Sepulveda Basin
08-06-2007, 05:11 PM
#6377
RE: Sepulveda Basin
So you take a xps system that is first generation knowing that there is an update for high usage 2.4 areas and are surprised when there's an issue. Instead of getting the update that Jim posted as needed for areas with questionable high 2.4 usage, you complain that
With the new setup, it has been tested in high usage 2.4 areas and passed... It has been tested and passed. Even where some of the other brands haven't?? It sounds like unreal expectations? If you had the new setup, put it in a cheap plane and tested it (which would be the wise thing to do with any new radio, receiver etc be it 72 or 2.4) and it had issues excluding battery etc, then your conclusion would be rational!!!!
Added:
You know Jim was notified that they were getting unusual interference at the Las Vegas field. He came right out, tested it and found a solution and reason for the interference. Based on what I've read here though, I really don't know if he was notified right and really given a chance to even respond.....
But as we have seen at our field here in the Basin it has had problems, serious problems, Till they get resolved, i wouldn't put money in the hands of XPS.
Added:
You know Jim was notified that they were getting unusual interference at the Las Vegas field. He came right out, tested it and found a solution and reason for the interference. Based on what I've read here though, I really don't know if he was notified right and really given a chance to even respond.....
08-06-2007, 05:22 PM
#6378
Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Troy,
MO
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: Kmot
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Maybe I missed the posts you are referring to but I haven't seen any arrogance and if any of my post have come across as arrongant for that I apologize.
I did not see where anyone is forcing you or any members to buy anything. The only thing that has caused contention is a club banning the use of radio equipment at an event without any concrete proof that it caused the crash in question.
On 7/26/2007 in another thread XPS (Jim Drew specifically) volunteered to come out to the basin and bring their own airplanes to fly and test equpment (spctrum analyzser) and check out the field to see what kind of interference may be going on. To this the club president basically told him to don't bother because the flyers at the field were to protective of the field. To me that is arrogant. Yeah we would appreciate you help, but don't bother on the weekend. How does this offer to help keep anyone else from flying? I am sure that they would do more than a range check before they took off flying.
Don't believe me....want proof... here it is. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_60..._4/key_/tm.htm Look at post 65 and the reply post 80.
08-06-2007, 05:32 PM
#6379
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chatsworth,
CA
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: pllove
Maybe I missed the posts you are referring to but I haven't seen any arrogance and if any of my post have come across as arrongant for that I apologize.
I did not see where anyone is forcing you or any members to buy anything. The only thing that has caused contention is a club banning the use of radio equipment at an event without any concrete proof that it caused the crash in question.
On 7/26/2007 in another thread XPS (Jim Drew specifically) volunteered to come out to the basin and bring their own airplanes to fly and test equpment (spctrum analyzser) and check out the field to see what kind of interference may be going on. To this the club president basically told him to don't bother because the flyers at the field were to protective of the field. To me that is arrogant. Yeah we would appreciate you help, but don't bother on the weekend. How does this offer to help keep anyone else from flying? I am sure that they would do more than a range check before they took off flying.
Don't believe me....want proof... here it is. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_60..._4/key_/tm.htm Look at post 65 and the reply post 80.
Well, you are not quite right here. What our president said was :
I highly discourage you to do it during the weekend (300+ People)or in a Turbine Powered model.
This is the only field left in Southern California that will allow jets and you will find our users to be highly protective of it.
He never said don't come, he merely said "discouraged" him from coming on a weekend and using a turbine to test with. Let's keep the facts stright here.
alan
ORIGINAL: Kmot
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Maybe I missed the posts you are referring to but I haven't seen any arrogance and if any of my post have come across as arrongant for that I apologize.
I did not see where anyone is forcing you or any members to buy anything. The only thing that has caused contention is a club banning the use of radio equipment at an event without any concrete proof that it caused the crash in question.
On 7/26/2007 in another thread XPS (Jim Drew specifically) volunteered to come out to the basin and bring their own airplanes to fly and test equpment (spctrum analyzser) and check out the field to see what kind of interference may be going on. To this the club president basically told him to don't bother because the flyers at the field were to protective of the field. To me that is arrogant. Yeah we would appreciate you help, but don't bother on the weekend. How does this offer to help keep anyone else from flying? I am sure that they would do more than a range check before they took off flying.
Don't believe me....want proof... here it is. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_60..._4/key_/tm.htm Look at post 65 and the reply post 80.
Well, you are not quite right here. What our president said was :
I highly discourage you to do it during the weekend (300+ People)or in a Turbine Powered model.
This is the only field left in Southern California that will allow jets and you will find our users to be highly protective of it.
He never said don't come, he merely said "discouraged" him from coming on a weekend and using a turbine to test with. Let's keep the facts stright here.
alan
08-06-2007, 05:36 PM
#6380
Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: North Hollywood,
CA
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
It is true that the Basin is extremely busy on weekends. Why not come out during the week - - there is the same airport traffic and less of a crowd of people to ask questions so that the work/study can be completed quietly and successfully.
