vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Except that it is more likely for something to go wrong, when there is more involved. I would rather have less components than more. Also, it is something else I have to buy. Having satellite RXers has not proven itself to be better. It is just different and more. Just for this reason alone, I steer clear of JR and Spektrum. And no, I do not fly Futaba.

chuckk2

Remember that a digital RX has a lot going on. The end result is some electrical and rf noise.
By having the basic RX located away from the digital circuitry, you can improve the sensitivity by improving the signal to noise ratio.
Then there is a signal blocking issue, due to the various parts of the model, and short antennas.

Anyway, the sensitivity of the modern 2.4ghz R/C receiver is quite good when designed properly, and top grade components are used.
It's also well to note that even so, the sensitivity of one RX to another can vary by a significant amount. In other-words,
a receiver that "just meets" testing requirements may be half as sensitive as one that is at the top end of the scale.

My Background, for whatever it's worth, or not!
Back in the late 1960's, I spent some time in the Navy as a shipboard electronics tech, and often the only on board tech.
In the Navy's usual manner, I was trained in general electronics and radio communications equipment, and then promptly assigned to radar and navigation systems.
(And expected to provide radio communications repair when the other techs could not!)
At that time, a large number of the older radar systems designed in the late 1940's and early 1950's were still in service on the small ships that I was assigned to.
1.5 to about 2.5 Ghz was the general operating frequency range. The low power radar systems had a range of about 20 miles, and the medium power systems
up to about 200 under ideal conditions. The medium power units were sort of a conversion from early antiaircraft radar, in that they did not have an air search antenna
and the appropriate display. This made sense, in that it allowed use of common parts that were available in large numbers, although obsolete for antiaircraft radar use.

We spent a lot of time at sea between Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam in good weather and bad, and I spent a fair amount of my efforts keeping radars and Loran receivers
going. There are things in the China sea that you really don't want to run into in the middle of the night or in bad weather!
In and around Vietnam, we often made night time firing runs. During the day, we'd navigate visually, and record radar based positions to match the visually confirmed positions.
At night, we'd come back, and use radar to establish the proper firing positions, and fire rockets and 5" gun rounds into designated targets.

Decades later, I ended up spending a major part of my career in of all things, a specialized field that designs and builds equipment intended to jam airborne and ground based radar.

impulse09

My Feedback: (3)

Futaba doesn't need satellites. Satellites are either a bandaid, or Horizon is trying to nickle and dime the hobbyist. What protocol is Spektrum on now anyways?

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Ever notic that it is pretty much the same people that are crashing all the time. Spectrum had I say had sitll have with the DSM2
Systems of old. That being saie with the DSMX (Hopping) when Used is far better. Back to the same people crashing
if U look deeper U know what kind of workmen ship these people do and ainly their flying ability, NUFF SAID. JMHO

drac1

My Feedback: (4)

As a safety concern, one should never turn the transmitter off before the receiver no matter what brand it is.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Especially if you have retracts.

eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

And I hope their workmanship is better than your proofreading.

Sorry Hound Dog, but I barely can understand what you're sayin'.

drac1

My Feedback: (4)

How many Futaba users are there verses Spektrum users? If there are more Spektrum, then naturally there could be more Spektrum related crashes. Also with Spektrum being cheaper, would it be fair to say more beginner/lower skilled pilots are using them which appears to be where most of the signal loss crashes are?

Many so called "signal loss" crashes, are in reality pilot error. Example; the plane goes into a spin and won't recover no matter what the pilot does. Quite often the plane has stalled without the pilot realising and the pilot throwing the sticks around makes it worse untill it crashes. Then blames the radio. I've seen this scenario a few times.

I'm not aiming this at anyone in particular or being argumentative, just making a comment from my experience and looking at it from a different angle.

I've always used JR apart from a couple of Spektrums bought as RTF and never had a signal loss problem or a radio related crash. Having not used Futaba i can't comment on them. I do think many crashes are unnecessarily blamed on the radio.
As has already been said, there will always be arguments as to which brand is better. Always will be. If one particular brand works for you, then stick with it. If you are a new comer then go to a club and watch and learn. Ask questions so you can make an informed descision.

drac1

My Feedback: (4)

This is why i like JR's model match system.

Rob2160

Have you ever tested a Spektrum AR6255 (no satellites) along side a Futaba 617FS? I have, there is no difference in range or performance with the ones I am using.

Both pictured here. Mounting them is identical due to the similar form factor.

