplitos wnats to pay even more for their new radio's that will now need to be re-engineered for new frequency range and SS and FH techniques adapted for the band. The cheaper solution for RC is keep finding solutions to remain viable within the 2.4GHz band and avoid conflict with other users. We'll be staying on 2.4GHz for some years to come. Of that I am sure. Fifteen years ago a RF engineering colleague who also flies RC mentioned that RC should nbe operating in the higher frequency ranges because of the possibilities it would open. He was right. Now it seems factions within the community what us to go back to the days before fire... |
RE: what 2.4 article
The RC industry has a lot invested in 2.4GHz technology currently so I highly doubt they will want to move back to an archaic frequency. |
RE: what 2.4 article
These new 2.4 radio transmitters do operate at lower output power than the 72 band, so the current requirements from the batteries are less.
The 2.4 band (ISM frequencies) is 100 MHz wide, and is kind of the wild west as far as the FCC is concerned. Originally it was not considered good for communications because atmospheric moisture attenuated the signal over long distances. This same trait heats a lot of food in my kitchen. On the old 72 MHz frequency channels, RC systems were limited to about a 6 KHz signal. This meant that the amount of information encoded in your transmitter's signal was very limited. Even the pulse width encoding systems were so heavily filtered that they worked at all was amazing. My DX-8 can send 8 channels worth of data every 11 milliseconds at a 2048 resolution. That's about twice as fast as needed and probably 4 times more accurate than I could possibly detect while flying, but it shows what the bandwidth can do at these higher frequencies. As I read the AMA note on it, I concluded the following: 1). Reflections from metal can affect 2.4 systems with multipath. Gee, it did the same on 72. 2). We need a new Technical Director at the AMA. That article was a whole lot of nothing. |
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: TimBle (big del - good stuff but doesn't need repeating) .........The RC industry has a lot invested in 2.4GHz technology currently so Ihighly doubt they will want to move back to an archaic frequency. I can see 700MHz to 900MHz being attractive but <u>doesn;t TV transmissions use that currently..? </u> Abel |
RE: what 2.4 article
I've experienced some of these loss of control incidents and asked a lot of questions to try and get some help from several sources including AMA.
At my field the problem has come and gone and sometimes rears it's ugly head again. I've had my gear checked out by Horizon and they did find a weak RF in one TX that I lost several aircraft with. The conclusions I've drawn from my own experiences at our field are: 1. DSM/DSM2 that picks two random channels everytime you turn on your TX can often pick two close together and if there is a frequency issue in the 2.4 spectrum we share with others - you may experience a problem. The problem may be complete loss of control or a momentary loss of control. 2. Frequency Hopping is less prone to this interference in the 2.4 spectrum we use. 3. A lot depends upon where you are and what is going on about you (you can't see, it feel it or touch it unfotunately.) 4. Some of the Chinese RX's on the market and some of the counterfeits do not seem (in my experience) to deal with the temporary loss of signal as well as the branded items. (Again my conclusion.) I've acquired a spectrum analyzer that works with my laptop and so far can visualize nothign that looks peculiar to my untrained eye. I feel strongly that Horizon/Spektrum/JR may have a product liability issue here with DSM/DSM2 and maybe sitting on a land mine if they don't do something to address it as the 2.4 channels are just getting more and more users. As far as support on this issue from AMA they do really try to help, but there does not seem to be a depth of resources internal to the organization that can track down the root cause here for us. Relative to returning to 72Mhz - if it was so good then what are we doing on 2.4? I can surely remember stuff falling out of the sky both from interference and our own stupidity. see http://www.rcmodelreviews.com as I think he has explains the problem in layman's language (at least two articles on Spektrum 2.4.). My course of action is to upgrade the TX's to DSMx and migrate to DSMx to minimize the chances of ongoing problems. Yes, I acquired a Futaba 2.4 system too! |
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot The RC industry has a lot invested in 2.4GHz technology currently so Ihighly doubt they will want to move back to an archaic frequency. Its the bandwidth that keep s100 Tx from conflicting. Narrow that down and yipppee ai yay back to Tx control we go. I exaggerate a little because there is a long way between 75Mhz and 2400Mhz. However, the advantages of the bandwidth is very attractive to an RC application and its the same trait that allows many different devices to talk while in the same room. Still awaiting a compelling arguement that says 2.4GHz is a dangerous place to be. |