Remember, it is a public area - no one can really stop you, just maybe discourage you a bit.
Paul
Remember, it is a public area - no one can really stop you, just maybe discourage you a bit.
Paul
08-06-2007, 05:41 PM
#6381
My Feedback: (15)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: west hills,
CA
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
If Jim came out to test at the basin, I would HOPE that some ground testing and use of spektrum analysers would preclude the act of flying a jet. Again, as stated, the only reason for this whole discussion was about saftey. That is why a weekend test was not advised because it can get pretty busy there on a weekend. That also was assuming that they would fly one of their own jets. We just don't want to take a chance, but I don't see anything wrong with the ground testing on a weekend.
Everyone here agrees on one thing, saftey is paramount, I honestly would like to see the problem resolved and people can move on to flying there planes.
Billy
Everyone here agrees on one thing, saftey is paramount, I honestly would like to see the problem resolved and people can move on to flying there planes.
Billy
08-06-2007, 05:48 PM
#6382
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Seems like if you ask someone to come out and help on their own dime then anytime that they can make it should be great!!!!! Telling them not to come at a certain time is..... If you're paying for them to come then?? The weekend sounds like the perfect time to find out what's going on. The time with the absolute most interference available!!! Isn't that what you want? To find out what's going on so that we can have a lot of great systems to use!!!
Added:
I don't really think that Jim would come out and just fire up a jet and takeoff to see if he gets interference or not
Added:
I don't really think that Jim would come out and just fire up a jet and takeoff to see if he gets interference or not
08-06-2007, 05:49 PM
#6383
Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Troy,
MO
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: alanrw
ORIGINAL: pllove
Maybe I missed the posts you are referring to but I haven't seen any arrogance and if any of my post have come across as arrongant for that I apologize.
I did not see where anyone is forcing you or any members to buy anything. The only thing that has caused contention is a club banning the use of radio equipment at an event without any concrete proof that it caused the crash in question.
On 7/26/2007 in another thread XPS (Jim Drew specifically) volunteered to come out to the basin and bring their own airplanes to fly and test equpment (spctrum analyzser) and check out the field to see what kind of interference may be going on. To this the club president basically told him to don't bother because the flyers at the field were to protective of the field. To me that is arrogant. Yeah we would appreciate you help, but don't bother on the weekend. How does this offer to help keep anyone else from flying? I am sure that they would do more than a range check before they took off flying.
Don't believe me....want proof... here it is. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_60..._4/key_/tm.htm Look at post 65 and the reply post 80.
Well, you are not quite right here. What our president said was :
I highly discourage you to do it during the weekend (300+ People)or in a Turbine Powered model.
This is the only field left in Southern California that will allow jets and you will find our users to be highly protective of it.
He never said don't come, he merely said "discouraged" him from coming on a weekend and using a turbine to test with. Let's keep the facts stright here.
alan
ORIGINAL: Kmot
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Maybe I missed the posts you are referring to but I haven't seen any arrogance and if any of my post have come across as arrongant for that I apologize.
I did not see where anyone is forcing you or any members to buy anything. The only thing that has caused contention is a club banning the use of radio equipment at an event without any concrete proof that it caused the crash in question.
On 7/26/2007 in another thread XPS (Jim Drew specifically) volunteered to come out to the basin and bring their own airplanes to fly and test equpment (spctrum analyzser) and check out the field to see what kind of interference may be going on. To this the club president basically told him to don't bother because the flyers at the field were to protective of the field. To me that is arrogant. Yeah we would appreciate you help, but don't bother on the weekend. How does this offer to help keep anyone else from flying? I am sure that they would do more than a range check before they took off flying.
Don't believe me....want proof... here it is. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_60..._4/key_/tm.htm Look at post 65 and the reply post 80.
Well, you are not quite right here. What our president said was :
I highly discourage you to do it during the weekend (300+ People)or in a Turbine Powered model.
This is the only field left in Southern California that will allow jets and you will find our users to be highly protective of it.
He never said don't come, he merely said "discouraged" him from coming on a weekend and using a turbine to test with. Let's keep the facts stright here.
alan
08-06-2007, 06:22 PM
#6384
RE: Sepulveda Basin
While I haven't followed this other thread, the basin is a public field. Anyone can come anytime the field is not closed for a permitted event. No invitation is required. Heck, you don't need to be a club member, an AMA member, or even ever flown before. If he wants, he can even get a permit from the county, and close the field for his own testing.
