Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
05-02-2007, 05:36 PM
#26
Senior Member
My Feedback: (117)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tullahoma, TN
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I range check my DX7's first thing every day at the beginning of flying time..
I disagree with your glitch opinion.. If I have a very clean flying model/system with my DX7 2.4 Gig radio, your saying I should go get a 72 band radio to see if I can find a glitch?? I don't think so... But Thanks anyhow.. Brian
I disagree with your glitch opinion.. If I have a very clean flying model/system with my DX7 2.4 Gig radio, your saying I should go get a 72 band radio to see if I can find a glitch?? I don't think so... But Thanks anyhow.. Brian
ORIGINAL: Josey Wales
Really the point is you still have the problem its just the 2.4 is hiding it....for now anyway...usually it comes back to bite you but hopefully it wont..When I goto 2.4 I will still range check with my ppm rx however..I kn ow if I cant get 20' then there is a major issue..
I think a lot of people will leave out the range check when they use the 2.4 which is a mistake IMO
ORIGINAL: AmpAce
That's just the point! With the 2.4 Gig systems, you don't have to go through all of that miserable stuff! About a year ago I was trying to get an 80" electric Super Cub into the air, but had some kind of a weird power system interference going with my FM system. Tried and tried to find the problem, changed most everything out, but still couldn't get a reliable range check over about 20 feet, with the motor running.
That's just the point! With the 2.4 Gig systems, you don't have to go through all of that miserable stuff! About a year ago I was trying to get an 80" electric Super Cub into the air, but had some kind of a weird power system interference going with my FM system. Tried and tried to find the problem, changed most everything out, but still couldn't get a reliable range check over about 20 feet, with the motor running.
I think a lot of people will leave out the range check when they use the 2.4 which is a mistake IMO
05-02-2007, 05:44 PM
#27
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
some guys are really hungup on the "PPM testing"--
I can't really see any benifit -
I once had a ratty old ignition engine - ditched it - but for years - the modern ignition engines I have use never caused a glitch
PCMand even the new 2.4 have been referred to as masking problems----
so what - if it works it works
ditto for the 2.4 stuff - I use 2.4 DX2 exclusively now - -why would I want to mess around with essentially an obsolete radio?
Call a spade a spade
the systems up till now can be knocked out of the air by bumping metal parts or a kid with $99.95 RTF trainer
I can't really see any benifit -
I once had a ratty old ignition engine - ditched it - but for years - the modern ignition engines I have use never caused a glitch
PCMand even the new 2.4 have been referred to as masking problems----
so what - if it works it works
ditto for the 2.4 stuff - I use 2.4 DX2 exclusively now - -why would I want to mess around with essentially an obsolete radio?
Call a spade a spade
the systems up till now can be knocked out of the air by bumping metal parts or a kid with $99.95 RTF trainer
05-02-2007, 06:00 PM
#28
Senior Member
My Feedback: (61)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: **,
NJ
Posts: 4,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
ORIGINAL: Brian Smith
I disagree with your glitch opinion.. If I have a very clean flying model/system with my DX7 2.4 Gig radio, your saying I should go get a 72 band radio to see if I can find a glitch?? I don't think so... But Thanks anyhow.. Brian
I disagree with your glitch opinion.. If I have a very clean flying model/system with my DX7 2.4 Gig radio, your saying I should go get a 72 band radio to see if I can find a glitch?? I don't think so... But Thanks anyhow.. Brian
Dick is right that most modern electronics are pretty clean but even new stuff can be defective...I know with my luck I will be the exception so instead I just assume do my normal testing and be sure there are no issues....
05-02-2007, 06:14 PM
#29
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I think it's an engineering thing. Have a problem but don't know how to fix it? Find a product or proceedure that masks the problem. The problem is still there but is covered up...mostly. Can't figure how to get rid of the remaining part of the problem? Find or invent a new product or proceedure that covers up a little more. The original problem is still there but by golly someone got their name up in lights for finding a way to shove it under the rug. Hopefully you have a big enough rug.
05-02-2007, 06:31 PM
#30
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I have a bum leg --but I mask it by travelling in a car
my point is that I see no need , using modern radio (2.4) to go through a pre check using old ppm stuff.
At least I see no need - I have only been doing this since 1970 so maybe I am a relative newcomer .
