sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

But we are not in Europe. We fly on different frequencies. We are not flying airplanes as big as they are. Just because the Europeans flying 1/2 scale giants doesn't mean we all need to put optically isolated setups in our .40 sized trainers. When I start flying 1/2 scale or larger, I'll revisit the issue. But for the most part, people here are talking 30% to 40% airplanes that are very very reliable with the current setups. There is a point where one can over complicate an issue, where the complication is far worse than the issue to start with. I believe that is the case with isolators and fiber optics, with the exception of using a fiber optic link for servos forward of the firewall.

I know enough about electronics to realize the advantages of optically isolated setups in applications that warrant them. But there are some significant disadvantages as well. I believe that adding an optic isolator is applying a fix to a problem that doesn't exist. Secondly, adding the isolator reduces the overall reliability by taking the redundant battery setup, splitting them into separate entities, and making each of them capable to shutting down the system independently. And the isolated is itself another point of failure.

So, yes, I am adamant about not reducing the reliability of a setup that is field proven, just to install an isolator to fix a problem that has been shown not to exist, and has a very low possibility of occurring in the future.

Forgues Research

My Feedback: (7)

Steve,
Frequency has nothing to do with it, and I'm not talking about .40 size trainers. And when your talking about 40% size, that is very close to 50% isn't.

Your method has a few less connection but is much more dangerous not being isolated.

Anyway, be addamant, and so am I isolation.

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

I understand frequency doesn't have anything to do with it. It was offered in the 'things are different over there, than they are here' spirit.

If 40% is close to 50%, isn't 35% close to 40%, and 30% close to 35%, and so on... Just like redundant batteries, ganged servos, dual receivers, etc, there is a point where it makes sense, and one where it doesn't. Our points are just different, as I am not against isolators in general, just the point at which they need to be applied and when.

I can't lay claim to 'my method' as you referred to as being mine. Its just good engineering practices, mixed with the advise and expertise of many well known people in the industry. The method is in widespread use, not unique, and shown to work and work well. I am just relaying what most everyone is using, from the TOC pilots to the Sunday giant scale pilots.

Dangerous? I would strongly disagree, as would most.

Forgues Research

My Feedback: (7)

I also understand what your saying, but its not good engineering practice. As I said before, if something goes wrong, it feeds right back to the receiver. That is why you should isolate the receiver so nothing can feed back, then you could deal with the problem of a servo and not the whole thing where you have no more control if the receiver locks up.

I also look up to good experts, but I also have been in this hightec Robotics world for over 30 years, and I can tell you that I have learned a thing or two

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

I also understand what you are saying, and agree isolators are neat solutions to various problems. But there are various degrees of applying good engineering practices. We don't need ceramic bearings in our OS-46FX engine, or even our DA-150cc engines, but we do in our turbines. Applying ceramic bearings to solve a high temperature problem in our glow engines is over application of good engineering practices. That is not to say not using ceramic bearings is a bad engineering practice. Its just that ceramic bearings are not needed in that application. Its very easy to over engineer a project, and end up with a project that is overly complicated without comparable benefits. If that wasn't the case, we would all be flying 15lb trainers with battery backers, isolators, on board glow system, battery monitors, glitch detectors, fiber optic extensions, etc.

Every person has their own preference. I just happen to fall into the 9x% that doesn't use them, and want to keep things a simple and reliable as possible.

Lets just agree that we disagree, and get back to talking matchboxes....or put it in the isolator thread. No need to keep rehashing this.

rcob

sfaust, Thank you for the advice. I was just over @ Giant Scale &Sport Aircraft forum looking for "this one" and stumbled on the topic of (JR Matchbox) and this guy is asking what to do about his plane. He plug's in the JR matchbox and the plane freak's out. He said that he called for advice and they told him it's impossible. Now he's asking everyone out in R/C universe land. MAN! GEEEEESS I will get help around hear when it's time for the brains to go in the plane. What is "optically isolated"? My plane has a servo 2" from the motor and the instructions say nothing about using optic's. In fact there is nothing at all that I can see in the instructions that talks about all the stuff you guy's are saying to use or have used. Do I still need to do all of this stuff I'm reading. Sorry for the stupid question's but I warned all of you already I think. Thanks again everyone, Rob

Rockeye

Well that was interesting. You two are way above my head. I just figured it was a bad Matchbox based on what I have read in this forum and getting a good one will solve my problem. Still waiting for it to come in to my local Hobby Store.