He can certainly come out on the weekend, but if fliers there perceive him to be disrupting their flying, some of them may loose their warm fuzzy feeling. As stated, this is a public field and the clubs have very little control over the general public fliers. All the clubs already get a lot of crying about the days the field is closed to the general public when they get a permit and hold events. That's despite the fact that it's club events, and primarily the Valley Fliers, that pay for maintenance and improvements to the facilities. If he wants to do testing with 6 YS110 powered 40 sized warbirds, 2 3Drs, 3 small electrics, a person on a buddy box for the first time, and someone who's never flown before, trying to fly for the first time, and 30 more planes in the pits, all at the same time, and try and test... Well, weekend are the best time to find that kind of fun.
Which is better, a public field, or a private field? At a private field, the club controls the field and could easily accomodate testing at it's whim. Trying to maintain a private field in the middle of urban sprawl would be next to impossible. Look at all the fields that are being lost across the nation, mostly because of developement encroachment. A public field, in the middle of a flood basin, in the middle of an urban center, where anyone can come and fly, is a unique, though challanging, oportunity to both clubs and general public alike. The biggest threat comes from the resuts of accidents. If a problem is brought to a club by it's members, and no action is taken, because there's no proof, and something bad happend, it could jepordise the filed, not only for that club, but for all the clubs that use the field, and all those that are not affiliated with any of the clubs.
He can certainly come out on the weekend, but if fliers there perceive him to be disrupting their flying, some of them may loose their warm fuzzy feeling. As stated, this is a public field and the clubs have very little control over the general public fliers. All the clubs already get a lot of crying about the days the field is closed to the general public when they get a permit and hold events. That's despite the fact that it's club events, and primarily the Valley Fliers, that pay for maintenance and improvements to the facilities. If he wants to do testing with 6 YS110 powered 40 sized warbirds, 2 3Drs, 3 small electrics, a person on a buddy box for the first time, and someone who's never flown before, trying to fly for the first time, and 30 more planes in the pits, all at the same time, and try and test... Well, weekend are the best time to find that kind of fun.
Which is better, a public field, or a private field? At a private field, the club controls the field and could easily accomodate testing at it's whim. Trying to maintain a private field in the middle of urban sprawl would be next to impossible. Look at all the fields that are being lost across the nation, mostly because of developement encroachment. A public field, in the middle of a flood basin, in the middle of an urban center, where anyone can come and fly, is a unique, though challanging, oportunity to both clubs and general public alike. The biggest threat comes from the resuts of accidents. If a problem is brought to a club by it's members, and no action is taken, because there's no proof, and something bad happend, it could jepordise the filed, not only for that club, but for all the clubs that use the field, and all those that are not affiliated with any of the clubs.
08-06-2007, 06:34 PM
#6385
RE: Sepulveda Basin
If there's a problem, what better place to find out about how to solve it??? Some of the people may not have a warm fuzzy feeling which goes to show how ridiculous they are. Someone comes out to help them, to improve their hobby and field for their benefit and gets insulted for their efforts.....
08-06-2007, 07:54 PM
#6386
Junior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: somewhere,
IN
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: Kmot
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
That is a very grown up stance to take. It's ok, I'll buy yours. No true data to back up a statement, and then that. Ok.
08-06-2007, 08:03 PM
#6387
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: iflybyu77
That is a very grown up stance to take. It's ok, I'll buy yours. No true data to back up a statement, and then that. Ok.
ORIGINAL: Kmot
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
That is a very grown up stance to take. It's ok, I'll buy yours. No true data to back up a statement, and then that. Ok.
I take it you've never met Jimmy Drew, and if you did, have you had lenghthy conversations with him, a bit of arrogance is putting it mildly????
I have, and my coment on this is "No Coment"
Like I have been saying about all 2.4 systems: I'll let the "BETA TESTERS" do all the work for me.
Gene
08-06-2007, 08:04 PM
#6388
Junior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: somewhere,
IN
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: saramos
While I haven't followed this other thread, the basin is a public field. Anyone can come anytime the field is not closed for a permitted event. No invitation is required. Heck, you don't need to be a club member, an AMA member, or even ever flown before. If he wants, he can even get a permit from the county, and close the field for his own testing.
He can certainly come out on the weekend, but if fliers there perceive him to be disrupting their flying, some of them may loose their warm fuzzy feeling. As stated, this is a public field and the clubs have very little control over the general public fliers. All the clubs already get a lot of crying about the days the field is closed to the general public when they get a permit and hold events. That's despite the fact that it's club events, and primarily the Valley Fliers, that pay for maintenance and improvements to the facilities. If he wants to do testing with 6 YS110 powered 40 sized warbirds, 2 3Drs, 3 small electrics, a person on a buddy box for the first time, and someone who's never flown before, trying to fly for the first time, and 30 more planes in the pits, all at the same time, and try and test... Well, weekend are the best time to find that kind of fun.
