Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

You are right, JR is not Spektrum. They are a joint venture with JR supplying the radio control expertise and Spektrum supplying the modulation and transmission technology. Any way you look at it, JR will get the publicity whither positive or negative. Brand loyalty will last as long as a modeler is getting what he/she desires from his/her equipment. I prefer Futaba. If JR releases a product (under what ever name or association) that better meets my needs without a counterpart from Futaba, I am not adverse to change.

Jimnie

air mail,
Yep, it is cool, also there is another huge feature I see people have not picked up on. DX7 has Model Match. Because the rx in a DSS system communicates with the tx then it transmitts an id signal. If the transmitter memory is set to a certain model but the receiver is in a different model the system will not work. The transmitter must be set to the same model as you are trying to fly.

If someone says they haven't ever been shot down then they either don't fly models or their time is coming. If something can happen it will. With DSM there is no chance to get shot down, thats all. BTW, DX6 has been flying for almost two years and there are many posts on RCU from people who have been flying it in glow models from the beginning. The other one regarding the model memory is the same, at some time everyone I know has at least tried to fly or has crashed because they didn't select the correct model, so same thing, if it can happen it will.

It is backward compatible with the DX6 receiver so it flys park flyers or indoor models with many more features than the DX6 (including a flight timer for the electric guys). And the price is right.

Pretty good article with quick to the point features: try this: http://www.horizonhobby.com/Articles...ArticleID=1626

Jimnie

RTK

My Feedback: (1)

Check out http://www.xtremepowersystems.net/xtremelink.php

Electriceddie

Guys,

Like I said before 95% of the guys who crash won't admit it is pilot error. They blame it on the radio. If the radio absolutely does not get any interference 110% when in use and a crash ocurrs, then we would have to say then that it was pilot error, correct? So no matter how perfect a radio may be it is still controlled by a human being who is not perfect, although many believe in the own minds that they are. After all, we all know the guy in the club, and we all know one "Who is a Legend in his own Mind" that he is a "Hot Shot" pilot and does not ever crash, so it must be radio interference. Most fields have pretty good frequecy board control that I have been at, and if it is followed by all there won't be any accidental shoot downs.

However spread spectrum will help stop the accidental transmitter on your frequecy, being turned on by some geek at the field and shooting you down. Good frequency board control will do that, but pilot error still remains.


At our field we have good freq. board control. Sometimes what may appear to be an interference issue at first, which turns out upon inspection to be a bad switch or a low charged battery or some similar issue. In the last couple of years that I recall there has not been one documented crash due to actual radio interference at the field I fly at.


So get spread spectrum possibly to eliminate the possible shoot down from the accidental turn "ON" of a radio on your freq. But don't be fooled by the spread spectrum system that if you buy it you will never have a crash.

Just something to think about, another angle of many out there. I am not putting down spread spectrum I think the technology is something worth following up. I just get the feeling from what I have read that some people feel this will solve all of their airplane demise problems.


Happy flying

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

Personally, I am more afraid of the local park flyer who turns on there TX and goes flying or attempted to fly and crash. A $180 model purchased at the LHS and then taking to a nearby field is more dangerous than anything that I can imagine.

Electriceddie

Geistware,


Understandable. I just can't believe that that would be an issue. In the area were we fly there are several clubs in a 15 - 20 mile area and of the 2 that I fly at, there is no place that a Park Flyer could fly close enough to us. Is that rally a problem? What percentage across the board with respect to interfernce does that represent? Is it a small or large percentage?

Hey here's an Idea! Most Park flyers flying RC is a novelty after a destroyed plane or two they will probably not be back into RC anyway. "So shoot them down first"
LOL

Only kidding..........

akschu

My Feedback: (5)

I don't care about the frequency control as that has never been a problem for me up here in Alaska. That said, I still like the idea of having a data link to the airplane where more than servo positions can be transmitted. Obviously the DX7 doesn't do any of this so I'm not even looking at that radio, but if the Extreme link stuff comes though and is proven to be reliable, I'll be all over it.

As far as peoples comments about the frequency band, it's all give and take, higher frequencies offer more bandwidth, and use less power, but are also much more line of site. Lower frequences are subject to metal linkage, carbon fiber, and other problems, but don't require as much line of site.

Either way, it comes down to reliability testing with your equipment on your plane. If it works for you then use it, but that doesn't mean it will work for everybody else.

Bosshossv8

My Feedback: (10)

I like the technology, I used a DX6 unitl it was stolen.

But, the disrespect shown by HH will keep me from buying this "lower line" radio. I was given the "lower line radio" spiel when talking on th phone with them about the DX6.

Question for HH: Is this still a "lower Line" radio?????