John

m_saraga

My Feedback: (21)

I posted the following, and was directed here:

"I have a 35% EDGE 540, and I am using 3 JR Matchboxes; one for each wing, and one for the rudder.

However, when I do a range check, all my surfaces "twitch".

Originally, I had the matchboxes as close to the receiver as possible, then someone told me to use an 8" extension but the problem is still there. I called Horizon, and they told me that it was impossible for that to happen.

I'm using two duralite batteries with regulators.

Anyone has an idea of what I can do to fix the bug?

Please let me know.

Thanks"

It looks like the JR Matchboxes really cause trouble. If anyone finds an answer, please post it.

Thanks


Matt
866-535 4407 Ext. 207
[email protected]

ROGER RUSSELL

My Feedback: (12)

m_

Try it without the regulators?

m_saraga

My Feedback: (21)

My batteries are 7.2 Volts each, so if I run the without regulators I'll burn everything, plus, when I disconnect the matchboxes, the glitching stops, and I have tested all sorts of set ups, even different batteries, so I'm positive it's the matchboxes.

I wonder if Futaba's MSA-10's act the same way?

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

Are you using JR or Futaba servos?

I have a friend who lost a H9 Cap a few weeks ago. Both aileron servos on one wing panel locked up. He was using Futaba servos into the JR Matchbox.
Should that matter? No.
Does it? Maybe....

I have used matchboxes for a while now without any trouble whatsoever. I am using JR servos though.

m_saraga

My Feedback: (21)

I'm using Hitec servos. If this is the problem, then JR should be more specific about the uses of the Matcchboxes.

ROGER RUSSELL

My Feedback: (12)

am using Hitec servos on my wings of a bipe, all four with the BOX with seperate NiCad battery. So far no problems...

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

I am not saying that you cant use another brand of servos with the boxes but the problems that people have had with them seem to be when an off brand of servo is used..

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

Optically coupled in simplistic terms, is using light over a glass medium to convey information rather than using electronic waves over copper wire. Wires can act as an antenna, and in fact, many antennas are just that, a long piece of wire. So, under the right conditions, the servo wires can carry interference from the servo motors back through the wiring to the receiver, or pick up stray radio interference as an antenna. Using a fiber optic lead isolates the interference, as the fiber optic lead will not act as an antenna or conduit.

Mounting a servo right next to the ignition or engine places the servo lead close to the source of the interference. You can get away with this when the system is properly grounded, the ignition module is shielded, you are using resistor spark plugs, etc. In a new installation, it is not uncommon for everything to work even when the servos are mounted close to the engine and ignition.

The problem comes later on down the road when the resistor spark plugs stops 'resisting', or when the ground between the engine/ignition breaks, the shielding on the ignition module fails, etc. At that point, the servo leads would then become an antenna and help transmit the re interference to the receiver. This is obviously not good.

There are two ways around this. One is to keep a good separation between the engine/ignition. Usually that means keeping all wires, metal push rods, switches, batteries, servos, etc at least 10-12" away from the ignition module, engine, and ignition battery and switch. Think of that 10" to 12" to be a metal and wire free zone. Mount the throttle servo 12" back from the engine/ignition, and use a ny-rod setup which is plastic and will not act as an antenna. If you can't do this, then you can either use a fiber optic link, or be aware of the problem and properly maintain the grounds, shielding, and resistor spark plugs. If you never have a failure of any of these, then mounting the servos right next to the ignition module is fine. If per se the shielding on the ignition module should fail, you will really wish you add the 10" of separation. Kind of like seat belts. A pain to wear when you don't need them, but if you needed them and weren't wearing them, you'd never make the mistake again.