Which is better, a public field, or a private field? At a private field, the club controls the field and could easily accomodate testing at it's whim. Trying to maintain a private field in the middle of urban sprawl would be next to impossible. Look at all the fields that are being lost across the nation, mostly because of developement encroachment. A public field, in the middle of a flood basin, in the middle of an urban center, where anyone can come and fly, is a unique, though challanging, oportunity to both clubs and general public alike. The biggest threat comes from the resuts of accidents. If a problem is brought to a club by it's members, and no action is taken, because there's no proof, and something bad happend, it could jepordise the filed, not only for that club, but for all the clubs that use the field, and all those that are not affiliated with any of the clubs.
While I haven't followed this other thread, the basin is a public field. Anyone can come anytime the field is not closed for a permitted event. No invitation is required. Heck, you don't need to be a club member, an AMA member, or even ever flown before. If he wants, he can even get a permit from the county, and close the field for his own testing.
He can certainly come out on the weekend, but if fliers there perceive him to be disrupting their flying, some of them may loose their warm fuzzy feeling. As stated, this is a public field and the clubs have very little control over the general public fliers. All the clubs already get a lot of crying about the days the field is closed to the general public when they get a permit and hold events. That's despite the fact that it's club events, and primarily the Valley Fliers, that pay for maintenance and improvements to the facilities. If he wants to do testing with 6 YS110 powered 40 sized warbirds, 2 3Drs, 3 small electrics, a person on a buddy box for the first time, and someone who's never flown before, trying to fly for the first time, and 30 more planes in the pits, all at the same time, and try and test... Well, weekend are the best time to find that kind of fun.
Which is better, a public field, or a private field? At a private field, the club controls the field and could easily accomodate testing at it's whim. Trying to maintain a private field in the middle of urban sprawl would be next to impossible. Look at all the fields that are being lost across the nation, mostly because of developement encroachment. A public field, in the middle of a flood basin, in the middle of an urban center, where anyone can come and fly, is a unique, though challanging, oportunity to both clubs and general public alike. The biggest threat comes from the resuts of accidents. If a problem is brought to a club by it's members, and no action is taken, because there's no proof, and something bad happend, it could jepordise the filed, not only for that club, but for all the clubs that use the field, and all those that are not affiliated with any of the clubs.
08-06-2007, 08:14 PM
#6389
Junior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: somewhere,
IN
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: Kriptonic69
I take it you've never met Jimmy Drew, and if you did, have you had lenghthy conversations with him, a bit of arrogance is putting it mildly????
I have, and my coment on this is "No Coment"
Gene
ORIGINAL: iflybyu77
That is a very grown up stance to take. It's ok, I'll buy yours. No true data to back up a statement, and then that. Ok.
ORIGINAL: Kmot
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
Based solely on the arrogance of the XPS proponents, I will no longer consider purchase of any Xtreme Link product.
Well done!
That is a very grown up stance to take. It's ok, I'll buy yours. No true data to back up a statement, and then that. Ok.
I take it you've never met Jimmy Drew, and if you did, have you had lenghthy conversations with him, a bit of arrogance is putting it mildly????
I have, and my coment on this is "No Coment"
Gene
I'm sure not trying to be the smart guy here Gene. I trusted this system to close in 3D flying on a high power helicopter, 3D airplanes, and a few guys flying their turbines on it (locally - guys and aircraft *I* know). I'm not going to convince you if you want to take the attitude that everything that happens is XPS's fault, because I bet you or someone like you fought the same battle over PPM or PCM or G3, and most recently all the guys saying ANYTHING 2.4 is bad. So, you win. I don't share my success to say you are wrong, I just share it to say it can and does work, and the proof is in the flying. No hard feelings I hope.
08-06-2007, 08:36 PM
#6390
Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Troy,
MO
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Another problem that I can see at the Basin field would be the new flyer who goes to the hobby shop and buys a new radio and plane on 72 band. Not knowing much goes to the field and turn on his tx without checking the freq board. Sounds crazy, but it does happen and has almost happen at our field.
It is not that big of a problem at our field because we have 52 members. Most people know who is in the club. However I can not see how any club could keep tabs at the Basin Field.
I do hope they get their problems worked out so they can continue flying and enjoying the hobby.
It is not that big of a problem at our field because we have 52 members. Most people know who is in the club. However I can not see how any club could keep tabs at the Basin Field.
I do hope they get their problems worked out so they can continue flying and enjoying the hobby.
08-06-2007, 09:10 PM
#6391
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Maui Hawaii
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
re rc groups post http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...8&postcount=94
I fly at the Basin and have been watching this unfortunate situation unfold. As a Basin flyer, I see The Valley Fliers position, which is based solely on safety and the reality of the unique and extreme interference problems here.
And as an entrepreneur myself, I see Jim’s side. If I were Jim Drew, I’d be pissed too. BTW, I really like the telemetry aspects of XPS, so I want this to work out so I can own one.
