Notices
Questions and Answers If you have general RC questions or answers discuss it here.

Why go 2.4?

Old 03-07-2007, 09:28 PM
  #1  
Flying freak
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: granby, QC, CANADA
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Why go 2.4?

So we have all herd about the new 2.4 spectrum stuff but how many are actually plannign on making the jump? im not i mean if i stay on 72.??? and everyone goes to spectrum no one will be there to bother me. of corse people can make a case that the 2.4 is better for interfiernece and that but what about the composit guys that are killing themself tryign to place the rx because the signial cant find its way through cf... also how many millions of flights have been succesful with the 72 stuff.. should be good enough for everythign i fly. another advatage is as peoepl go 2.4 i can probably find my hands on more then a couple lightly used very goo condition rx's...

WHat are your thoughts?
Old 03-07-2007, 11:07 PM
  #2  
scriptt
Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Phoenix , AZ
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

I just made the jump this weekend and bought a DX7, I found one at a local hobby shop marked down to $319 so I figured what the heck. I have been in the market because my second hand Futaba 6 channel has started to give me throttle glitches and I don’t trust it any more.

I don’t have to worry about crystals; there are 40 channels so unless there are 40 people with the DX7 at my field I have no worries, im never swapping crystals or even worrying about frequencies. But perhaps my favorite feature is the ModelMatch feature. I also like the clean look, the antenna is kept in the fuselage so you don’t have to put a hole in your plane or mess with dangling antennas.

But more than anything I just get a good feeling from spectrum and I think they will be around for a wile. I might change my mind after flying with it but from what I hear, most owners are dazzled with the system.

On the other hand if I was in a different situation I probably wouldn’t have gotten it. You see almost all of my airplanes and supplies are second hand off of Craigslist. So I have never bought an expensive controller before, nor have I bought a bunch of 72mhz RX’s. This is actually one of the only things I have bought for my hobby that is brand new. So I don’t feel like it’s as much of a waste as some people would because I don’t have as much invested into all of my receivers which ill have to replace.
Old 03-07-2007, 11:59 PM
  #3  
Sailplane
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

Flying Freak,

Man..., I with you! The more flyers that switch over to the 2.4 stuff, The more room we have on 72! We'll now be able to afford some really great 72 mHz tx's and Rx's.

Ernie
Sailplane
Old 03-08-2007, 12:20 AM
  #4  
rclement
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
rclement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 2,690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?


ORIGINAL: Sailplane

Flying Freak,

Man..., I with you! The more flyers that switch over to the 2.4 stuff, The more room we have on 72! We'll now be able to afford some really great 72 mHz tx's and Rx's.

Ernie
Sailplane
That's where I'm at. I hope everyone at the field gets one. There's rarely ever anyone on my channel anyway so I doubt that I will ever make the switch.
Old 03-08-2007, 08:19 AM
  #5  
weeber24
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

I have to admit, I'm stuck. I started flying last Spring and now have two planes (Alpha trainer and Pulse XT), but I'm still using the 4-channel radio that came with my RTF package. I really want to get a computer radio, and start looking at planes with retracts, so I need a new radio, but I'm stuck on whether or not I want to go the 2.4 Ghz route.

On one hand, I only have two planes so it's not like I have a lot invested in receivers so going 2.4 Ghz really isn't much of a capital cost. I do like the model-match feature on the DX-7, and people really seem to love the system. Not having to worry about frequency pins and greatly reducing (if not eliminating) shoot-downs is a definite bonus.

On the other hand, getting a 72Mhz synthesized radio (like the JR7202) is appealing because it will fly everything I have now and I'll be able to use cheaper receivers with everything in the future (as opposed to the $100 Spektrum receivers). To be honest, even though the field I fly at is in Atlanta which I imagine if fairly crowded frequency-wise, nobody really has had any problems on 72 and people are good about using the frequency board. I do know that the 7202 is not module based, and I did consider getting a module radio that can be upgraded to 2.4 later, but I don't think that's the best option for someone in my situation.