I simply don't have/ have not had any radio problems that were not caused by a funky receiver .
So why not hook up the setup - do good range power/on off tests -if it is all good - go fly -
If you have a flying carpet why not use it
(rimshot)
my point is that I see no need , using modern radio (2.4) to go through a pre check using old ppm stuff.
At least I see no need - I have only been doing this since 1970 so maybe I am a relative newcomer .
I simply don't have/ have not had any radio problems that were not caused by a funky receiver .
So why not hook up the setup - do good range power/on off tests -if it is all good - go fly -
If you have a flying carpet why not use it
(rimshot)
05-02-2007, 07:29 PM
#31
Senior Member
My Feedback: (117)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tullahoma, TN
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
Or they can just fuss with their "stuff" while I'm out flying.. Suits me just fine !! Brian
Suits me just fine !! Brian
ORIGINAL: dick Hanson
I have a bum leg --but I mask it by travelling in a car
my point is that I see no need , using modern radio (2.4) to go through a pre check using old ppm stuff.
At least I see no need - I have only been doing this since 1970 so maybe I am a relative newcomer .
I simply don't have/ have not had any radio problems that were not caused by a funky receiver .
So why not hook up the setup - do good range power/on off tests -if it is all good - go fly -
If you have a flying carpet why not use it
(rimshot)
I have a bum leg --but I mask it by travelling in a car
my point is that I see no need , using modern radio (2.4) to go through a pre check using old ppm stuff.
At least I see no need - I have only been doing this since 1970 so maybe I am a relative newcomer .
I simply don't have/ have not had any radio problems that were not caused by a funky receiver .
So why not hook up the setup - do good range power/on off tests -if it is all good - go fly -
If you have a flying carpet why not use it
(rimshot)
05-02-2007, 07:30 PM
#32
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Flyer\'s Paradise
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I think I sense here quite a bit of misunderstanding as to how the 2.4 system works. It operates way way above the frequencys that our old 72 mhz systems use. It also happens to be way above the frequencys that are generated by metal parts rubbing together, faulty ignition systems, parallel battery and servo wires, and other normal rf interference generated by airplanes. The 72 mhz systems are quite prone to interference from these sources. The 2.4 ghz systems are not.
If I am using a 2.4 system, my motor is running well, I have no "glitches", and the controls are responding properly, I consider my plane to have no problems. I think it is totally irrelevant to do a range check with a 72 mhz system when you are going to fly 2.4.
If I were to plug in an FM sytem into the same plane, just to do a range check, and found that the range check failed, in my mind that would not indicate a problem, as I do not plan to fly with the FM system. Since my range check and subsequent flights were great with the 2.4 system, which I will continue to use for flying this plane, I consider all to be well. Just because a glitchy old 72 mhz system glitches all over the place when plugged in to my plane, what difference does it make, as long as the plane operates well on the system I am using?
AmpAce
If I am using a 2.4 system, my motor is running well, I have no "glitches", and the controls are responding properly, I consider my plane to have no problems. I think it is totally irrelevant to do a range check with a 72 mhz system when you are going to fly 2.4.
If I were to plug in an FM sytem into the same plane, just to do a range check, and found that the range check failed, in my mind that would not indicate a problem, as I do not plan to fly with the FM system. Since my range check and subsequent flights were great with the 2.4 system, which I will continue to use for flying this plane, I consider all to be well. Just because a glitchy old 72 mhz system glitches all over the place when plugged in to my plane, what difference does it make, as long as the plane operates well on the system I am using?
AmpAce
05-02-2007, 07:35 PM
#33
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: clinton township,
MI
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I think I sense here quite a bit of misunderstanding as to how the 2.4 system works. It operates way way above the frequencys that our old 72 mhz systems use. It also happens to be way above the frequencys that are generated by metal parts rubbing together, faulty ignition systems, parallel battery and servo wires, and other normal rf interference generated by airplanes. The 72 mhz systems are quite prone to interference from these sources. The 2.4 ghz systems are not.
If I am using a 2.4 system, my motor is running well, I have no "glitches", and the controls are responding properly, I consider my plane to have no problems. I think it is totally irrelevant to do a range check with a 72 mhz system when you are going to fly 2.4.