Rob2160

Yes this is a big plus for Spektrum / JR. I had two crashes with Helicopters on Futaba (both totally my fault for not selecting the correct model)

This was with a 6EX. With the more advanced models I own like the 8FG and 14SG it is less of a problem because you can configure the radio to force you to choose the model every time you power up. It won't power up until you do. These models allow longer model names also (it helps when one radio drives 12 different helicopters)

Loopman

My Feedback: (195)

Okay, I was a JR/Spehtrum user for many years. I found myself rationalizing why I had "brown outs" and lost three aircraft (the last one being a brand new H9 Supercub). In every case I had the receivers properly positioned, 6 volt power supplies, all the safe guards and I lost three planes. I had also bought a brand new DSMX receiver and after the Cub went in I contacted Horizon, sent the receiver (and the transmitter) in for inspection. Hosrizon's response was I needed to upgrade the receivers software. To make a long story short, Futaba has been doing 2.4 a very long time and since I switched to FAAST, I have not had one single, solitary glitch. In my book Futaba is better than JR/Spektrum. JMHO!

Happy Flying!

Loopman

1UGLYPUG

BUT,,, I have seen Spektrum replace two planes for one friend of mine,and one for another friend of mine,, Futaba will never replace a plane, even when they know their equipment is faulty, and replace the bad transmitter.... If their crap was so great, they would stand behind it more.... Since their customer service of taking care of the customer's loss when they know their equipment is faulty is non existent,,, I will never buy another Futaba. And, since I have not lost one plane with a Spektrum radio, and Spektrum is cheaper, there is no contest... Futaba looses due to high price and poor customer service that I have personally witnessed. If they won't stand behind their equipment any better than that,, it must be because they know what kind of crap they are selling....

Dave

DSMX Video

Let's not forget the DSM advertisement: "DSM is the 2.4GHz technology that's here to stay and one to beat"
The DSMX video is a clever cover-up for DSM fiasco. Turning on 100 transmitters on 2.4GHz band in the middle of no-where and call it "band is totally saturated" is ludicrous.
Our flying fields are located in urban area where millions are using the unlicensed 2.4GHz band. The video is also misleading since it makes you think that the 2.4GHz band is for RC use only.

cloudancer03

My Feedback: (22)

Well at least this debate was civil.futaba developed its current 2.4 from technology it had discovered at least 15 years ealier than spectrum.while spectrum 2.4 is similar it uses the 2.4 frequency similarly.the best thing is that both work well and have made flying rc so much better.i did own a dx7 and in less than 15 minutes destryed 2 expensive planes.the brown out was related to the receiver not me.and the solution was at the time a 6.00 part.i went back to futaba.in fairness that issue has long been addressed.i returned to futaba and it was just easier for me to bind and I didnt like the other antennae unit.nothing wrong or inferior just different.both futaba , jr and spectrum have done an outstanding service to our hobby.spectrum isvery afford with futaba.but I will admit for park flyers spectrum is slightly less expensive and has lots of inexpensve rx.while I do not claim to know I ofthis I hear time to time issues with other brands beyond theses two very respectable companies.i love 2.4 and I love my futaba 8fg.
?..

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

that has been A practice for ever ,,, 72 mhz or what ever.

Rob2160

Isn't that like saying... The Iphone 5 is a cover up for the Iphone 3 Fiasco because it couldn't access 4G networks?

I'm not complaining if technology advances and they release a better protocol (DSMX)

I am also extremely happy that anything DSMX is backward compatible with DSM2..

Advances in technology are a good thing..

1UGLYPUG

In 1978, I was an AF airborne radio instructor, and then a satellite communications instructor. We had some of the first "frequency hopping" equipment installed on our nuclear carrying aircraft. These were like the Futaba FASST frequency hopping systems. What a pain it was teaching digital stream signal technology to some of the older analog radio guys. If Futaba had decent customer service, I would recommend them hands down, but, their customer service stinks. 2.4 Ghz frequencies, or microwave, can be blocked by metal objects and results in loss of signal lock due to poor antenna installations. They also work best in line of site instances. That is why almost anything can block the signal, including the batteries in your plane, the metal push rods, and even servo wires. Extra receivers/antennas can only help, which is why I like the satellite receivers Spektrum uses. There are too many things that affect signal loss to even start here. On the comment about signals conforming to the "curvature" of the earth, HF frequencies , or those around the CB band, don't conform to the curvature of the earth, they bounce off the ionosphere,, to travel around the earth. All frequencies are "line of sight", or radiate in a straight line, in all directions. Unless you are using a dish antenna or beam antenna, the signals will all "spray" or radiate in all directions. The high or low frequency does not affect the radiation pattern, but the antenna does. The tip of the antenna radiates the less signal strength. I see lots of people with their transmitter antennas pointing the tip of the antenna at the plane, which is the worst antenna orientation possible. So many people don't know the radiation patterns of antennas, and don't realize the loss of signal it can cause. And don't touch the antenna which can severely reduce the signal. Some study of antenna radiation patterns and antenna signal reception, would help a lot of folks on here. Just a thought on the speed of linking when turning on the Futaba and the Spektrum. The Futaba does not have the model select data bit stream being sent out to guarantee you only link to your one model, whereas the Spektrum has the extra data bit stream being sent out, and guaranteeing connection to the right model. A plus for me, as I don't have to worry about linking to the wrong model.