The way I see what’s happening now, the escalation of the situation has more to do with communication than RC radios.
Text posts and email communication GUARANTEE confusion.
Psychologists and communication experts say that 90% of communication is NON VERBAL.
Stated the other way, text communication is only 10% effective.
Combine this with highly technical issues, add some emotion, remove personal accountability and social respect by hiding behind a screen name, throw in a lawyer or two and stand back and watch the needless disaster snowball.
Guys, how many times have you read one of your posts or emails and said to yourself, ‘That’s not what I wanted to say’? Most people do not have sufficient writing skills to use as their only mode of communication.
TOO MUCH INFORMATION IS LEFT OUT.
Body language, tone of voice, inflection, speed, volume, pitch, facial expression, visible emotion, etc. are MANDATORY for effective complete communication.
I N E V E R solely use text for important communication involving emotional romantic relationships or critical business issues.
I hesitate to illustrate the point with an example, but here goes. . .
When attempting to select the perfect restaurant for a special occasion – business or romantic –
Your text or email response to the other persons is . . .
What were you thinking?
You mean. . . what do you have in mind – Italian, or ? ? ?
She reads . . . What were you thinking?, and hears, . . . WHAT were you THINKING, you stupid B%&ch!
Please do not read any inference in the above example into the situation at hand. I’ve used it as an example for years and it’s the only one I can think of at the moment. But I know some of you will. . .
. . . because you cannot see the kindness in my eyes.
Regarding XPS and the Valley Fliers. . .
A phone call in the beginning would have COMPLETELY PREVENTED this from getting out of hand.
. . . just my .02. Bill
I fly at the Basin and have been watching this unfortunate situation unfold. As a Basin flyer, I see The Valley Fliers position, which is based solely on safety and the reality of the unique and extreme interference problems here.
And as an entrepreneur myself, I see Jim’s side. If I were Jim Drew, I’d be pissed too. BTW, I really like the telemetry aspects of XPS, so I want this to work out so I can own one.
The way I see what’s happening now, the escalation of the situation has more to do with communication than RC radios.
Text posts and email communication GUARANTEE confusion.
Psychologists and communication experts say that 90% of communication is NON VERBAL.
Stated the other way, text communication is only 10% effective.
Combine this with highly technical issues, add some emotion, remove personal accountability and social respect by hiding behind a screen name, throw in a lawyer or two and stand back and watch the needless disaster snowball.
Guys, how many times have you read one of your posts or emails and said to yourself, ‘That’s not what I wanted to say’? Most people do not have sufficient writing skills to use as their only mode of communication.
TOO MUCH INFORMATION IS LEFT OUT.
Body language, tone of voice, inflection, speed, volume, pitch, facial expression, visible emotion, etc. are MANDATORY for effective complete communication.
I N E V E R solely use text for important communication involving emotional romantic relationships or critical business issues.
I hesitate to illustrate the point with an example, but here goes. . .
When attempting to select the perfect restaurant for a special occasion – business or romantic –
Your text or email response to the other persons is . . .
What were you thinking?
You mean. . . what do you have in mind – Italian, or ? ? ?
She reads . . . What were you thinking?, and hears, . . . WHAT were you THINKING, you stupid B%&ch!
Please do not read any inference in the above example into the situation at hand. I’ve used it as an example for years and it’s the only one I can think of at the moment. But I know some of you will. . .
. . . because you cannot see the kindness in my eyes.
Regarding XPS and the Valley Fliers. . .
A phone call in the beginning would have COMPLETELY PREVENTED this from getting out of hand.
. . . just my .02. Bill
08-06-2007, 09:19 PM
#6392
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tarzana, CA
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: pllove
Another problem that I can see at the Basin field would be the new flyer who goes to the hobby shop and buys a new radio and plane on 72 band. Not knowing much goes to the field and turn on his tx without checking the freq board. Sounds crazy, but it does happen and has almost happen at our field.
It is not that big of a problem at our field because we have 52 members. Most people know who is in the club. However I can not see how any club could keep tabs at the Basin Field.
I do hope they get their problems worked out so they can continue flying and enjoying the hobby.
Another problem that I can see at the Basin field would be the new flyer who goes to the hobby shop and buys a new radio and plane on 72 band. Not knowing much goes to the field and turn on his tx without checking the freq board. Sounds crazy, but it does happen and has almost happen at our field.
It is not that big of a problem at our field because we have 52 members. Most people know who is in the club. However I can not see how any club could keep tabs at the Basin Field.
I do hope they get their problems worked out so they can continue flying and enjoying the hobby.
Yes it probably has happened since the "basin" has been party to RC for more than 40 years that I know of. But for the most part problems are far and few between.
Mike R
08-06-2007, 09:39 PM
#6393
Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Troy,
MO
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: MikeRuth
IMHO it's called "self Policing". I for one am very aware of the surroundings at the field and so are many others that are regulars. Newbies that might not know are educated very quickly about the frequency control system in place.
