Notices
RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros Discussion all about rc radios, transmitters, receivers, servos, etc.

Interference at the local field

Old 03-31-2003, 05:39 AM
  #1  
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (78)
 
Rcpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,808
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

I fly JR equipment. At our field, we've had some very serious interference issues. People with all brands of radios are being taken out. We've lost more than a few nice birds.

We've done extensive testing with frequency monitors (scanners?). We've discovered that the JR receivers that use the abc technology are more prone to the deadly hits at our field. Specifically, the new R700 is very bad at handling whatever it is thatís causing our problem.

With the old R600 receiver; you could do a range check. When you lost signal-- the servos would simply jitter, and quiver a bit-- but they stayed centered; for the most part.

With the new R700 receiver; when you lost signal during the range check-- the servos went NUTS. All the servos would jump to full deflection in any direction. The servos would jump back and forth from one endpoint to the other.

Like I said, the Futaba and hitec guys; as well as the Airtronics guys are all having problems. But the JR guys are experiencing more lost planes and intermittent hits.

I have a few Hitec dual conversion receivers. I've been flying with them for now. It helps out a bunch. I still get little glitches and the occasional bad hit-- but nothing that I can't fly through.

I'm in the process of getting my first big plane going. It might seem small to most of you, but it's my first big bird. It's an 80" Extra. I've been flying 25% stuff for about a year now and I'm ready to move up.

I'm scared to death to fly it at our field. I'll probably have about $1500 wrapped up in the plane.

I've been thinking about buying a JR 945 dual conversion RX, but they are about $200. Thatís pretty steep.

The Hitec RX's seem to work okay. But I've had problems with Hitec servos and am hesitant to use their RX in my expensive plane now.

What the heck should I do? I realize that there is always a risk when you fly, but the risks are pretty high at our field right now. I could go PCM, but Iím using a 652 radio, and itís not PCM capable. So, Iíd have to spring for a new TX in order to go that route.

The club officials seem to think that our problems are ďnormalĒ interference, and that itís all part of the risk of flying a plane. I disagree.

Any ideas for a different RX or setup?
Old 03-31-2003, 06:18 AM
  #2  
My Feedback: (21)
 
Shortman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 5,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

JR "Feel the interference difference!" hehehe, just had to say it...

anyways, I notice when i do range checks at my field that once my plane is out of distance the servos also go crazy. but i havent heard or seen any complaints about interference like that.

I am not positive, but I think I saw a thread about the new JR reciever screwing up and having problems, might want to do a search and find out.
Old 03-31-2003, 04:49 PM
  #3  
My Feedback: (11)
 
FLYBOY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 9,075
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

Are you having the problems with PCM or FM radios or both? There is no such thing as "NORMAL INTERFERANCE" If you are loosing planes, there is a reason.

When I was flying in the US nats in Richland, only the PCM radios were getting hit. They told us the cause was something to do with transmissions from the military base near us to sattelites. Don't know if I buy that, but only PCM birds were affected and there were a bunch.
Old 04-01-2003, 12:40 AM
  #4  
My Feedback: (17)
 
Silvanskii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

I've noticed also that many fields are outlawing channel 22 and some others I can't remember at the moment due to possible intereference with cell phone towers?

Just a thought, are all the affected radios on similar freq.s? Cell towers nearby?
Old 04-01-2003, 01:24 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

The 652 does SPCM and ZPCM as well as PPM.

The R700 glitches more than the R600 because it is more sensitive. So, when shot out of the sky, the R700 may go wild where the R600 would just act dead. Either way, you have an fast uncontrolled landing!!! I prefer the R700 because it has better interference rejection and ranges better than the R600.

Folks in many parts of Colorado are having unusual interference problems. The only solution for many has been dual conversion. Most who own R945's and R940's would say that it is money well spent.

Are you flying your transmiter with the same crystal you bought it with? If no, this can throw tuning off. If yes, it could b a bad, damaged crystal or a tuning problem wih the transitter. If you have not yet, send it in to Horizon and have it checked out.

You could try changing brands of equipment. JR works with Airtronics and also some Hitec receivers are shift selectable. You could also change all of your equipment to another brand, but as you say, other brands are having trouble too.

