Flying Geezer

My Feedback: (14)

Don't tell me you pay sticker price when you buy a car. I have heard of people like that.

king_arthur1953

I am very new to this since I have been away from RC for over 15 years. So I have been researching diligently and with no brand loyalty at all I see 3 radio systems I am interested in. System 1 is the [link=http://www.espritmodel.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=5586]Spektrum DX-7 TX/RX only[/link] at $269.00. System 2 is the [link=http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdId=JRP2915]JR X9309 9 channel wo/servos[/link] at $630.00. System 3 is the [link=http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXUEW6&P=0]Futaba 10 channel WO servos SS[/link] at $600.00.

It seems to me that none of these radios are bad. Some like the 2 recievers being seperated, some the FAAST technology. Some the Model match some don't care. The DX-7 has less capabilities but for those who have no requirements for more than it has it fits the bill. As for me I am simply indecisive at this point but I am really liking the Futaba 10C. Especially since it will be late april at the earliest before I purchase and it should be out by then. Kind of seems to boil down to personal preferences not good or bad.

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

I am not sure how using extensions "neccesarily" makes Spektrum more robust. It just may turn out (time will tell) that frequency hopping is more robust. No one knows for sure, but I do know the system works well. My 72 stuff only has one receiver and one antenna. It's a good thing I switched to 2.4 to get the security of two antennas. My thought process tells me that Spektrum is inherently less robust, therefore you need many receivers and up to 8 antennas to equal the robustness of a frequency hopping system with two antennas. Of course I don't really know the answer, but I do know there are always two sides to every coin.

One weakness of the Spektrum system is there is no way to route the antennas on the outside of the plane when using a carbon fuse. I guess you just mount the entire satellite receivers out there?

Flyfalcons

899 for what, Dave?

bgold

Josey, I've got about 4 gallons thru a DA-100 using a Fasst system. I did mount the receiver up high as I as originally going to use XPS but changed. I to just taped my antenneas to the fuselage side and a former at 90 degrees. Not the slightest hint of a problem.

superdave01

The link showed a price of 899.

Robust, channel hoping has nothing to do with robust IF you mean as in stronger, changing channels does not increase signal strength at all, youve took in marketing which is decietful at the least.

Futaba hops, JR/Spektrum uses 2 channels at the same time, both methods are well proven.

The extensions simply make it easy to put recievers futher apart, like in the case of a plane with a lotta metal or carbon.

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

The other solution(s) which does not require main/remote receiver unit configuraion does not suffer from the discussed reliability issue.

rmh

The problems are LESS reliability than misapplication of product -
The use of the tiny less expensive rx has been one of a learning curve for some
the little rx are terrific for the small foamies - but some pushed the limits -
It is really easy for those on the side lines to point out problems which occur as this entire 2.4 radio appication is absorbed by the market.
If what you prefer works for you - what else could you want ?
My own original choice of the SPEKTRUM stuff has been -all in all an outstanding success for me -
I was REALLY concerned with rx seeing the tx-from the get go -also I had been thru a recent learning curve on batteries (doing small electric models) - so I never ran into many problems others did of sorting out power issues..
Our local community has done an overwhelming switch to the SPEKTRUM- from the 72/50 etc.
based on the results I see -- the system will be very hard to beat.
We do have some XPS and Futaba users - these also work well - BUT those guys had already seen the Spektrum setups and did their homework-so some of the learning curve was already done for em.
Also it is not a goofy "mine is bigger than yours " confrontation. Shared info is a better description.
It al is not sorted out -- the European use of the systems -is an entirely different kettle of fish and getting proper setups for tiny carbon fuselages is still a question.
the reason the manufacturers have not jumped headlong into that problem - tho it shows up here - regularly- by a few- is simple.
Overall this portion of the market is very tiny - less than one percent I would venture -so the economics don't fit.
All one has to do is vist a US hobby store and ask the owner - "what product group has the most activity.?"

summerwind

Flying Geezer

My Feedback: (14)

If the receiver goes out on a Futaba or EXP unit you're going down.

Josey Wales

My Feedback: (61)

I read the online manual for the 12FG and the last 2 channels on the 14rx have no receiver output as the others do. They are called virtual channels and are as you described as a switching channel--just on or off. I couldnt find anything on the 10C though so my guess is it is probably the same thing.

Flyfalcons

Dave, Tower has them at 599. Not "list" price or whatever that preview link showed, 599 is the "real" price.

Flying Geezer

My Feedback: (14)

Keep in mind that this is a hobby shop rumor. That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee. I was wondering if anyone had information to confirm or deny this.

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

Thanks for a fair statement.

I intend to discuss the issue from personal interest and a "theoretical" view. No doubt spectrum is popular and is mainstream. It is still interesting though to discover pros and cons for it.

From the new 9 channel rx offering of spectrum, it seems connecting more than one remote unit to a main is feasible. To me that is a good direction to achieve ultra reliability.

superdave01

For someone to see TWO recievers less reliable then ONE then they dont understand how they work and communicate with each other.

If you feel that way you should read up, once you understand how they work you will agree that there not a reliability issue.

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

If the main receiver on the Spectrum system fails, the plane is going down. The output for the servos comes only from the main receiver and if that fails.....ouch. Correct me if I am wrong. I agree if the signal is weak from the main it can use the satellite. But some where in the system has to be a central location that processes the signal and outputs that signal to the servos. No processing, no flying. This is the same as all other manufactures.

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

Josey,
The virtual channels have nothing to do with the output to the receiver. They are just mixes used in the logic of programming that do not directly drive an output. The output on the 12FG, 12Z and 14MZ all have 12 proportional channels and 2 digital channels. The virtual mixes are not outputs.

Flyfalcons

Yep even the Spektrum system with satellite receivers has a single failure point. The only way to get true redundancy is to have two receivers. However, receiver failure is very rare so I really doubt it's an issue with either system.

Josey Wales

My Feedback: (61)

So the digital channels are not the same as the proportional correct ?

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

Correct, they are simply used to drive a servo to one of two positions. Retracts is a common use for them.

rmh

You should look at the new 9100 rx by Spektrum

now -which is the main receiver?
actually -the thing that looks like the main rx is NOT a rx but a switch/ power distributor thingy.
The extra rx in Spektrum are not "helpers " they are simply more receivers .
If th part where servos are plugged infails - yes you are skeerueed just like with any rx.

Josey Wales

My Feedback: (61)

Got it! Thanks!

Flying Geezer

My Feedback: (14)

I would think that a retract output would have to be proportional. How else could you adjust endpoints/travel. I was thinking more of smoke pumps, on board glow, etc., things that just go on and off. Or switching mixes on and off that have been programmed into the transmitter computer.

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

Dick,
I agree with you, the extra receivers help with making sure the signal is received, but the system is not completely redundant as SuperDave01 wants to believe. Even the 9100 proved with the soft switch problem that if something fails in the main box, the entire thing shuts down. Therefore if Futaba or Airtronics can use two antennas and still recieve the signal reliably, then the argument of one receiver (or maybe I should say processer) is less reliable then Spektrum is a mute point.

As far as I am concerned they all have a central failure point and they all work. Receiver failure as you pointed out in a earlier post is very rare and therefore all brands are very reliable. Good thing too, because the pilot input can be dangerous enough.

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

Most 180 degree retract servos will not operate in a proportional fashion even if they are plugged into a proportional channel. They only have two positions 180 degrees apart. You adjust the travel by where you drill the holes on the servo wheel. If you use a standard servo for retracts, then I would agree that a proportional channel would be easier.