Rob2160

Ok, so I'm stuck in a hotel in Darwin, with a new Futaba 6EX.

I thought I'd take it out for some real world range checking...

I placed the TX on the ground at the position indicated in the picture - it was beside a tree with the back of the TX facing south.

I then jumped in the car and drove to Position 1 - During the drive the receiver lost signal as I went behind trees and buildings.

As soon as I had a line of sight view of the TX, the RX locked solid green - This distance was 1.77km

I then drove to Position 2 - Again it lost signal while driving, but when i parked the car, I had a solid green light on the RX (this was while still in the car) The RX was also inside a plastic pelican case inside a thick carboard box (to simulate a fuselage)

When I got out of the car it remained solid green and the only way I could get an occasional red blink was to place myself between the TX and the RX.

The line of sight distance to position 2 was 3.34 km.

From position 2, looking back towards the location of the TX, even cars driving by were tiny indiscernable specks.. There is NO way you could see your plane at this distance...

The following pic shows the locations..

I am very impressed with the range of this Radio. I will be conducting similar checks on my Spektrum DX6i tomorrow..

JIMF14D

There are no girls to chase in Darwin................

Rob2160

Yes, an abundance of 18-22 year old tourists.. all way too young for me....

ukengineman

Nice to have some real world evidence of range. I've been very happy with my Futaba 6EX 2.4GHz gear.
Alan

Rudy F

Keep in mind, that you get "multipath" reflections on the water-surface, improving range!

Greetings from Vienna, Rudy

Silent-AV8R

Water generally absorbs 2.4 GHz energy. In fact some early 2.4 systems had a great deal of trouble in RC boats due to that.

I have flown a 3.8 meter thermal duration/F3J glider at a measured (by onboard GPS) range of 2,700 feet. I could barely see the plane at this distance. My FASST system was rock solid. Good enough for me!! Any farther away and I would not be able to see the plane, so what more do I need??

Rob2160

Yes, I am very impressed with the Futaba, I used to fly 40mhz FM in the early 80's and 29Mhz AM before that.. they had a range of about "a mile" I tested the old Kraft Receiver one day and managed just under 2 Kilometers... That was a state of the art top shelf radio in 1980 and cost me almost $800.

The 6EX cost me $249 Australian, and I have done additional testing since my first post, confirming a solid signal at over 4 kilometers... (12,000 feet)

Awesome.!!! Considering i am only using it in a Small Ducted Fan Jet, that looks tiny at 300 meters, I think the range will be sufficient..

Silent-AV8R

I like what you have done and it provides proof that the actual range is well beyond the visual range for most of us!! I do a lot of soaring and I have never had a range issue even when out at the limits of my vision (and that of my timer!!).

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

The next experiment is to test the under- water range :-)

-another happy futaba 2.4G user.

Charlie P.

This is like a Doctor saying "I want to run a few tests on you" and the patient saying: "That's fine. I can tell you what you want to know."

If you are testing the transmitter . . . how can you trust it when it says it is in contact with the receiver without observing movement in response to the control input? If it says it will work and does - that a positive test. If it says it will work and doesn't - that's a failed range check. If it says it will work and you can't prove it. That's heresay.

victorzamora

It's still better than DSM, just randomly losing connection while in flight .

Rob2160

A very valid point.. and that is what wives are for!

I will shortly post details of my second series of range checks. Where my faithful companion (wife) patiently sat operating 4 transmitters (under instruction by mobile phone) while I drove to various locations testing the range...

She operated the controls as I instructed her, allowing me to observe the correct servo movement throughout...

I'll have the diagram and details of the checks posted later tonight..

PS.. and all it cost me wasto buy her a coffee!

Rob2160

Ok, so here is Part 2 of the range checking.

This time I tested 4 Radios.

1. Spektrum DX6i with an AR6200 receiver
2. Futaba 6EX 2.4 ghz with a R606FS receiver
3. A Kraft Series 80 7C 40 Mhz FM (built in 1980 and last serviced in 1990)
4. A 36 Mhz FM4 Channelradio that came packaged in an RTF Ducted Fan F-18 kit (it has a brand label of "FAMOUS" on it)

I removed the 36 mhz radio from the F-18 and replaced it with the Futaba 6EX which is fortunate as you will see..

With my wife sitting with the 4 transmitters in the location indicated in the photo below.

I used my mobile (cell) phone to instruct her which sticks to move so I could view the corresponding servo movement.

I then drove with the 4 receivers, with servos connected to the positiions indicated.