I use the 10-12" separation, and replace the spark plugs every year. I won't use a ignition module that is cracked in any way, and I check the ignition/spark plug grounds periodically. Even if they fail, the separation will eliminate the interference from becoming an issue.

I have a couple planes that I use the Electro Dynamic Fiber Optic ignition kill switch with good results. Basically, it acts as a way to kill the engine from the transmitter, and is just a more reliable way than using an additional servo, or as an backup to the throttle or choke method. It is in my opinion necessary to have a way to kill the engine from the transmitter, but it doesn't need to be via fiber optics. Using the throttle trim method is reasonable, as is the choke servo method. I just like using both the ignition kill and the throttle/choke as they are two totally independent systems that are unlikely to fail at the same time.

TJKav8tor-RCU

My Feedback: (2)

I guess it's time for me to weigh in on this Matchbox issue.

I've now lost three 33% aircraft to what I believe to be an intermittent Matchbox failure, this has occurred using Futaba servo's as well as JR 8411's so I'm not quite so quick to think that this is an off brand servo issue. However I am rapidly coming to the conclusion and after an email exchange with Danny Snynder at Horizon service that while JR doesn't publize or disclaim the use of their equipment with Brand X (OK Futaba) their quietly stated position is we don't make any of our gear to work with anything else.

For those of us running high end Futaba gear (9ZAP WC2, 309 FSS receivers) you can take that to mean that should you have a problem and you go back to JR to have them look into it they'll give you chapter and verse of what isn't supported. I don't know about you guys but after losing the first brand new H9 Cap 232, brand new servos, brand new Matchboxes, fresh check out of the 9Z by Radio South - inexplicable lock up crash and assuming my receiver had failed, tested everything in 2nd brand new H9 Cap 232 and after 7 flights watching the ailerons go to the locks (mind you another brand new receiver, freshly checked out servo's) and this Cap screws itself into the ground and now the latest (yes another brand new 309FSS receiver) same matchboxes, freshly serviced servo's (again) the H9 Suhkoi 31 simply throttles up on TAXI and flys away...I dunno know but I'll tell ya this is losing it's appeal for fun and is certainly causing me to think about dropping JR equipment (servo's and matchboxes) in favor of using ALL Futaba gear to get around this JR mantra (reads excuse) 'we don't support the use of JR equipment in a mixed environment'. I've been at this 35 years and have never heard such a thing.

Excuse me for ranting but I'm about $6K in the hole here and may have had more fun burning thousand dollar bills for sport. It's especially troubling to get this pitch from someone like JR who I've always thought more of and which I consider to be extremely poor form from a manufacturer. I would have much preferred to get an offer of we'll make it right for you...but I 'm left to think that JR isn't that kind of class act.

TJ [:@]

dsnyder

I will start by saying that we have not seen your equipment to be tested at this time, so if there is a problem with the matchbox in this application with futaba equipment it has not been verified. It is very true that JR makes their equipment to work with JR equipment, it is a matched set. Simple things like connector pin sizes can be different and cause problems. I have seen an off brand extension on a helicopter used for one of the CCPM servos cause the gyro to not work correctly. This extension was not even on the gyro. But it caused the gyro to not work correctly. Simply changing the extension totally cured the problems that the heli had.

Quite honestly, you do not know for sure what happened at this time, and the equipment is untested to verify any failure. From reports I have received from witnesses, it sounds very much like a fail safe situation from loss of signal. What caused this failure? That can't be answered at this time.

As I stated to you in my email, we have only seen 1 matchbox problem, which was a poor solder point, and the matchbox simply did not work out of the package. We have not seen any other problems up to this time. As I stated in the email to you, send in your equipment and I will be more than happy to test your equipment to find any faults with the equipment.