If I were to plug in an FM sytem into the same plane, just to do a range check, and found that the range check failed, in my mind that would not indicate a problem, as I do not plan to fly with the FM system. Since my range check and subsequent flights were great with the 2.4 system, which I will continue to use for flying this plane, I consider all to be well. Just because a glitchy old 72 mhz system glitches all over the place when plugged in to my plane, what difference does it make, as long as the plane operates well on the system I am using?
AmpAce
Nicely said!
K8BVJ
If I am using a 2.4 system, my motor is running well, I have no "glitches", and the controls are responding properly, I consider my plane to have no problems. I think it is totally irrelevant to do a range check with a 72 mhz system when you are going to fly 2.4.
If I were to plug in an FM sytem into the same plane, just to do a range check, and found that the range check failed, in my mind that would not indicate a problem, as I do not plan to fly with the FM system. Since my range check and subsequent flights were great with the 2.4 system, which I will continue to use for flying this plane, I consider all to be well. Just because a glitchy old 72 mhz system glitches all over the place when plugged in to my plane, what difference does it make, as long as the plane operates well on the system I am using?
AmpAce
Nicely said!
K8BVJ
05-02-2007, 07:37 PM
#35
Senior Member
My Feedback: (117)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tullahoma, TN
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
He don't need no stinkin' big carpet.. Great job is right.. Brian
Great job is right.. Brian
ORIGINAL: k8bvj
I think I sense here quite a bit of misunderstanding as to how the 2.4 system works. It operates way way above the frequencys that our old 72 mhz systems use. It also happens to be way above the frequencys that are generated by metal parts rubbing together, faulty ignition systems, parallel battery and servo wires, and other normal rf interference generated by airplanes. The 72 mhz systems are quite prone to interference from these sources. The 2.4 ghz systems are not.
If I am using a 2.4 system, my motor is running well, I have no "glitches", and the controls are responding properly, I consider my plane to have no problems. I think it is totally irrelevant to do a range check with a 72 mhz system when you are going to fly 2.4.
If I were to plug in an FM sytem into the same plane, just to do a range check, and found that the range check failed, in my mind that would not indicate a problem, as I do not plan to fly with the FM system. Since my range check and subsequent flights were great with the 2.4 system, which I will continue to use for flying this plane, I consider all to be well. Just because a glitchy old 72 mhz system glitches all over the place when plugged in to my plane, what difference does it make, as long as the plane operates well on the system I am using?
AmpAce
Nicely said!
K8BVJ
I think I sense here quite a bit of misunderstanding as to how the 2.4 system works. It operates way way above the frequencys that our old 72 mhz systems use. It also happens to be way above the frequencys that are generated by metal parts rubbing together, faulty ignition systems, parallel battery and servo wires, and other normal rf interference generated by airplanes. The 72 mhz systems are quite prone to interference from these sources. The 2.4 ghz systems are not.
If I am using a 2.4 system, my motor is running well, I have no "glitches", and the controls are responding properly, I consider my plane to have no problems. I think it is totally irrelevant to do a range check with a 72 mhz system when you are going to fly 2.4.
If I were to plug in an FM sytem into the same plane, just to do a range check, and found that the range check failed, in my mind that would not indicate a problem, as I do not plan to fly with the FM system. Since my range check and subsequent flights were great with the 2.4 system, which I will continue to use for flying this plane, I consider all to be well. Just because a glitchy old 72 mhz system glitches all over the place when plugged in to my plane, what difference does it make, as long as the plane operates well on the system I am using?
AmpAce
Nicely said!
K8BVJ
05-02-2007, 08:01 PM
#36
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
the ignition systems of a few years back - were good / bad and/or indifferent
for example:
some had a high tension lead -unshielded which was long --then a ground lead which again was long --and ran from the HV box to the engine mounting lug
this setup made a beautiful rf generator of the box/engine and wiring.
It was improved by shortening the wires and grounding to the plug-- which reduced the physical size of the "loop".
Now -any decent system has a fully shielded high tension lead - which reduces the possible radiator to a minimum.
add in better caps and r type plugs etc.. and there is simply little to fear from the modern systems.
if they have holes in sheathing and loose connections and batteries strung all over the place - yeh there could be a problem - but hopefully-- that friggen mess will never get in the air--
bluntly put there is really little excuse for having a bad ignition with todays abundance of info ,describing a good setup and how to check and install a system.
