Gyroguru

I purchased my Multiplex Royal EVO 9 several years ago and have been very happy with it. Many members of my clubs have switched over to the 2.4.

My patient has run out and just about tired of Hitec/Multiplex to come up with a module for my radio. I bought this radio because of its upgradeability. I on the border line about switching over to Futaba. I am not interested in after market module such as XPS.

This technology is nothing new. Even people like esky are offering low end helicopter with 2.4 GHz radio. On Hitec’s website it reads “Welcome to the Next Generation”. I think it should read last Generation!

Just checking to see how others are feeling about Hitec/Multiplex lack of 2.4 developments or much of anything else.

tadawson

Myself, I could care less if the module comes from Hitec or Multiplex - 3rd party is just fine. A PPM stream off a radio is a standard, and there is no magic in getting it right as a 3rd party whatsoever.

Personally, from what I have seen of HiTec, they have been one of the *worst* things that ever happened to Multiplex. US representation? Maybe in theory . . . but what I see in reality is utterly pathetic . . . love the radio, loath the relationship . . .

- Tim

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

I have been extremely happy with my JR XP9303 with the Spektrum 2.4 module. Until I replace all my 72Mhz Rx's, I have the best of both worlds. I do not know about Hitec modules, but I was very disappointed that my Futaba 9CAP could not be fitted with a 2.4 module that supported all 9 channels. When I first purchased the 9CAP and got to the point where I needed the 9th channel, I suddenly realized that Ch9 was just a switch. Since no one made a 9ch PPM receiver that worked with the 9CAP, I could only use the more expensive Futaba 9ch PCM receiver. When I found out that JR made a 9ch PPM receiver, as well as a 9ch PCM receiver, and that with an XP9303, the 9th channel was fully proportional, I gave up on Futaba and went to JR.

I realize that their 10, 12, and 14ch systems have much better programing than the 9CAP, but JR beat them to the marketplace and I am not sorry that I have the JR radios.

pilotpete2

I find it hard to imagine a scenario where all 9 channels are in use and all 9 require proportional control.
Got retracts or ignition kill??
Pete

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

My H9 P47-150 has Ch2 and Ch7 mixed for Aileron, Ch3 for Elevator (using a Matchbox but ran out of channels - needed to Reverse one servo), Ch1 for Throttle, Ch4 for Rudder, Ch5 and Ch9 mixed for Retracts (so one gear comes up before the other, in a scale fashion), Ch6 for Flaps (using a Matchbox because one Flap servo needs to be Reversed - Would have mixed them on separate channels if I had them), Ch8 for Kill Switch.

I have had problems with Reversing Y picking up RF noise and/0r Shifting Neutral. I could have used a 12 channel radio. Extra channels are cheaper than Matchboxes and lighter. A Y harness makes it more difficult, and time consuming, to adjust control surfaces to Match. I could have used another channel for dropping the Belly Tank.

My jet is the same way. I have Brakes, Speed Brakes, Open Canopy. A channel that is just a switch is limiting.

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

I think Futaba has great radios, but why didn't they make it easy to put Flaps on a Switch, on the 9CAP, like my JR XP9303. and Flight Modes. Also, the introduction of PC cable so I can transfer all my model memories to the PC, edit them or print them out, and save them back to any XP9303.

On the other hand, why didn't JR choose to incorporate a memory module, like Campac for Futaba?

pilotpete2

That's a more complex setup than I've ever attempted. With the 9C you are limited to using PCM, for sure.
If you had stayed with Futaba, the 12FG would be more in line with the complexity of the models you fly, though the 10C would still do it, an optical kill switch should not need more than an on/off channel. In comparison, the X9303 and 10C have a sort of trade off in strong vs. weak points. When you get to 12 channels and up, Futaba is very competitive when you compare the 12FG to the 12X, that is if they can get the receiver heat issue behind them[]
Regards,
Pete

rmh

If
If cows had wings -

pilotpete2

OK Dick, now is it the heat problem, or the 12FG, vs 12x
Oh yeah, model match, click model match, click model match
Pete

onewasp

pilotpete2

You REALLY think Cows have wings?????

tadawson

Any chance of staying on topic, which, btw, was a lament about the availability of 2.4 for *MULTIPLEX* radios, not JR or Futaba . . . .

- Tim

onewasp

I think we are as "On Topic" as HiTec/Multiplex is 'on' their development schedule.

____ lessee, full range 2.4Ghz by Spektrum in 2006 (Park Fliers and surface lots earlier than that)!

The way I see it we could detour through space and still be back in time for the announcement.[X(][]


But, yes. Let's get to the facts.

saitofreak

Hitec seemingly lost the plot years ago in terms of ongoing radio development. They are basically a servo company now - at least in my view. Multiplex makes good gear but dithering on 2.4G. Times are a changin' [8D]

bigedmustafa

My Feedback: (2)

As more and more pilots move over to the 2.4Ghz radio systems, the risk of interference and accidental shoot-downs drops lower and lower for 72Mhz pilots. There isn't much of a point in "upgrading" your radio system if you don't have issues in the first place.

Hitec is selling the Freedom 9S 9-channel frequency synthesized receiver for $64.99. You'd have to pay at least twice that for a comparable 2.4Ghz receiver. If you own the Evo 9 and you're not having any problems with it, I'd simply advise you to enjoy the thinning traffic on 72Mhz and the availability of really good, really affordable 72Mhz receivers.

Multiplex will get a 2.4Ghz module to market sooner or later, and when it does finally come to market it will likely be a very good product. In the mean time, enjoy what you have .

BuschBarber

My Feedback: (2)

One of the things we are finding out is that with the advent of more and more flyers going to 2.4 and not needing the discipline of getting a Frequency Pin, the 72Mhz flyers are getting lax, especially the ones operating on both 72Mhz and 2.4. There have even been occasions where the pilot does not Extend the antenna on his 72Mhz Tx because he is used to flying the 2.4Tx and not seeing the antenna In His Face, as it used to be.

This may sound far fetched, but I have seen it.

Do not think that because 2.4 is replacing 72Mhz that it is any safer on 72Mhz. Some of the Car and Boat people are buying up the cheap Aircrage 72Mhz stuff.

onewasp

I have to point out that 2.4GHz is decidedly safer than 72MHz.
Even the 'example' cited would be zero problems save for 72MHz.

Now, I have seen Tx antenna's collapsed on take off since the days of 26.995MHz.
I have been shot down with the field under Frequency control (Prompting a one year study and an FCC written and oral exam at the FCC location including code which resulted in a General License). I flew on six meters for 30+ years.

I dropped six meters like a hot rock as soon as Spektrum announced the DX7 full range set.
I have NEVER looked back as even six meters (in its day) was not this good.

Currently flying X9303 as well as the DX7 from the first batch.
LIFE (and Spektrum) are both good!