TJKav8tor-RCU

My Feedback: (2)

Danny,

I hate to take exception with you or JR, but the tone of your email in response to my inquiry did not indicate support, it had many reasons trying to rationalize my failures that sounded like excuses for why I MAY have had a failure, like multiple crashes, liked mixed environment equipment and the statement that JR only supports equipment used in an all JR system. This is of course BEFORE Horizon had ever examined my gear. I don't know about anyone else, but that sure sounds like a lot of positioning prior to ever examining the facts and leads me to believe that JR is simply looking for a way to blame brand X for my significant misfortune in using JR servos and Matchboxes in a Futaba Tx & Rx environment.

However you have missed and continue to miss the point that on the first crash a solid lock up occured on the first H9 Cap, where the airplane simply flew away and at that point there is no excuse for or way to explain that away. No previous crash damage, brand new or known good everything AND the fact that there have been more than a few reports of this EXACT type of activity (just browse the RCU forum under a JR MATCHBOX search) leaves me to believe I'm not the only guy. While Horizon Service may have only seen one bad solder joint something tells me that's simply the only bad Matchbox you've seen, not the only problem...if JR has stonewalled everyone else like this I wonder how many really pursued it through to conclusion?

One other point, I do have another aircraft that performs perfectly in this 'mixed environment' with JR servo's, JR switches and Futaba Rx (albeit according to you, not supported) - the only difference being there are no Matchbox's to contend with, same gear, same extensions, same JR switches, same batteries. I wonder how we explain that...? Lucky?

I'm not going to get into a contest with you or JR over this, I'll send you ALL of my gear, although now I'm questioning that JR is qualified to evaluate the performance of Futaba gear. And frankly I'm questioning Horizon's lack of bias to the problem based on all the excuses I read last evening in your note. Maybe I should send all this gear to Radio South and have them do an unbiased assessment of what has failed and then inform JR of the results...then I suppose there'd be a whole number of excuses after that...

If you haven't figured it out already leading off with me with a bunch of excuses for my problem without even examining my gear has left a lousy taste in my mouth. I'd suggest starting over again with a far more customer service oriented tact.

TJ

dsnyder

I will do everything I can to help you out. I am simply telling you the facts of what I know, such that you understand ahead of time.

Lets look at the facts. The equipment has not been tested at this time, so no real conclusions can be made. However there are literally thousands of possibilities for what may have happened.

All 3 examples could be interference, and a coincidence. All 3 could have been one item in each that caused a drop out. This includes switches, regulators, batteries, receivers, servos, extensions, any other electronic device, not to mention the engine, ignition, and any metal to metal contact in the aircraft. Then we rule in outside interference and any other number of problems such as vibration, and there are infinite possibilities.

From all of this, the matchbox is to blame simply because you have other planes working fine without the matchbox???? I have seen aircraft using futaba systems, with the matchbox work for many flights. In fact in airplane I sold to a friend, a 40% carden cap, he installed that very set up, as it had matchboxes on the ailerons! He sold the airplane recently, however, it worked just fine while he used it. We have thousands of matchboxes on the market right now, and they are working extremely well.

TJ, I very much enjoyed talking to you at the events we have both attended. The simple fact is though, that there are any number of things that may have happened, and to simply blame the matchbox because it was in all three at this point is premature.

I feel very sorry that you have had the problems with all three aircraft and I would love to be able to know exactly what happened in each case. But frankly it is impossible to know at this point.

I have talked with 2 people now that were at the event, I have spoken at length with the product support rep you spoke with, and have a pretty good picture of what happened shy of knowing why it happened. I can use that information to better evaluate the system.

