andrew66

Hey, I am about to buy a new radio, and was wanting to go 2.4 for various reasons that have been disputed over the past. Last night i was at the airport's AGM and got talking to another R/C fanatic, and he was telling me that the new 2.4 frequency doesnt penetrate objects (trees, people, ect..) I was wondering if there was any truth to it. Has anyone had issues with this?
thanks,
andrew

scooty

Regular ole 72 doesn't penetrate anything either. They're both line of sight technologies. You'll be fine with 2.4

Gremlin Castle

My Feedback: (14)

What Scooty said. If you can't see it you can't control it.

dirtybird

My Feedback: (5)

Not true. If you try it you will find your system will work fine with the transmitter in your house and your receiver outside. Both 2.4 and 72.
Unless you live in a metal house.

ChuckW

I've never heard of this but I'm suspicious. Sure, I can imagine objects of certain size and/or material might affect the signal but that's true of any frequency I would think. Plus, the receiver is usually inside of a plane. Isn't the plane an object? Of course I'm no radio expert either.

ppkk

Dirtybird is correct.

Think about the cordless telephone in your house, and the location of the base relative to where you use the headset, baby monitors, wireless routers, etc.

Roary m

My Feedback: (67)

Whatever you do, don't touch your tongue to the end of the transmitter antenna or it will turn blue.[sm=wink_smile.gif]

flaminheli

I don't know about any of this info above but, I have started my planes and walked into the house with the transmitter which is about 50' away and thru 4 walls and about 50' of open yard I still have control of my restrained planes with the transmitter in range check mode. This is with a Futaba 7c 2.4 w/ 617 reciever.

Live Wire

Do a search on radio waves. They are different than you maay think.

andrew66

thanks for the replies! I had my doubts wheter it was true. But wanted to be sure before i bought a radio system (I dont intend on flying behind anything) so it looks like im in the clear.
thanks guys!

Roary m

My Feedback: (67)

Speaking of cordless phones, I have a phone guy story. I went out on a call where the lady was complaining about the size of her phone bill as well as hearing voices on the line. I cleared the line trouble(minor) but she said she was still hearing voices[&:]. I checked her bill and another number showed up with calls being made in the middle of the night. I ran the number and it was the neighbor across the street; they had the identical cordless phone set and had it set to the same channel. They were calling the shopping network in the middle of the night and a ring back would activate my customer's line, hence the billing charges. Pretty cool, huh?

Jetdesign

My Feedback: (8)

2.4g is totally awesome.

draftman1

it works like its suposed to

foxx

My Feedback: (2)

It is not the objects, but the material that the objects are constructed from. For a given frequency some material are transparent and some are blocking, for example when a neighbor plays load music you usually hear the base because low frequencies are very penetertating and high frequencies absorbed by walls. As rule thumb higher frequencies are more aborbed by objects than the lower frequencies.

jetmech05

True...the materail that an object is made from, and signal strength will be the biggest factors in which radio waves penetrate an object.
any radio is subject to interference this includes 2.4....
Now for our use which is RC for aircraft...either 72 or 2.4 works well.....2.4 is new and will eventually replace 72..just as FM replaced AM in our hobby...
Have fun on your new radio msearch...as for me I want the 10c from Futaba

Ram Jet

Darn, I guess I won't be able to fly from the living room of my mobile home.

Bill

Ram Jet

I'm no expert either but isn't the antenna wire usually flown outside the fuselage?

Bill

ChuckW

With 72mHz that was generally true but not always. Definitely not the case with 2.4GHz. The Spektrum antennas are only an inch or so long.

foxx

My Feedback: (2)

72mHZ is a very desiable band, it is in the prime frequency real state location. I can not count the number of times that AMA had to court to protect this band. it looks to me going to 2.4 GHZ we ourselves abandoning 72mHZ band. The radio manufactureres would love it to sell their $1500 radios.

bassfisher

My Feedback: (21)

I hope that more folks go to 2.4, let's me have more time on my Channel!!

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

2.4 is a lot higher frequency than 72, so it might have a little more trouble penetrating some kinds of things, like maybe thick woods. (Not saying "will," just "might.") But if you need a signal to penetrate that kind of thing, you're in so much trouble it probably won't mater anyway. Go with 2.4: in 10 years, it will probably be all we have.

Roary m

My Feedback: (67)

So what you guys are saying is that my house is a "low pass" device?[sm=wink_smile.gif]

Jetdesign

My Feedback: (8)

nice!

Stick 40

OK, 2.4 is a very good system. It has its limits. We must set up our radio's as they need to be set up. I use the duel reciever set up and have flown it for two years and have not had one problem. But I have found out the best way to install the two recievers and they work. eveyone needs to learn the way this new system works and what its limits are.

The one thing is the engine and elect. can cause interference. ITS LINE OF sight and any metal on the plane will affect it. The duel reciever can help, if inftalled properly.

Good luck, its like anything else. If its new we have to learn how to work with it.

sticks

Stick 40

buy what ever you decide too. 2.4 won't go through BS eather. There are millons of 2.4 systems out here and they work. There has been 100 2.4 systems turned one at once with no problems.

sticks