BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

The antennas on the Satellite are the same aircraft but not in the same plane. They are 90 deg to the antennas in the main Rx and correct according to the manual.

They are represented in picture 3.

Zor

I am referrring to the only picture in post #45

Both antennas are in an horizontal plane when the airplane is in normal attitude sitting on the ground on its wheels.

Zor

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

Yes!! And that is not only acceptable but one of the recommended installations. The antennas for the main Rx are Perpendicular to the antennas for the Satellite. If they were Parallel, that would be incorrect. The other recommended installations would be to mount the the Satellite on the bulkhead to the right of it's current location. You could also rotate the Satellite 90 deg to the Right, in both locations.

I have set up numerous aircraft using these same patterns, without incident.

Zor

I wish you had said who does the recommendation and how he (they) did that recommendation.
That is obvious in the picture.

It would be the same as receivers with a single antenna or with a double parallel antennas a short distance away on the receiver case. The polarization is the same but for some phase difference.

That would put both antennas parallel ; not the best.

That would be better to take advantage of both polarization

Any installation is ok if one never flys far away as can happen with large models.
What we are talking about is "What is best" for a good link and maximum range.

Itis also best to have receivers without AGC. Something distributors never talk about.

All we hear (read) is "full range". They seem afraid to give us concrete information.
That is not surprising.

Zor

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

Zor - What is the matter with you? You are totally out of touch with how these JR/Spektrum 2.4 radios should be set up. You bought a DX7 and suddenly you are the authority. You have had very little if any practical real world experience using these radios in the field. You don't go to major events, you don't go to trade shows, you just Troll around RCU to get some terms so you can try and sound intelligent, but it is still not enough.

The Main Rx is mounted to the floor of the fuselage with the antennas pointing to the sides.
The Satellite Rx is mounted to the side of the fuselage with the antennas pointing front and back.
This is a correct installation.

It is also correct to mount the Satellite Rx to the side of the fuselage or to the face of a bulkhead, with the antennas pointing towards the top and bottom of the fuselage.

No matter how you try to deny this, you are incorrect.

Try and Polarize your thoughts in a Positive direction instead of a Negative direction.

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

One correction. With the Satellite on the bulkhead, antennas need to be vertical. They should not be horizontal.

Zor

You do not seem to realize that what we are talking about is "radio communication" and the best way of obtaining maximum range for reliability.
Your comments in the above paragraphis just throwing dirt around.for no justifiable reason.
I have used radio communication for most of my long life. It appears you do not even understand what I am talking about. What do you know about radiaton, propagation and field strenght ?
You do not learn this by putting the switch on an RC transmitter and receiver and just use it to control a model airplane. That knowledge is not acquired by visiting shows and attending major events of model flying.

YES it is a correct installation but it is not the best and I am saying why (which you rarely do) ; it is because both are in a horizontal plane and cannot take advantage of any polarizaton at 90 degrees.

That is exactly the orientationI was talking about but it does not appear you read me any better than usual.

Proof that you do not pay attention. You claim I deny while reading properly makes it evident that it is exactly what I was promoting (not denying).

Please try to take time to interpret your reading with greater attention and not read the opposite to what is written clearly.I often read you and conclude you do not understand the subject discussed.

I do not wish to be rude to you andI do not care about or mind your rudeness to me. It does not bother me. I do not talk or write about things I know nothing or little about.

Enjoy yourself but guard against often misleading readers.

Repeating what I talked about ___ It is best to have two antennas having their orientation so that their center line (their length) are 90 degrees and in a geometrical plane also 90 degrees apart (not parallel). Using a different description in words, one antenna is oriented 9 o'clock to 3 o;clock and the other is 12 o'clock to 6 o'clock and the two planes are at least a couple of inches apart.

If that is not possible other orientatons will work but with potential reduced range and worst signal to noise ratios.

Zor

Zor

BuschBarber,

You posted the above while I was typing and formatting.

I am glad you now saw the light.

It takes a good man to realize and correct its misunderstanding.

You are a super good guy.

