RCU Forums

RCU Forums (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/)
-   Beginners (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/beginners-85/)
-   -   reciever/transmitter compability (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/beginners-85/4525590-reciever-transmitter-compability.html)

jigeye 07-20-2006 07:39 PM

reciever/transmitter compability
 
I have a 27% Somenzini Yak 54 and a Futaba 6EXA computer radio. The Yak is a gas powered airplane {EVO 26 cc}.
Do I really need a PCM reciever or will a regular FM reciever suffice? What does PCM do for me and do you need it for a gas engine?

piper_chuck 07-20-2006 10:05 PM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 
Considering the size, weight, and cost of your plane, I'd go for a PCM receiver. This is assuming that you have the new 6EXAS, not the original one, right?

RCVFR 07-20-2006 10:11 PM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 
I've been flying gas engines, magneto and EI for over 7 years on FM. So far, I have survived without PCM. You will get a lot of firmly held opinion, beliefs and threats on the subject. BTW, your engine is the Evolution 26? I don't belive EVO makes that size engine, or do they?[sm=confused.gif]

RCKen 07-20-2006 10:19 PM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 
I'm not jumping in to say for or against PCM. But I do want to clear up one point. There are two types of modulation that is used PPM and PCM. BOTH of these use FM as the transport signal. Many get confused and thing that they are choosing between FM or PCM, but in reality PCM uses FM. FM is how the signal is transmitted from the transmitter to the receiver. PPM or PCM is the language that the radio speaks to the plane with. There is a bit more involved with the differences between PPM and PCM, but I just wanted to point out that no matter what modulation you use it's still an FM radio.

Ken

bruce88123 07-21-2006 07:31 AM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 


ORIGINAL: Jim Dines

I've been flying gas engines, magneto and EI for over 7 years on FM. So far, I have survived without PCM. You will get a lot of firmly held opinion, beliefs and threats on the subject. BTW, your engine is the Evolution 26? I don't belive EVO makes that size engine, or do they?[sm=confused.gif]
I'm pretty sure they do Jim :D

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodId=EVOE26GT

RCVFR 07-21-2006 09:14 AM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 


ORIGINAL: bruce88123



ORIGINAL: Jim Dines

I've been flying gas engines, magneto and EI for over 7 years on FM. So far, I have survived without PCM. You will get a lot of firmly held opinion, beliefs and threats on the subject. BTW, your engine is the Evolution 26? I don't belive EVO makes that size engine, or do they?[sm=confused.gif]
I'm pretty sure they do Jim :D

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodId=EVOE26GT
EVO engines. www.evo-engines.com

mwarren400 07-21-2006 09:27 AM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 
Jim

You have confused EVO with Evolution...two different manufacturers. Evolution is Japanese ...EVO is Spanish I believe. Some people mistakenly use EVO as an abbreviation for Evolution.

Yes Evoluton has a 26cc gas engine.

bruce88123 07-21-2006 09:59 AM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 
Sorry Jim, I also learned as I had never heard of www.evo-engines.com before. :)

I guess we were both kinda correct.

RCVFR 07-21-2006 05:08 PM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 


ORIGINAL: mwarren400

Jim

You have confused EVO with Evolution...two different manufacturers. Evolution is Japanese ...EVO is Spanish I believe. Some people mistakenly use EVO as an abbreviation for Evolution.

Yes Evoluton has a 26cc gas engine.
I'm not the confused one. I questioned if the original poster intended to mean Evolution 26, instead of EVO 26. I know that there is an Evolution 26. I also know there is EVO Engine Company, and as best I can determine, EVO makes larger engines and not a 26cc size.

"Some people mistakenly use EVO as an abbreviation for Evolution".

No kidding? ;)

Beige 07-21-2006 06:54 PM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 

ORIGINAL: RCKen

I'm not jumping in to say for or against PCM. But I do want to clear up one point. There are two types of modulation that is used PPM and PCM. BOTH of these use FM as the transport signal. Many get confused and thing that they are choosing between FM or PCM, but in reality PCM uses FM. FM is how the signal is transmitted from the transmitter to the receiver. PPM or PCM is the language that the radio speaks to the plane with. There is a bit more involved with the differences between PPM and PCM, but I just wanted to point out that no matter what modulation you use it's still an FM radio.

Ken
irritating isn't it :D, just think, some time ago someone said FM instead of PPM for what ever reason and it's stuck, ahh well :)



anyway, i can't add anything useful to the thread, just though i'd add kens post again, just incase anyone missed it ;)

hardtop351 12-27-2006 05:15 AM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 
yes both pcm and ppm use an fm signal as a carrier.

pcm....Pulse Code Modulation
ppm....Pulse Position Modulation

pcm is said to be more tollerant to interferrence. pcm is usually preferred over ppm in spark ignition models due to their tollerance to radiated noise from the ignition system.

cheers
craig

bruce88123 12-27-2006 08:30 AM

RE: reciever/transmitter compability
 


ORIGINAL: hardtop351

yes both pcm and ppm use an fm signal as a carrier.

pcm....Pulse Code Modulation
ppm....Pulse Position Modulation

pcm is said to be more tollerant to interferrence. pcm is usually preferred over ppm in spark ignition models due to their tollerance to radiated noise from the ignition system.

cheers
craig
And the new 2.4 GHz system is better yet because it operates above all of the generated noise and never hears ANY of it. Spark ignition-OK, metal to metal connections-OK


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:14 PM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.