Yes it probably has happened since the "basin" has been party to RC for more than 40 years that I know of. But for the most part problems are far and few between.
Mike R
ORIGINAL: pllove
Another problem that I can see at the Basin field would be the new flyer who goes to the hobby shop and buys a new radio and plane on 72 band. Not knowing much goes to the field and turn on his tx without checking the freq board. Sounds crazy, but it does happen and has almost happen at our field.
It is not that big of a problem at our field because we have 52 members. Most people know who is in the club. However I can not see how any club could keep tabs at the Basin Field.
I do hope they get their problems worked out so they can continue flying and enjoying the hobby.
Another problem that I can see at the Basin field would be the new flyer who goes to the hobby shop and buys a new radio and plane on 72 band. Not knowing much goes to the field and turn on his tx without checking the freq board. Sounds crazy, but it does happen and has almost happen at our field.
It is not that big of a problem at our field because we have 52 members. Most people know who is in the club. However I can not see how any club could keep tabs at the Basin Field.
I do hope they get their problems worked out so they can continue flying and enjoying the hobby.
Yes it probably has happened since the "basin" has been party to RC for more than 40 years that I know of. But for the most part problems are far and few between.
Mike R
08-06-2007, 10:01 PM
#6394
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bemis,
NM
Posts: 2,889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: jonkoppisch
With the new setup, it has been tested in high usage 2.4 areas and passed...
Added:
You know Jim was notified that they were getting unusual interference at the Las Vegas field. He came right out, tested it and found a solution and reason for the interference.
With the new setup, it has been tested in high usage 2.4 areas and passed...
Added:
You know Jim was notified that they were getting unusual interference at the Las Vegas field. He came right out, tested it and found a solution and reason for the interference.
And also, has any progress been made in solutioning the problem at the Basin ? ? ? [
]Some in depth details on the actual XPS problem ( not speculation, or hear say ) would be greatly appreciated .
Thank you. > Jim
08-06-2007, 10:43 PM
#6395
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sepulveda,
CA
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
These f-ing turbine jets are better off out in desert dry lake beds, right where they belong. I am sure that if the pilots can afford these expensive ten to twenty grand toys, then they can certainly afford filling up their gas tanks and flying out where it is safe to do so - without potentially jeopardizing the safety of people on the golf course as well as the events held on the east side of Woodley. The fire in the grass sucks. It stinks. Screw whether or not it's the only flying field left in LA for jets. You guys think that flight failures never can happen to you. Just wait until one of your flying time bombs derails in the so-called fail safe and plows into a whole group of people across the street and kills a few. The same goes for those stupid giant scale pilots that fly upwards without any regards to Van Nuys air traffic. You know who you are and you suck.
08-06-2007, 10:43 PM
#6396
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Just 1 post from it. I'll see if I can find more info on it tomorrow. There was a lot of info on everything involved...
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=591
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=591
JimDrew
Well, we would like to think we have much better results in high noise environments. DX7s and 72Mhz systems crashed at Bennett field during the TFC event, when we only observed our system become sluggish. Changing to the new antenna eliminated that completely. I am convinced that bi-directional communication makes the difference in these environments. Traditional communications are one-way. With convential radios, we send a frame of data to the plane 44.44 times per second and hope the plane gets it. What if during the reception of those packets there is high enough noise to cause data corruption? With our system, the first bad packet results in the receiver not responding to transmitter (acknowledgement), which causes our transmitter to immediately re-send the data.... over and over and over again until it gets a response. The first 'retry' occurs within 864us (less than 1ms) of not getting a response, and continues repeatedly every 2.7ms trying to get data through. If the next frame occurs during this time, the new data is used and retrys are continued. So, what happens in reality is that we WILL get data through at some point, and the plane will appear to be sluggish because it is catching periodic updates through these high noise windows. On any other 2.4GHz system, 36Mhz, 40Mhz, 72MHz, or 75Mhz system, data being sent could conincide with noise high enough to cause data corruption. With no possibility of retries, you could easily have a long period of nulls that happened right as each packet is sent, resulting in a complete lockout. For our system to get a complete lock out (which we have never seen, not even in Las Vegas with the failsafe set to occur at 1 second) it would take something pretty substantial - like losing power to either the transmitter or plane, or something 2.4GHz with enough power to completely swamp the receiver's front-end (like something miltary related).