Thanks

Zor

alan tully

My Feedback: (3)

this sorta thing also happened to me once but i didnt fly it the 2nd time .When i got it home i started wiggling the plane around and saw the rudder lock out.What i  found was that when they stripped the wires for the antanna they removed to much wire and the 2 were touching each other and that was making the system lock up .Once the 2 wires stopped  touching the pane went back to working rite

alan tully

My Feedback: (3)

that happened to me once what is was ,when they stripped the wire for the antanna they removed to much of the covering and the 2 wires were tpuching each other killing the signal to the radio .They would touch the plane had no responce so try touhing them together if the signal is lost mybe thats what the problem was

kurt2022

My Feedback: (18)

That could have been my h9 cap last Saturday when I experienced my ar7000 receiver locking out or going in failsafe, luckily I got mine on the ground safely! I'm going to all ar9000's or jr921's with up to four rf links not two compared to the ar7000's, too dangerous!!!

pfloyd

I can't believe John that you've given up. You were RIGHT and now you are WRONG just like Rcpilot is. If you think that #3 install is wrong because both antennas are on the same horizontal axis, then I suppose you should never ever attempt to fly in knife edge.

Zor

It is all a matter of desired control signal energy induced in the receiving antenna(s).

That energy depends on the transmitter radiated power producing a field strenght according to its directivity which vary with the orientaton of the transmitter antenna. How you hold the transmitter so that maximum field strenght goes toward the receiver.

Then the directivity of the receiving antenna(s) which varies with the orientaton of the model and the manner the receiving antenna(s) were installed in the model.

In a few words all the above affect the range where the signal become too weak for control or the signal to noise (or unwanted radiation) ratio is not sufficient for proper demodulation.

The above explains also why we never see actual range specified in a distance figure.
All that is said is "full range" which simply mean "you should be able to fly your airplane as far as you can see its attitude for contolling it.

Since larger model's attitude can be seen at farther distancces some fliers of giant models often install two receivers thinking they have increased the communication range. That is not so because one receiver does not know what the other one is doing. One receiver is independent of the other one.

The main reason for multiple receivers (satellite receivers) is to take advantage of the radiated field polarization. Some system come with such satellite receivers but if not then installing a second receiver is the only choice. It does not necessarily increase the maximum range but we may say it makes the receiver response more uniform and more independent of the model attitude during maneuvers.

In fact it is often forgotten that multiple antennas in close proximity affect the directivity pattern. Consider yagis, adcocks, and looped elements and their directivity patterns.

Fortunately for the average flier it is not a primary concern but we often read about a loss of control that is not easily explainable.

We have the ability to hold our transmitters for best signal propagation to the receiver wherever the model is in tha air. We should install the 2.4 Ghz antenna(s) as recommended and do our best to keep the receiving antenna(s) as far as practical from other electrically conductive materials in the model. Our choice is often rather limited.

Of course we often read that a fellow never had problems. That is good. With a smaller model up to size 90 or even 120 the plane is rarely further than about 700 feet (about 220 meters).

Zor

baronbrian

My Feedback: (13)

+1

also keeping as much distance as possible between the primary rx and the satellite is as important.

doublesixes

I lost 2 planes to my DX7/r7000 combo under similar circumstances to OP's.

My radio was purchased in 07 and I didn't experience bad things until a few months ago when, in quick succession, 2 gas planes were lost.

After these traumatic events, I tried all my r7000s and 6000s with foamies. All I can say is that control is basically lost/regained if the planes fly further than 30-40 feet away from me, regardless of RX. As one could imagine, I'm no longer using that radio but for sim applications.

Zor

An interesting posting.

No comments

Zor

cometravi

btw, I was testing the receiver I had on my plane that crashed and Channel 6 seems like it was faulty. It went to extreme throw or did not respond at all. Tried various configs but no luck. My Cap232 was configured for Channel 1 & 6 as ailerons and it did roll into the ground and the first glitch was aileron related.. Has anyone had this happen to them? I read the advisory on the AR9000 and the Capacitors coming loose. Wont really know as this could have happened post crash but this could just be it.

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

The Capacitor issue affected older AR9000's, from 4 or 5 years ago. It wouldn't just affect one channel. My AR9000's were from that period and I had to send them back to have the Capacitor secured. One of my original AR9000 had a Channel port that was dead. I could not even connect a battery to it. I returned it to the LHS and they replaced it.

Zor

cometravi,

Read this, it may help and not have to return the receiver.

http://www.spektrumrc.com/Articles/A...ArticleID=1709

This repair assumes (of course) that the capacitor is still good and its connections inside itself as well as to the PC board are not broken.

If you feel better to send it to the service center then that is the best course to follow as already suggested.

It is always recommended to install a receiver so it is subject to a minimum of mechanical vibrations.

Zor

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

The case is very difficult to open without damaging or defacing it. Gluing the Capacitor down will not resolve the problem with the bad Channel port, if you have one. If your Rx is newer than 4 years old it most likely does not have the Capacitor issue.