Really, I don't think there's really a wrong choice between the options for me, but these are the pros/cons that I'm weighing in the decision that I'll be making in the next few months. Right now, I have to say that I'm leaning toward the DX-7, but it only 55%-45% in favor.
Old 03-08-2007, 08:47 AM
  #6  
Geistware
Senior Member
My Feedback: (16)
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 12,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

IN our area we have a lot of open fields and parks.
I have met two park flyers on my frequency and I showed them how my 33% CAP can shoot down there foamie.
The are now scared that I would knock them down so now they look out for me.
(VERY TRUE)

ORIGINAL: Flying freak

So we have all herd about the new 2.4 spectrum stuff but how many are actually plannign on making the jump? im not i mean if i stay on 72.??? and everyone goes to spectrum no one will be there to bother me. of corse people can make a case that the 2.4 is better for interfiernece and that but what about the composit guys that are killing themself tryign to place the rx because the signial cant find its way through cf... also how many millions of flights have been succesful with the 72 stuff.. should be good enough for everythign i fly. another advatage is as peoepl go 2.4 i can probably find my hands on more then a couple lightly used very goo condition rx's...

WHat are your thoughts?
Old 03-08-2007, 09:01 AM
  #7  
Newc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Leesburg, IN
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

On the other hand, getting a 72Mhz synthesized radio (like the JR7202) is appealing because it will fly everything I have now and I'll be able to use cheaper receivers with everything in the future (as opposed to the $100 Spektrum receivers).
Don't really see this as much of an issue as the JR 7-channel receivers go for $70 to $100.
I don’t have to worry about crystals; there are 40 channels so unless there are 40 people with the DX7 at my field I have no worries
Where did the number 40 come from? I believe that for all practical purposes there are an unlimited number of channels available.
Old 03-08-2007, 09:57 AM
  #8  
orenda635
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Milton, ON, CANADA
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

I bought the DX7 as a Christmas gift to myself but I haven't tried it in the air yet.

I think spread spectrum supports 8 channels, meaning 8 can fly at a time. Unless you're at one of these massive events with huge airfields, I doubt they'll be a problem. The nice thing about these radios is that they eliminate the possibility for human error. Somebody accidentally turning their radio on will not cause your plane to crash since the radio will detect that channel is already in use and not select it.
Another handy feature is that you can bind a receiver to a plane, meaning the transmitter will automatically pick up the right settings for that particular plane. Therefore there's no chance of flying with the wrong model in memory.

JRs receivers are very expensive. Fortunately I've got a radio that supports both positive and negative shift so I can use cheaper Futaba or OEM ones. $100 is a lot if you're a low budget pilot like me or if you've got a lot of planes.
Old 03-08-2007, 10:37 AM
  #9  
Sherpa FE
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

Newc, Orenda 635

Below is a link right off the Spektrum web page FAQ's.

http://www.spektrumrc.com/DSM/FAQ.aspx

In the downloadable videos it also explains that there is room for 80 users for ground mode, and 40 users for air mode.

Josh
Old 03-08-2007, 11:35 AM
  #10  
scriptt
Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Phoenix , AZ
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?


ORIGINAL: Newc

On the other hand, getting a 72Mhz synthesized radio (like the JR7202) is appealing because it will fly everything I have now and I'll be able to use cheaper receivers with everything in the future (as opposed to the $100 Spektrum receivers).
Don't really see this as much of an issue as the JR 7-channel receivers go for $70 to $100.
I don’t have to worry about crystals; there are 40 channels so unless there are 40 people with the DX7 at my field I have no worries
Where did the number 40 come from? I believe that for all practical purposes there are an unlimited number of channels available.
[link=http://www.spektrumrc.com/DSM/FAQ.aspx]Spectrum DX-7 FAQ[/link]

What happens if the band is full (80 users for surface or 40 users for aircraft) and I turn on my transmitter?