Well, we would like to think we have much better results in high noise environments. DX7s and 72Mhz systems crashed at Bennett field during the TFC event, when we only observed our system become sluggish. Changing to the new antenna eliminated that completely. I am convinced that bi-directional communication makes the difference in these environments. Traditional communications are one-way. With convential radios, we send a frame of data to the plane 44.44 times per second and hope the plane gets it. What if during the reception of those packets there is high enough noise to cause data corruption? With our system, the first bad packet results in the receiver not responding to transmitter (acknowledgement), which causes our transmitter to immediately re-send the data.... over and over and over again until it gets a response. The first 'retry' occurs within 864us (less than 1ms) of not getting a response, and continues repeatedly every 2.7ms trying to get data through. If the next frame occurs during this time, the new data is used and retrys are continued. So, what happens in reality is that we WILL get data through at some point, and the plane will appear to be sluggish because it is catching periodic updates through these high noise windows. On any other 2.4GHz system, 36Mhz, 40Mhz, 72MHz, or 75Mhz system, data being sent could conincide with noise high enough to cause data corruption. With no possibility of retries, you could easily have a long period of nulls that happened right as each packet is sent, resulting in a complete lockout. For our system to get a complete lock out (which we have never seen, not even in Las Vegas with the failsafe set to occur at 1 second) it would take something pretty substantial - like losing power to either the transmitter or plane, or something 2.4GHz with enough power to completely swamp the receiver's front-end (like something miltary related).
08-06-2007, 10:51 PM
#6397
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Another one...
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...postcount=4109
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...postcount=4109
Quote:
Originally Posted by akschu
Anyway, I don't see a good 2.4ghz solution yet. The spektrum has really crappy rx's that are sensitive to voltage drops and other lockouts and the xls has such poor testing that it required a major rf change during it's first 3 days......
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonsense! First of all and antenna change is not a major deal. Our units were designed to use either route. Secondly, 10+ months of flight testing has been done. Only in high noise environments is there a "problem", and that really equates to a slowed system, not something that locks up and causes loss of control. We proved that repeatedly in Las Vegas by deliberately flying through a section of air that caused the problem to occur. At no time was the plane in jeapordy, it just became sluggish for a few seconds while in that space. The new antenna eliminated the slugglishness in this high noise level environment. We didn't need to have to change the antenna, but every chance we get to change this product to make it better, we will take it. It doesn't make sense (unless you are company wanting to rake in millions from consumers) to sit on an improvement until you just feel like releasing it. Thirdly, we sold hundreds of units in Toledo, and we see extremely positive reviews.
The RF section we use has been used world-wide in more than one hundred thousands devices spanning through various applications over the last 3 years, including UAV applications. It would be accurate to say that there are significantly more of these RF units in use than all 2.4GHz radio systems for R/C combined. Maxstream was purchased by Digi last year for $38 million in cash. Digi is one of the largest suppliers of wireless devices in the world. The RF section was not designed by a fly-by-night operation. This company is considered the best in the business.
Originally Posted by akschu
Anyway, I don't see a good 2.4ghz solution yet. The spektrum has really crappy rx's that are sensitive to voltage drops and other lockouts and the xls has such poor testing that it required a major rf change during it's first 3 days......
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonsense! First of all and antenna change is not a major deal. Our units were designed to use either route. Secondly, 10+ months of flight testing has been done. Only in high noise environments is there a "problem", and that really equates to a slowed system, not something that locks up and causes loss of control. We proved that repeatedly in Las Vegas by deliberately flying through a section of air that caused the problem to occur. At no time was the plane in jeapordy, it just became sluggish for a few seconds while in that space. The new antenna eliminated the slugglishness in this high noise level environment. We didn't need to have to change the antenna, but every chance we get to change this product to make it better, we will take it. It doesn't make sense (unless you are company wanting to rake in millions from consumers) to sit on an improvement until you just feel like releasing it. Thirdly, we sold hundreds of units in Toledo, and we see extremely positive reviews.
The RF section we use has been used world-wide in more than one hundred thousands devices spanning through various applications over the last 3 years, including UAV applications. It would be accurate to say that there are significantly more of these RF units in use than all 2.4GHz radio systems for R/C combined. Maxstream was purchased by Digi last year for $38 million in cash. Digi is one of the largest suppliers of wireless devices in the world. The RF section was not designed by a fly-by-night operation. This company is considered the best in the business.
08-06-2007, 10:55 PM
#6398
RE: Sepulveda Basin
And the final one...
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=464
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=464
Jim Drew
We have always had the ability to change the antenna on the transmitter module. You will clearly see space in our cases for this. Maxstream has always contended that our 1.5dBi built-in antenna would perform virtually the same as the external 2.1dBi antenna. Since they build the RF, we took their word for it. Imagine Maxstream's surprise that there was in fact a difference. When we heard of Sam's crash, I immediately looked into the area on google earth search and possible sources of high noise (thinking TV repeaters that operate on 2.4GHz). On Thursday I arrived at Bennett field to look at Ron's system and to see if we could locate a problem there. We had flown the system many times at that field in the past, and much to my surprise we did find a "hole" where a problem occurred. We could repeat this over and over again in the exact same spot. At no time did the plane go into failsafe (even with the failsafe set to 1 second instead of the normal 2 seconds), it just reacted slowly in this air space. I returned to our facility and built several test units on Friday and tested them before going back to Las Vegas on Saturday. I had no idea if an external antenna was going to change anything. We spent Saturday morning finding the same spot (so Scott could see it with his own eyes, as he was still in disbelief after testing for 10+ months without seeing a hiccup). After making the change on Saturday (which took less than a minute to swap the transmitter module and re-bind the receiver), numerous flights in 3 different aircraft were conducted at varying altitudes, orientations, etc. Not a single problem was then encountered, even in and around the "hole". We flew until it was almost dark.