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: ace_drummond I've experienced some of these loss of control incidents and asked a lot of questions to try and get some help from several sources including AMA. At my field the problem has come and gone and sometimes rears it's ugly head again. I've had my gear checked out by Horizon and they did find a weak RF in one TX that I lost several aircraft with. The conclusions I've drawn from my own experiences at our field are: 1. DSM/DSM2 that picks two random channels everytime you turn on your TX can often pick two close together and if there is a frequency issue in the 2.4 spectrum we share with others - you may experience a problem. The problem may be complete loss of control or a momentary loss of control. 2. Frequency Hopping is less prone to this interference in the 2.4 spectrum we use. 3. A lot depends upon where you are and what is going on about you (you can't see, it feel it or touch it unfotunately.) 4. Some of the Chinese RX's on the market and some of the counterfeits do not seem (in my experience) to deal with the temporary loss of signal as well as the branded items. (Again my conclusion.) I've acquired a spectrum analyzer that works with my laptop and so far can visualize nothign that looks peculiar to my untrained eye. I feel strongly that Horizon/Spektrum/JR may have a product liability issue here with DSM/DSM2 and maybe sitting on a land mine if they don't do something to address it as the 2.4 channels are just getting more and more users. As far as support on this issue from AMA they do really try to help, but there does not seem to be a depth of resources internal to the organization that can track down the root cause here for us. Relative to returning to 72Mhz - if it was so good then what are we doing on 2.4? I can surely remember stuff falling out of the sky both from interference and our own stupidity. see http://www.rcmodelreviews.com as I think he has explains the problem in layman's language (at least two articles on Spektrum 2.4.). My course of action is to upgrade the TX's to DSMx and migrate to DSMx to minimize the chances of ongoing problems. Yes, I acquired a Futaba 2.4 system too! I'd like to throw a spanner in the works on the loss of control issue. Has anyone ever considered atmospheric reasons for the "loss of control"? I tried an experiement at the airfield some months ago. I had ballons in the car. Anyway some blokes were saying theres a spot out there where they were experiencing strange aircraft behaviour. One bloke nearly lost his plane once. We checked it out and flew it again. No issue so he directed us to the spot where the aircraft experienced the glitch. We overflew the area with the RCplane (30cc Yak54) and eventually we got it to behave in the manner described. A few more planes were flown through the area and at slightly different points they all experienced a wobble dip and climb. I walked over to the spot, baloon sin hand (Helium filled from a party the night before) and released the baloons in the area. They rose and at height that coincided with the "loss of control" incidents the baloons did a strange twirl and almost a circle and then continued upward. We then flew an electric glider over the spot. It turns out it was an eddy that was created by a small ridge about 30m away, coupled to a gravel patch creating a thermal. Only happens on certain days. Anyway no means conclusive and even perhaps a freak day. Point is often people who actively react to every move the plane makes will often misinterpret turbulence or a strong narrow thermal as a radio glitch. Far fetched? |
RE: what 2.4 article
Somewhere in another forum, I summarized the story of frequency hopping. It was originally patented by the actress Heddy Lamar and her husband or boyfriend during WWII. Too long of a story to repeat again, but it was finally used by the US government during the Cuban missile crisis.
For those wanting to go back to 72 mHz, the train has left the station. As far as I know, no major manufacturer makes anything, except maybe a few receivers on 72. The market has moved to 2.4. People looking for a perfect system are in the wrong hobby. I started with escapements on 27, then galloping ghost, color flag 72 and then the narrow channel 72. The best has been 2.4. My only crash with 2.4 was a battery pack that decided to have a cell short out in flight and can;t blame that on 2.4 |
RE: what 2.4 article
Many things get confused in this forum, leaving readers even more confused then before.
First of all - the 2.4 Ghz systems have flaws - but far less then the 72 Mhz systems. If they use less power depends on the individual systems you compare. A new 2.4 computer system with all the options may use more power then a simple 72 Mhz Tx. WIth the high capacity batteries we have today, this is not an issue. Then we have people experiencing interference having problems with their gas engines. Yes, the ignition can still cause problems with the 2.4 receivers. The interference happens after the signal has been decoded. After the 'firewall ' and safeties the 2.4 systems use. On this end the receiver communicates with it's servos still in the old fashioned way and is prone to interference. To eliminate the problem, we had to go to a new designed receiver using a shielded data cable to send signals to the servos. Few of us want to spend the money such a system would cost. Conclusion - the 2.4 Ghz systems are the best and safest we can get. I have no doubt the rc industry will come up with something better and greater in the future. But until then my 2.4 radio will serve me well for many years to come. |
RE: what 2.4 article
STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS
After reading the posts and some of the arguments here, this is my conclusion. Rafael |
RE: what 2.4 article
<font size="14" color="#FF0000">+1</font>
|
RE: what 2.4 article
Is frequency hopping anything like bar hopping?