In the unlikely event that all channels are occupied, the next transmitter will scan the band indefinitely until open channels are available. The transmitter will then acquire the channel(s) and begin transmitting. Only then will the system connect.


Evan at forty, for all practical purposes it’s still virtually unlimited. I fly at one of the biggest airfields in my area and we still have a limit of 6 people in the air at once. It will be a long long time until 40 people are at my field with 2.4 Tx's.
Old 03-08-2007, 12:03 PM
  #11  
orenda635
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Milton, ON, CANADA
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

I remember reading 8 somewhere. Where did I get that info? [sm=confused.gif]
Still, the chances are remote of there being a problem. 2.4ghz systems use similar technology that cell phones do to automatically pick a channel that's not in use. It will not pick a channel that's already in use. There's no need for frequency boards with them.
Old 03-08-2007, 01:13 PM
  #12  
Flying freak
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: granby, QC, CANADA
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

i hope all these systems on 2.4 will talk to each other the futaba airtornics JR spectrum and there are oither companies coming out on the 2.4 if one of them doesnt go with the same format coulndt stuff get interesting?

just a though

(i do understand that you might have problems with parkflyers... i guess its a risk but in my are is very small.. our club is well advertized and there arnt many place to fly so they may as well come join us.
Old 03-08-2007, 02:25 PM
  #13  
2slow2matter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 2,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

Geistware,
that was pure genius!

There are indeed 80 2.4 ghz channels. However, the DX7 locks onto two at a time, so that leaves a net of 40 available flying slots per site. There should never be that many planes in the sky at once, so you are fine.

The idea that I can turn my radio on in the pits to work on a plane without worrying about shooting down someone is also appealing. And besides, it could only be a matter of time before the FCC takes all of our 72 mhz channels anyway. Not that it may happen in any of our lifetimes, but it could.
Old 03-08-2007, 02:39 PM
  #14  
scriptt
Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Phoenix , AZ
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

I don’t understand this assumption that your channel is safe at a field. In my short flying career I have already had two people interfere with my channel at the field when I had the frequency card. With that alone I can’t justify this mentality with a traditional radio. A 2.4 on the other hand, no worries.

When a first time flyer comes to the field they don’t always understand the significance of keeping there radio off, It’s not just the newbs though, we had a guy at our field that had a malfunctioning hitec spectra module and he was causing vibration in three different planes, all on different channels when he would tap the box. His plane was affected most prominently but still, im sick of messing with all this interference garbage.

Flying with the DX7 is like flying with a clear head, I don’t have to worry about what some newb is doing with his radio. I can concentrate purely on my model with the confidence that my inputs are the ONLY inputs it is responding to.
Old 03-08-2007, 04:28 PM
  #15  
rc-sport
My Feedback: (12)
 
rc-sport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Round Lake, IL
Posts: 3,180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

Scriptt, if there are 40 SS flyers at a field and all radios are on and a 41st flyer turns on nothing will happen. His plane will just sit there with no control, as soon as 1 radio is shut off the 41st flyer will be able to lock on to his plane. No one will be shot down.
Old 03-08-2007, 04:37 PM
  #16  
2slow2matter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 2,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?


ORIGINAL: scriptt


ORIGINAL: Newc

On the other hand, getting a 72Mhz synthesized radio (like the JR7202) is appealing because it will fly everything I have now and I'll be able to use cheaper receivers with everything in the future (as opposed to the $100 Spektrum receivers).
Don't really see this as much of an issue as the JR 7-channel receivers go for $70 to $100.
I don’t have to worry about crystals; there are 40 channels so unless there are 40 people with the DX7 at my field I have no worries
Where did the number 40 come from? I believe that for all practical purposes there are an unlimited number of channels available.
[link=http://www.spektrumrc.com/DSM/FAQ.aspx]Spectrum DX-7 FAQ[/link]

What happens if the band is full (80 users for surface or 40 users for aircraft) and I turn on my transmitter?