HH stop milking us in baby steps for the REAL DEAL. It is disrespectful to the modelling community to parcel it out in baby steps. If it is "ready" for a "lower line" 7ch. it IS ready for a 9 or module program for existing radios.

HH is disrescting us and at the same time tooting it's horn. Gotta say, the marketing heads must have gone to the bank already and decided to milk us.

If you are not milking us, then come clean, and tell us when the modules or 9 or more channel will be available, so we don't waste our money on "lower line" (your words) products. Come clean. Oh, that's right, you need to milk the community for as much as you can, because SS IS then end game, and you see the drop off in sales after eveyone has one.

I can't believe I am the only one who see's it this way.

ec121

My Feedback: (2)

The question I have is: Where is the throttle curve for fixed wing planes? Seems like it would only have been a few keystrokes to include the curve in both the heli and fixed wing programs.

air mail rcu

Throttle curve or expo on the throttle for fixed wing would have been nice.

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

Here in Henry County, we have 3 parks or soccer fields within 2 miles of the flying field and many homes are on an acre or more of land. I would not have a problem flying a foamy in my front yard and have trained at least one person who wanted to learn but had enough land to fly once he became proficient in flight.

I will say most of my club members think that it is not a problem because they have not lost a plane. Waiting until a plane crashes because of interference is waiting too long. I personally have seen two people this year on channel 38 flying at the soccer field in front of our flying field. (1500 feet away) Their fear is that I will crash there plane. Now they promise to look for me first to make sure I don't shoot them down. Turned on my TX and showed them I could make them crash. What would happen if I didn't see this first and open dialog with these guys. LHS are in it for the sale. No caution concerning interference and shooting someone down, just how easy it is to find an open area and fly!

lsnover

My Feedback: (19)

Guys:

THe other thing that is nice about this technology, is it is not susceptible to electrical interferance like the 72mhz units. So on gas engines with ignitions, and electrics, this is a real advantage. I use the DX6 on my TREXes, and it has worked great. Just wish I had 5 point curves. The DX7 looks to be a good deal for the money, with three digital servoes. I will move this to my DA50 gasser for sure, and I will be getting a TREX600 I hope for Christmas, so this Radio should be about perfect. With the use of a matchbox or two, a 7 channel Receiver will work just fine in just about everything up to 33%. 9 Channels would be nice, but it IS marketing. Spektrum is first, and they are going to milk it for awhile. Eventually, the competition will catch up. In the mean time the DX7 is a nice upgrade from the 6.

Aside from Glitch prevention, we have a busy field, and it will be nice not to have to wait for a certain Pin. Mine seems to be inevitably being used by the guy with the 4 Stroke Cub pilot who flies for 45 minutes at a time, practicing his side slip touch and goes untilt he sun is just about to go down. ;-)

I also like to fly at a small field near my home. Its technically too close to our main field, so I was told, no go. The Spektrum has freed me from that limitation, and I don't have to worry about shooting someone down or being shot down.

I have a Fut. 9Z WC II that will soon be on the market. Technology marches on.


Cheers!
Lee

Bosshossv8

My Feedback: (10)

I'll temper my last comments and agree somewhat, the LHS owner is an E-Copter pilot and says the Spektrum solved a lot ghost problems.

After talking to the Spektrum guy at the show today, he gave me a reason for not making the modules.

The modulation conversion required would make it slower and keep the timing in-accuricies of the original radio. eh? Did I get that right??

XPS .....eh?

I don't, I will sit back and wait , like a lot of others. DX6 for the dome season here I come.

Electriceddie

Guys,


So let me get this straight are you guys saying that the Futaba 9C Super I just got a few months ago and the 5 other Futaba transmitters and 16 receivers by Futaba and Hitec I have will be obsolete when Spread Spectrum comes of age? Thats a lot of monies worth of radio gear.

Ed

Electriceddie

Guys,

I have never had any radio interfernece or been shot down or shot any one else down. I have been in this hobby/sport for 32 years now. I believe that for the most part a good working receiver does not go bad barring crashes. What goes bad is servos, connection of servos to recievers, servo extensions and switches. How is Spread Spectrum going to prevent that, it can't. When guys crash 95% of the times they say it was RF interfernce when it was one of the problems listed above or Pilot error. So I would not and I am not getting hyped up at all about Spread Spectrum. The only thing it does is prevent the accidental turn ON of a transmitter by some idiot who did not check to see if he had the Freq. Pin. Oh and the selfish, un-educated Park Flyer. If Park Flyers start to get out of hand can't they be reulated somehow, someway?


Never been Shot Down. I have crashed, but that was pilot error ( mostly inverted of the ground a foot or two at 65 MPH- Oops) But most guys won't admit that.