I tell you that JR manufactures equipment to work with JR equipment, as that is a very true statement, and we do not recommend mixing brands of equipment. Sure, it may work, sure you may get away with it. But some time down the line, it may result in problems. And it is a very real truth that both manufacturers on each side will not be able to help as it is not the fault of the equipment, but rather the installation. That is not to say that is what happened here. But I tell you so that you understand. It is possible. The last thing I want is for you to have any future problems.

I also told you that it will be difficult to determine anything with the matchboxes as they have now been through 3 crashes without having ever been checked out by an authorized service technician. If they are damaged and not working now, I will test your system with new matchboxes. That is the best anyone could do in a situation such as that.

As to the testing of your equipment, we will NOT service your futaba equipment in any way shape or form. We will turn it on, and that is it! We will only service JR equipment or any other Horizon hobby brand. The only reason to have it there is to test the entire set up, rather than a couple pieces of the puzzle. The only pieces we will be missing this way is the installation and the engine and ignition noise. Having the whole set up there, increases the chances of finding the weak link. Your futaba equipment will be returned to you 100% unaltered. If there is a problem with the futaba equipment, we will do absolutely nothing about it aside from informing you of it. You will need to send it to someone else for service and a check over before any operation in a model should happen. I must also inform you that any service by an unauthorized service agent will void the warranty of the equipment. The only service agent for JR in the US is Horizon Hobby.

I look forward to examining your equipment!

ChuckAuger

My Feedback: (12)

You do realize Futaba makes a Matchbox Type Device ??

TJKav8tor-RCU

My Feedback: (2)

Thanks for weighing in Chuck,

Yes I do unfortunately they didn't 15 months ago when I bought my Matchboxes.

And yes, I'm prepared to dump my Matchboxes and go to the MSA, but frankly this is a matter of making a multi thousand of dollar situation 'right'. You did notice this same trend at the very beginning of this thread right? (I'll help you - this situation has occured before and I want my situation resolved...).

TJ

dsnyder

The problems experienced ealier in this thread were NOT related to the matchbox. I have those matchboxes in question, they are still in use, and still working 100% correct without ANY problems.

rob g

The only thing that gets me, is why use a matchbox for third scale in the first place.

Surely, correctly set up controls and linkages would not require them.
I use JR, and futaba, and anything of third or larger gets two recievers, which has to be cheaper and more redundancy than three matchbox's.

The only type of distribution board I have used was a dpsi2001, to good effect. But still you cannot adjust your servos with it. More of a power regulator/isolator and distribution board all in one. The only bug bear is it still has a single point of failure. Only one rx.

To each his own.

But I dont think I will be buying matchboxes in the future.

Keep It Simple, Stupid: (Works for me)

Regards
Rob

3DRC

My Feedback: (3)

The matchbox seems to be a great device, especially in a 40% bird that requires ganged servos. But, we all have to realize that the more devices that we use the greater the chances of failure. I just can't imagine why anyone would use a matchbox on a 1/3 scale plane when you can adjust the hardware or mix to work fantastic. I have flown countless hours and observed a multitude of flights by other GS pilots and the only common failure that I have seen has been from using regulators that you don't need in the first place. I have very rarely seen any failures on a basic set-up. I can't count the number of times I have seen stalled planes go in and heard "I was hit" though.

Part of this hobby is destruction. We have all exerienced it from one thing or another. It is the aspect of the hobby that some of us thrive on so we 3D to keep ourselves even closer to the edge of distruction. The one most common error that I see is over-complicating a bird or a transmitter set-up. Keep it simple and fly the plane. Use the best equipment that you can afford and don't fiddle with it. Buy good kits and don't try to re-engineer them.

We are all tinkers and gadget people but that can also be our Achilles heal.

This is not meant to reflect on any of the parties posting. It is just an observation. I build it, set it up and fly it. I fly every weekend. The guys that like the gadgets and like to fiddle with trying to get the bird better always seem to be bent down with the hatch off while my bird it guzzling gas.

Bean

Forgues Research

My Feedback: (7)

Hey Bean, where have you been, what you said is qutie right, except the Fiber Optic right????