Position 1 - 1.6 Kilometers

Spektrum - Perfect connection and response
Futaba - Perfect connection and response
Kraft - Perfect connection and response
Famous - No connection, no response

Position 2 - 3.7 Kilometers

Spektrum - Perfect connection and response
Futaba - Perfect connection and response
Kraft - No connection, no response
Famous - No connection, no response

Position 3 - 5 Kilometers

Spektrum - Intermittent connection and response (If I held the receiver above my head it became fully connected and appeared to have reliable response, but when I lowered the RX it lost connection)
Futaba -Reasonable connection and response with intermittent red blinking on the RX light, however whenI shield the antenna with my hand the connection dropped completely
Kraft - No Connection
Famouse - No Connection



I then drove back to the location of the transmitters.. The "Famous" Brand 36 mhz radio did not connect until I was within 450 meters of the transmitter (hardly what you would fly a ducted fan jet with ...)

So my conclusion....

Spektrum and Futaba 2.4 ghz were virtually on par for rangeand clearly superior to my Kraft radio that was state of the art in 1980 (40Mhz FM)

The 36 mhz FM radio was not even in the ballpark...

Hope you find this info useful..

Cheers...

Silent-AV8R

So somewhere between 2.3 and 3.1 miles both 2.4 radios start to become intermittent. Sounds good to me. I am pretty certain that I would have significant difficulty seeing any plane I fly out past 2 miles.

Rob2160

Yes absolutely, at 2 miles even cars were indiscernable specks. I kept imagining the size of my planes compared to the cars at that distance.. you simply could NOT see them

JIMF14D

No fair. The only way to do this honestly is to have your wife sit on top of a 200 foot high pole on top of a truck that drives around in circles at 40 to 80 mph to simulate your plane while you move the sticks at the test distance!

I am kidding of course. Good job. Iwould try this with my Hitec Aurora 9 but my wife would tell me to go take...............a nap.

Jim D

Rob2160

Ha ha.. no worries.. I showed your post to my wife and suggested we try it... I think her blank expression just meant... "take your 200 foot pole and......."

Texastbird

Well if the Kraft radio has never had a tune up, the crystal can drift off frequency over the years which would lower the effective range. I have seen this myself on older radios with crystal technology. They are still good radios.

dbcisco

So basically you proved that new radios are better than 30 year old ones. Wow, didn't know that.
My 72Mhz 6XH has much further range than an Eflite LP5DSM, so FM is better than 2.4Ghz ?

How about a modern JR with Spektrum and FM modules vs a modern Futaba with FASST and FM modules? Now that would be meaningful data.

Rafael23cc

My Feedback: (6)

I've got an Idea, instead of complaining about the results posted here, you can do one of two things:

1. Set up a test and come to a conclusion yourself.
2. Send your radios to Australia, so he can test them side-by-side with other radios in the same environment. Looks that he does really have nothing else to do.

Otherwise, he made do with what was available to him. I suggest that you try it.

Rafael

carrellh

I'm sure there are planes big enough to be seen a mile away, and some people with exceptional eyesight, BUT a typical model airplane one mile away is beyond visual range for most people.

Since (under AMA guidelines in the US) you can't fly it if you can't see it, does it really matter if the range is two to three miles for the "new" systems versus about one for the "old" system?

It is possible that FM is "better" than 2.4 but I wouldn't say it is just because the LP5DSM ("LP" = limited power) has limited range.

Silent-AV8R

I fly a lot of larger thermal duration planes. Spans average around 12.5 feet or so. I have logged a couple of flights lately using a GPS logger that has documented a slant range of up to 2,700 feet on recent flights. At that distance I was losing sight during half of every turn. My timer/spotter was also having trouble seeing the plane. That is just over a 1/2-mile. Anyone who can see a normal plane at over a half mile has some pretty good eyes.

I've judged some IMAC contests where pilots used loggers and at distances of over 1,500 feet or so you can still see the plane, but it is really hard to tell exactly what it is doing. These are larger 40% type of planes.

Point being that unless there is something wrong most modern radios have range that exceeds the normal flying distance for most types of planes. And even at the extremes of eyesight they are still nowhere near exceeding the range of the radio.

dbcisco

I am not complaing, I just don't see the point of comparing to the antique radios.
It is nice to know the ranges of the 2.4Ghz radios, however, as to current equipment 2.4Ghz vs FM, it doesn't prove a thing.
Nice info but, it is like comparing a brand new Oldsmobile to a Model T to prove Fords are terrible.

JIMF14D

Hey, you are a voice of common sense here!

JIMF14D

Great idea! Maybe we coiuld send him to Australia with his radio to verify the tests. At his expense of course.