And it is true. Reliable sources have told me that we are going back to 72mHz systems by the year 2015. So, sell your 2.4g systems before they are useless. Also, sell all your plasma and LCD televisions, I-phones, I-pads, Kindels, cell phones and computers. The thing to buy is a DeLorian. The same reliable sources that are saying we are going back to 72mHz systems also report that we will be going back to black & white televisions, rotary phones, and snail mail by 2015. |
RE: what 2.4 article
well after 21December 2012 we going back to the stone age as some believe...
|
RE: what 2.4 article
Is the call to go back to 72 mhz just a control play? Seems a lot (not all) of those that pine for the good old days miss the impound and making sure people have their frequency pin, can't play radio police if there are no frequency conflicts.
|
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot ORIGINAL: warbird72 I do have mussle spassans tingeling in my arms.. I can't sleep at night either.. As far as the check out on the radio.. I checked it right out of here.. I then bought the first 7c 2.4. I bought it new from tower then had to send it back due to a bubble in the lcd.. But I do have 4 other 72 mhz systems all Futaba. ch 48 and 55. It's crazy I set up the plane on the 72 band walk around and glitch glitch bind. It acts as there is someone else on the same channel as me.. But I do have a scanner and on any given day no one else is on. Heck no one is on where I live.. But when the plane does this I hand the tx over to my girl and she can walk out of sight with no trouble at all. Then she will walk back I walk in between her and the plane full down and or full left or right aileron. I mean a full lock. It has striped gears because of this.. I take you have heard of this ?? I have had wrench's, cell phones, and other metal objects larger than your inserts near my transmitter. I suspect it is out of tune just enough that the induction from your insert puts it off frequency. I would send it to Radio South or the manufacture service center for a check up and tuning. |
RE: what 2.4 article
I do know one thing!! If the companys make us go back to 72 mhz IM DONE with this hobby.. Or they will at least have give us all new radios. Cuze I am not going to buy anymore systems. I guess we /I will go back to C/L.. But that wolnt work for me. I guess I will just stick to building/rebuilding rc engines. Heck may get into raceing go carts.. Thene it will be a catch me if you can issue lol.. I also have a t-maxx thats kuel at 20ft they fly..
|
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: warbird72 ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot ORIGINAL: warbird72 I do have mussle spassans tingeling in my arms.. I can't sleep at night either.. As far as the check out on the radio.. I checked it right out of here.. I then bought the first 7c 2.4. I bought it new from tower then had to send it back due to a bubble in the lcd.. But I do have 4 other 72 mhz systems all Futaba. ch 48 and 55. It's crazy I set up the plane on the 72 band walk around and glitch glitch bind. It acts as there is someone else on the same channel as me.. But I do have a scanner and on any given day no one else is on. Heck no one is on where I live.. But when the plane does this I hand the tx over to my girl and she can walk out of sight with no trouble at all. Then she will walk back I walk in between her and the plane full down and or full left or right aileron. I mean a full lock. It has striped gears because of this.. I take you have heard of this ?? I have had wrench's, cell phones, and other metal objects larger than your inserts near my transmitter. I suspect it is out of tune just enough that the induction from your insert puts it off frequency. I would send it to Radio South or the manufacture service center for a check up and tuning. Because the tuning may be off, but not enough to make it quit working withough your inserts. But this is only a hunch. |
RE: what 2.4 article
ORIGINAL: warbird72 I do know one thing!! If the companys make us go back to 72 mhz IM DONE with this hobby.. Or they will at least have give us all new radios. Cuze I am not going to buy anymore systems. I guess we /I will go back to C/L.. But that wolnt work for me. I guess I will just stick to building/rebuilding rc engines. Heck may get into raceing go carts.. Thene it will be a catch me if you can issue lol.. I also have a t-maxx thats kuel at 20ft they fly.. I don't think anyone isproposing to go back to 72 Mhz. At least not the narrow band system we have now. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:05 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.