Ed

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

Hey,
27mhz is not obsolete. People still use it for RC. It is just not are reliable as 72mhz. The same will be true for SS. Give it 10 years and people will still fly on 72mhz but it will not be the norm.

pilotpete2

Ed,
I would be more than happy to make you an offer on that decrepit and obsolete 9C Super
Pete

iflyj3

My Feedback: (7)

I think he is blowing smoke!!!!!!!

Your radio on 72 MHz will still be usable for the future. The 27 MHz band is still available that was allocated in 1958. If you want to take advantage of the features of SS you will need to buy something different. Do you buy a new car every year because something new comes out? I have 12 transmitters and 60+ receivers and I am not concerned. However, I will take advantage of SS when the dust settles. I have had a Spektrum DX6 for over 1 year and it works great.

pilotpete2

Yup[8D] And think of the "impact" on the guys left behind on 72Mhz, as more switch to 2.4Ghz, sounds like a win, win to me
Just my 2 cents here, but I still will put my money on a module based 2.4Ghz system as an upgrade path[8D]
Pete

Electriceddie

Yo Pete,

I am still siting here laughing at your offer for my decreit old 9C Super.....


LOL...

Ed

pilotpete2

Ed,
I'm glad I was able to provide you with that Endorphine boost, Hey it's no joke that a good laugh is good for your health Cheaper than prune juice[X(]
Pete

Bosshossv8

My Feedback: (10)

[quote]ORIGINAL: iflyj3



I think he is blowing smoke!!!!!!!

[quote]

Ya think????


I asked him if FCC type acceptance was the hurdle, point blank. He said " NO".

He then, it what sounded very rehearsed or repeated, said, " there is problem taking the PPM modulation and converting it to "perfect time" and, it would add length to the packets to such a degree as to hinder performance."

No comment from me, as I work in the Electronics and radio field, and don't want to start a technical reverse engineering war of words without being completely in-the-know of the technology. What he said and as he said it, it seemed , "seemed" to make sense.

XPS, the glove has been thrown down....answer up or become a footnote.

I will be using a DX6 for the foamies this winter, and will wait for the full featured to get worked out.

Receivers are to be 100bucks for the 7ch diversity variety. the 6channels are 55.....

gooseF22

We have been flying the 6 for awhile now watching for the full range in development. I talked to the boys at Winamac saturday, and they are going to buy several and install them in some of Ralph's aircaft. JR indirectly staked their reputation on this too. Mike McConville likes the system, so I heard indirectly, and I respect his opinion highly. I just ordered one for my Su31 1/3rd. I will be powering it with the power expander and a bunch of 8611A's in my rebuild this winter.

ON the DS6, we have been running them to the limits of eyesight, nothing.... We even drove the model 1/2 mile up the road and it worked. that's pretty good for the old slow sitck. We ran one also in the Eflite airliner and drove it sky high, no problem.

We have had 3 models shot down, and I have been checking radios with my scanner, and am picking up hits from pagers and railroads, as well as dirty radios that need tuning. Watching for the 3 channel bleedover, found 2 of those last weekend. We lost an 8000 dollar jet. It went to what I beleve is someone with a dial a freq radio. Also, last month I was standing in the common area, and a park flyer suddenly took off and zoomed through us. THis is all in the last 3 months. It's not the technology, it someone elses lack of discipline or knowledge that gets us shot down when it is interference or cochannel.

The other thing is that with 2.4 GHz, the waves are shorter and with error checking are less subject to ground bounce, because the higher the frequency, the more it penetrates objects and wont bounce, like CB waves do in the 30Mhz range.

goose

KB9STD

My Feedback: (1)

I'm not all that sharp on the technical issues involved with the SS equipment.But,I think SPEKTRUM has to be pulling BOSSHOSS's leg when they state " there is problem taking the PPM modulation and converting it to "perfect time" as their reason for not pursueing a "Module" based implementation.
If ," there is problem taking the PPM modulation and converting it to "perfect time",the people transplanting the RF section of the DX6 into 72mhz JR radios would be encountering the problems.From what I have been led to undrestand,putting the DX6's rf board into whichever JP transmitter appears to be the DX6's twin,works perfectly.The practice has also been given the green light by the AMA.
Apparently 2.4ghz equipment isn't governed by the regulations of the "Personal Radio Service",as our 72mhz systems are.And the regulations against using a "Hitec" module in a "Futaba" radio(for example) don't apply.

k3 valley flyer

My Feedback: (18)

My son belongs to an ILL club who has a member that has also sccessfully transplanted the DX6 rf to a 9303 with no problems. When and for how long is Horizon going to "play games" with the market place on the possibility of 2.4 modules for the 8103 and 9303 platforms? Do they really think we are that stupid? Boycott comes to my mind until they get off their highhorse and play it honest!