We have always had the ability to change the antenna on the transmitter module. You will clearly see space in our cases for this. Maxstream has always contended that our 1.5dBi built-in antenna would perform virtually the same as the external 2.1dBi antenna. Since they build the RF, we took their word for it. Imagine Maxstream's surprise that there was in fact a difference. When we heard of Sam's crash, I immediately looked into the area on google earth search and possible sources of high noise (thinking TV repeaters that operate on 2.4GHz). On Thursday I arrived at Bennett field to look at Ron's system and to see if we could locate a problem there. We had flown the system many times at that field in the past, and much to my surprise we did find a "hole" where a problem occurred. We could repeat this over and over again in the exact same spot. At no time did the plane go into failsafe (even with the failsafe set to 1 second instead of the normal 2 seconds), it just reacted slowly in this air space. I returned to our facility and built several test units on Friday and tested them before going back to Las Vegas on Saturday. I had no idea if an external antenna was going to change anything. We spent Saturday morning finding the same spot (so Scott could see it with his own eyes, as he was still in disbelief after testing for 10+ months without seeing a hiccup). After making the change on Saturday (which took less than a minute to swap the transmitter module and re-bind the receiver), numerous flights in 3 different aircraft were conducted at varying altitudes, orientations, etc. Not a single problem was then encountered, even in and around the "hole". We flew until it was almost dark.
08-06-2007, 11:14 PM
#6399
Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Troy,
MO
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Exactly!!
The last 3 post (6365, 6366, & 6367) are excellent examples of a field with high noise where XPS has done testing and improved their product to rectify any issue found.
I am sure that given the chance and all parties put politics and hurt feelings aside that a solution that would benefit all could be found. Seems like it has turned into the preverbial p**sing contest.
As an earlier post put it I do believe most of the issue here was a mixup in communications.
If a problem is found at the Basin field due to high levels of noise and a solution was found wouldn't it be great if all 2.4 Ghz products could be used. Just might eliminate some Freq. Conggestion on those busy weekends.
Not to mention all the benefits of the telemetry unit when it is available.
The last 3 post (6365, 6366, & 6367) are excellent examples of a field with high noise where XPS has done testing and improved their product to rectify any issue found.
I am sure that given the chance and all parties put politics and hurt feelings aside that a solution that would benefit all could be found. Seems like it has turned into the preverbial p**sing contest.
As an earlier post put it I do believe most of the issue here was a mixup in communications.
If a problem is found at the Basin field due to high levels of noise and a solution was found wouldn't it be great if all 2.4 Ghz products could be used. Just might eliminate some Freq. Conggestion on those busy weekends.
Not to mention all the benefits of the telemetry unit when it is available.
08-06-2007, 11:56 PM
#6400
Senior Member
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Saugus,
CA
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Sepulveda Basin
ORIGINAL: basinite
These f-ing turbine jets are better off out in desert dry lake beds, right where they belong. I am sure that if the pilots can afford these expensive ten to twenty grand toys, then they can certainly afford filling up their gas tanks and flying out where it is safe to do so - without potentially jeopardizing the safety of people on the golf course as well as the events held on the east side of Woodley. The fire in the grass sucks. It stinks. Screw whether or not it's the only flying field left in LA for jets. You guys think that flight failures never can happen to you. Just wait until one of your flying time bombs derails in the so-called fail safe and plows into a whole group of people across the street and kills a few. The same goes for those stupid giant scale pilots that fly upwards without any regards to Van Nuys air traffic. You know who you are and you suck.
These f-ing turbine jets are better off out in desert dry lake beds, right where they belong. I am sure that if the pilots can afford these expensive ten to twenty grand toys, then they can certainly afford filling up their gas tanks and flying out where it is safe to do so - without potentially jeopardizing the safety of people on the golf course as well as the events held on the east side of Woodley. The fire in the grass sucks. It stinks. Screw whether or not it's the only flying field left in LA for jets. You guys think that flight failures never can happen to you. Just wait until one of your flying time bombs derails in the so-called fail safe and plows into a whole group of people across the street and kills a few. The same goes for those stupid giant scale pilots that fly upwards without any regards to Van Nuys air traffic. You know who you are and you suck.