The R700 is a great single conversion FM receiver, but is near JR's bottom of the line.

I use R700's in trainers, but use R945's and R940's in everything else.

*** "An expensive receiver has paid for itself if it only prevents one crash." ***

I have my transmitters (and modules) checked out (and tuned if nessessay) to their crystals once a year.

I hope what I wrote was helpful to someone.
Old 04-01-2003, 01:32 AM
  #6  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: vancouver , WA
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

Now that you have determined radio prob's at the field, maybe you should go buy a new plane for the guy you and your club members went and purposely shot down thinking he was the problem.
Old 04-01-2003, 02:01 AM
  #7  
My Feedback: (41)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Shuswap, BC,
Posts: 1,753
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Interference at the local field

Maybe you have too much rebar in that $175,000 runway. Tear it up and use asphalt or grass .
Old 04-02-2003, 05:07 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

What in the heck are Buz and 4*60 talking about ?!?!?!

RCpilet, sounds like you need to use a Hitec ( pos shift for JR tx ) rx and JR servoes.
Old 04-02-2003, 04:14 PM
  #9  
My Feedback: (11)
 
FLYBOY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 9,075
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

Originally posted by hebertjj
What in the heck are Buz and 4*60 talking about ?!?!?!

Is rcpilet the one that went and purposly shot down the guy that was flying at the park by himself?

I missed that.

Would be prudent to make good on that one.
Old 04-02-2003, 04:39 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: West Jordan, UT
Posts: 1,479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

Originally posted by FLYBOY
Is rcpilet the one that went and purposly shot down the guy that was flying at the park by himself?

I missed that.
Yes, one and the same... I missed it too, since I don't usually read that forum. A quick search found it though: http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthread...042#post739042

As for the runway comment: http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthread...005#post752055]
Old 04-02-2003, 11:52 PM
  #11  
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (78)
 
Rcpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,808
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

We've moved to a new field since the shooting incident. The guy was killing planes on his frequency---not every frequency on every brand of radio equuipment.

And the guy who I shot down was not flying at a PARK! He was flying at an open or abandoned field only a few hundred yards from the club flying site. The planes at the club were clearly visible from where the guy was flying-- but he didn't give a rats ass about frequency control or the AMA rules.

So-- Buz^-- once again-- your all wet. Maybe an apology is in order.

As for the runway; I don't know if concrete has anything to do with interference. But the saftey committee did go a little nuts with the safety fencing. We've got chainlink fences everywhere. in the pits-- in the pilots stations-- and around the pits. A few very vocal club members have rasied quite a fuss about all the chainlink fencing. Those members believe that the fencing might be the cause of our interference problems-- but the club spent $10,000 on all the fencing-- they won't tear it out. It's only a year old.

We're still having probelms on all frequencies with all different brands of radios. We don't use channels 20 and 24 because the local new agencies broadcast on that or very close to it. The local hobby shops don't even sell crystals on those two channels. We're having problems on FM and PCM.

We've considered grounding the runway-- but I'm not well versed on FM frequencies and the physics of radio frequencies. Don't know if that would work or not.

I guess the true test will be when we get the grass runway done and start flying form there. It's about 1/2 mile away from the concrete. And there aren't any fences on the grass runway. If people can fly there without getting shot down-- then the club might consider removing the chainlink fences.

I guess I'll just use the JR945 RX for now. I'm definetly using JR servos from now on. I've been bitten by a few Hitecs and I've learned my lesson.

Let's not turn this into a pissing match BUZ^. You are wrong and you should admit it and let it go.

There are a lot of informed people on this board and one of them might be able to shed a little light on this problem. It would be a shame to see this thread deteriorate and have it get shut down.

Thanks
Old 04-03-2003, 12:02 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: vancouver , WA
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

(post # 38)

Never a fight at the field. An occasional argument-- but those are mostly politics and religion.

We did have a guy flying at a park about 1/4 mile away from our field. You could see our planes from the park. I know he could see us. About 4 or 5 other club members went and approached him one day and VERY NICELY invited hime to come and fly with us. They explained frequency control to him and begged him to fly at the field.