Luchnia

My Feedback: (21)

I agree and sometimes though advances in technology can come with some issues. One thing is for sure, the advances in technology is why I am in RC. It is so much more affordable and do-able for me. I highly regard the current "cool" radios and such. I mean, I have one radio for most of my planes and could use it for all my planes, but I have been too lazy to switch the rest over

Another point to make in this thread is that it has been remarkably civil. Most of the these type of threads get stupid and heat up quick. We all know there can be electronics failures with radios and other equipment. I have stated a number of times on forums about an issue I had that I was 100% sure it was the radio and was totally sure Spektrum was crap until I discovered what was really wrong!

Sometimes our assumptions are not on the mark. I had a plane that would glitch horrifically. Guess what it was? It was a connector in one of the wings that was vibrating back and forth and would cause control problems! Every issue I have had so far I pinned down by doing proper research. None have been radio issues. This doesn't mean a radio cannot fail, it just means that for me they haven't.

cloudancer03

My Feedback: (22)

Yes this discussion has been very civil .theres one on the myths of electric power which turned out just to be another bunch of posts designed to trash gas vs.nitro.this has been informative.i wish I could easily explain DSM tech theory versus FSST but both are superior to my old 72 fm. I still use analog servos in some planes but am gradually going digital and I am so far behind as I see new servos with high volages etc.the adavances in rc are exciting.t

MinnSpin

My Feedback: (40)

Good Point.
I made a blanket statement. My experience references AR400 and AR6210 technology, which was not discussed by me in the first posting.

Steve S. Helland

My Feedback: (15)

I have seen much success in our hobby with all brands of radios. I have seen many other pilots have flight failures while using the 2.4 Ghz systems. Never once did I attribute one of those failures to a loss of bind or a data interruption to the receiver. There is so much more that can go wrong with our set-ups such as:

1) Insufficient battery power

2) Electro-mechanical failure-bad switch, worn contacts, bent pins, using worn components...1000 different scenarios.

It always seems easiest for a pilot to say "Oh, he's using a Spektrum and I heard this and that...don't use those radios because they drop the bind".

Realize that the companies who design and manufacture these radio sets, (JR, Spektrum, Futaba etc.) have incredible R&D teams who have done extensive testing before they put them on the market. If these systems were in any way going to cause the companies to be liable I am sure that they would not have put them on the market to millions of users world wide. This subject is based upon fear.

I use Futaba systems only because I chose long ago to stick with one brand. I do understand how and why the 2.4 Ghz systems work and I have never had a failure because I am very thorough about how I set up my birds-wiring, switches, sufficient good quality batteries with sufficient charge etc.

In essence I pay these guys lots of money so I can purchase a good quality product that I know works well when used as recommended.
Analogy: Sometimes I want to stick my head up a bulls butt to get a good look at a T-bone steak...but I'm more inclined to take the butcher's word for it.

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

All these radio use commercial chips in the front end of their receivers, and there are only two or three used over all the different brands.

Remote receivers allow the modeler to place the antenna in an orthogonal orientation with gives a better chance of receiving the signal. More important to the more aggressive flier.

The RF power from 2.4G systems is very low compared to the 72 MHz systems. But link equations to determine range depend on many factors other than just frequency or power.

SkidMan

My Feedback: (17)

You said that the (up to) four seconds longer made a difference to you since you flew turbine aircraft. I assume that it must feel like a significant difference if you bring it up.

Since the longer delay only takes place during the first power up of an aircraft, why would that make a significant difference to you? The only way it made sense to me was my assumption that you thought it took a similar amount of time to relink if for some reason communication was lost.

Paul

rmh

Different tx/rx combos do initial link at different speeds - the Little Bind n Fly stuff like Indoor etc., sometimes take a few seconds - My models with 9/10 ch rxs pop right up .Ditto for the 610 /800 rx.
Getting a solid2.4 rf link is no mystery and claims of superior signal strength setups are malarkey for the most part - Like brands of gasoline .
Features are what make the systems sell today .
if you have a rf problem- check the mirror in your bathroom- likely you will find the real problem.