In the unlikely event that all channels are occupied, the next transmitter will scan the band indefinitely until open channels are available. The transmitter will then acquire the channel(s) and begin transmitting. Only then will the system connect.


Evan at forty, for all practical purposes it’s still virtually unlimited. I fly at one of the biggest airfields in my area and we still have a limit of 6 people in the air at once. It will be a long long time until 40 people are at my field with 2.4 Tx's.
And probably an even longer time before they are all turned on at the same time!!!!!!!!
Old 03-08-2007, 05:18 PM
  #17  
scriptt
Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Phoenix , AZ
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?


ORIGINAL: rc-sport

Scriptt, if there are 40 SS flyers at a field and all radios are on and a 41st flyer turns on nothing will happen. His plane will just sit there with no control, as soon as 1 radio is shut off the 41st flyer will be able to lock on to his plane. No one will be shot down.
Yes good point, but just so you know, im not advocating against the 2.7 radios, my previous post was referring to 72mhz systems, being shot down.

But I see you what you mean, I was saying that 40 people would have to be at a field with there 2.4 radios turned on when in fact even if that did happen, nothing would happen. Very good point,

The short of what I was trying to say about the DX7 is no matter what your situation is you are very unlikely to get shot down.

Old 03-08-2007, 06:46 PM
  #18  
orenda635
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Milton, ON, CANADA
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

ORIGINAL: scriptt

I don’t understand this assumption that your channel is safe at a field. In my short flying career I have already had two people interfere with my channel at the field when I had the frequency card. With that alone I can’t justify this mentality with a traditional radio. A 2.4 on the other hand, no worries.
Well, there's an inherent risk in of failure using any wireless communication device. Nothing will be 100% safe. The only way to get that would be to have a wire connecting your plane to the controller, and a lot of ferrite magnets.
Spread spectrum systems remove most of the human error element since it's all computerized. Therefore there is no need for careful frequency monitoring.

Anyway, the adoption rate is pretty slow. I'm the only pilot at my club that I know of that has one, out of some 150 members. Many pilots are slow to adopt new technology, either by lack of understanding or financial issues. Even the modules available now aren't exactly cheap.
However, there is a bonus for 72mhz pilots. As more pilots adopt 2.4ghz system, they'll be less traffic on the 72mhz band. 72mhz systems are not obsolete yet.
Old 03-08-2007, 06:54 PM
  #19  
Rcpilot
My Feedback: (78)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,746
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

I'm buying an Extreeme link module for my JR8103 as soon as they are available.

We have dead spots at our field. Those dead spots kill airplanes. Every brand of radio is effected. All PPM and PCM 72mhz systems are effected.

We put a Spektrum system in a plane and flew it around in the "dead" spots TRYING to find a glitch or a hit. Nothing. Rock solid. We flew tank after tank after tank after tank after tank after tank after tank after tank through the dead spots. Low and slow. Fast and furious. Nothing. Rock solid.

We wrapped the ANTENNA from a Spektrum RX AROUND the spark plug lead on a weed wacker. We set the smaller --secondary---RX right on top of the spark plug boot and zip tied it on there. We ran that weedie from idle to full throttle and everywhere in between for 2 whole tanks. Not a single glitch. We walked off over 300 FEET and it was rock solid with that weedie running at various throttle settings. Rock solid. Not even a hiccup.

I'm jumping into 2.4ghz as soon as I can get one from Extreme link. I swear--the INSTANT it becomes available--I'm buying one module and about 6 RXs.
Old 03-08-2007, 07:16 PM
  #20  
Flying freak
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: granby, QC, CANADA
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

why not get a real JR module instead of the extreme link?
Old 03-08-2007, 11:30 PM
  #21  
Rcpilot
My Feedback: (78)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,746
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Why go 2.4?

Extreme link has better numbers.

Thats a topic for another thread though, and I'm not gonna start it. [sm=47_47.gif]

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.