He told them to kiss his @$$.

When I heard about this-- I was pi$$ed off. So, myself and a friend went over to the park one day when he was flying. We approached him and acted totally clueless. After he landed, I asked him all kinds of questions. I acted like a total newbie who had no idea what an aileron or TX was.

I got him to hand me his radio. It was some kind of Futaba. I immediately turned it over and looked at the crystal on the back. Then we left and headed straight for the LHS.

He was on channel 29-- so I bought a crystal on channel 29. We returned about 45 minutes later with MY TX. I slapped the 29 crystal in and turned my TX on. I started banging the sticks.

He went down in a cloud of dust and cactus'.


YOUR THE ONE THAT SAID PARK.
Anyone that thinks they can justify what you did is delusional. Your right about an apology, and your on the owing end of it.
Old 04-03-2003, 12:08 AM
  #13  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
Ladyflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North Am, MT
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

The alphabet soup receivers were questionable when they were released. One of the respondents to this thread staunchly defended them when I made a comment to that issue over a year ago. While they may be ok in remote areas there is no place for them in more developed ares IMHO, and that opinion is based on experience. It only costs a few dollars more to go with a MODERN receiver.
ABC&W ?
Old 04-03-2003, 12:15 AM
  #14  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: somewhere
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Willfull Shootdown

Sounds to me like whoever 'rcpilet' is, he should have his AMA ticket pulled. He should also be turned into the law sice he broke a federal law by willfully interfering, not to mention he is a danger to innocent bystanders, and what used to be his modelling brothers. Anyone who would do this is not a part of this hobby! They are the type that jack our insurance up...the type that cause us to pay higher and higher AMA dues. The type I turn my back to, and hope everyone else will too! rcpilet...here's to you! About Phase! It doesn't matter how or why this individual shot another plane down. By his own admission he did it. Loose cannons like this should be banned from ever being allowed to control an aircraft again. It's totally irresponsible, dangerous, and despicable!!!
Old 04-03-2003, 12:26 AM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

All "modern" JR receivers have ABC&W, even if is not on the label.

These all have the same ABC&W circuit. R600, R700, R549, R649, R950, R940, R945, R955.

Therefore, according to Ladyflyer, all JR receivers suck.
Old 04-03-2003, 12:59 AM
  #16  
My Feedback: (108)
 
DavidAgar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Battle Ground, WA
Posts: 5,053
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

I am going to close this post down. I can see that the post originator has openly stated he has broken one of the basic rules of RC flying and while I am not an attorney, nor do I profess to know all the laws of the land, has probally broken a few laws as well. This post has all the ear markings of becoming a slamming, hence it is being closed. Thanks for your understanding on this matter.
Old 04-03-2003, 04:23 PM
  #17  
My Feedback: (11)
 
FLYBOY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 9,075
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default Interference at the local field

All things being equal, if they are having radio problems and it is on more than one freq, I would remove the fence and see if it takes care of it or go fly a hundred yards away one time and see if the problem persists. I think the fence could do it.
Old 04-03-2003, 09:29 PM
  #18  
My Feedback: (41)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Shuswap, BC,
Posts: 1,753
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Interference at the local field

I vote for the fence also.
Old 04-03-2003, 11:28 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: West Jordan, UT
Posts: 1,479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Chain link fencing = interference

Originally posted by Rcpilet
But the saftey committee did go a little nuts with the safety fencing. We've got chainlink fences everywhere. in the pits-- in the pilots stations-- and around the pits. A few very vocal club members have rasied quite a fuss about all the chainlink fencing. Those members believe that the fencing might be the cause of our interference problems-- but the club spent $10,000 on all the fencing-- they won't tear it out. It's only a year old.
I have read repeatedly, and experienced it 1st hand once that chain-link fencing causes severe interference on all channels, just like you are describing. Try to convince the club to take it down for a temporary test. If it resoves the problem (it should), they can sell the fencing to recoup much of the money, and replace it with plastic fencing. Up here, we like to use plastic snow-fencing material.
If you're not familiar with it, here's a couple pictures (I think it is also available in black):

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.