Some guys do like to build their own ignitions -and are really good at it . Taking an old POS and then hoping the radio will work with it is not a good plan.
for example:
some had a high tension lead -unshielded which was long --then a ground lead which again was long --and ran from the HV box to the engine mounting lug
this setup made a beautiful rf generator of the box/engine and wiring.
It was improved by shortening the wires and grounding to the plug-- which reduced the physical size of the "loop".
Now -any decent system has a fully shielded high tension lead - which reduces the possible radiator to a minimum.
add in better caps and r type plugs etc.. and there is simply little to fear from the modern systems.
if they have holes in sheathing and loose connections and batteries strung all over the place - yeh there could be a problem - but hopefully-- that friggen mess will never get in the air--
bluntly put there is really little excuse for having a bad ignition with todays abundance of info ,describing a good setup and how to check and install a system.
Some guys do like to build their own ignitions -and are really good at it . Taking an old POS and then hoping the radio will work with it is not a good plan.
05-02-2007, 10:13 PM
#37
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I won't even try to argue about the difference in frequencies and interference, but it seems a little odd to no longer have a care about internal electrical conflicts. I've been flying 900mhz, 1.3 and 2.4 gig for a few years now and can assure you that they have some darn serious issues at times as well. Generally from an outside source, but they for sure are not probem free! In the next year or perhaps less those same problems will become more apparent with our models so it might make sense to have a clean system in the event we want to change back to 72mhz from time to time. There's soon to be a lot of stuff flying around using the same general freqs and they'll be pushing POWER. Hop tables or no, that will not have a good effect on our low level stuff.
05-02-2007, 11:24 PM
#38
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
In all of the competition flying using gas engines I have seen-been involved with, etc., ---nobody - -- bothers with the FM test .
Yes I do understand that it is more liable to show interferrence with some systems on FM-but if in actual practice -it causes no problems - why bother?
just range check with the equipment you intend to use .
The most expensive radio on the market on 72-as I have seen - is easily brought down by metal to metal contact -
the real cure -- get out of those lower bands !
Yes I do understand that it is more liable to show interferrence with some systems on FM-but if in actual practice -it causes no problems - why bother?
just range check with the equipment you intend to use .
The most expensive radio on the market on 72-as I have seen - is easily brought down by metal to metal contact -
the real cure -- get out of those lower bands !
05-03-2007, 11:15 AM
#39
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Flyer\'s Paradise
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
Well put, Dick!
And I agree, "get out of those lower bands"! That is the best way to cure a problem, and it is not "masking" the problem. If your plane is generating a 72mhz RF signal, so what? It certainly isn't a "problem" that you are "masking", when you are using the 2.4 system, which could care less whether or not there are stray 72 mhz signals running around.
I don't argue with doing range checks or even other equipment checks. Just do them with the equipment you are going to fly. If you want to check out all of your servos, for example, buy one of those sophisticated servo tester/programmer, electronic devices and have at it. Preferably one servo at a time, in the plane, using the wiring installed. That's a much better way to check your servos than hooking up an FM system and trying to track down glitches!
AmpAce
And I agree, "get out of those lower bands"! That is the best way to cure a problem, and it is not "masking" the problem. If your plane is generating a 72mhz RF signal, so what? It certainly isn't a "problem" that you are "masking", when you are using the 2.4 system, which could care less whether or not there are stray 72 mhz signals running around.
I don't argue with doing range checks or even other equipment checks. Just do them with the equipment you are going to fly. If you want to check out all of your servos, for example, buy one of those sophisticated servo tester/programmer, electronic devices and have at it. Preferably one servo at a time, in the plane, using the wiring installed. That's a much better way to check your servos than hooking up an FM system and trying to track down glitches!
AmpAce
ORIGINAL: dick Hanson
In all of the competition flying using gas engines I have seen-been involved with, etc., ---nobody - -- bothers with the FM test .
Yes I do understand that it is more liable to show interferrence with some systems on FM-but if in actual practice -it causes no problems - why bother?
just range check with the equipment you intend to use .
The most expensive radio on the market on 72-as I have seen - is easily brought down by metal to metal contact -
the real cure -- get out of those lower bands !
In all of the competition flying using gas engines I have seen-been involved with, etc., ---nobody - -- bothers with the FM test .
Yes I do understand that it is more liable to show interferrence with some systems on FM-but if in actual practice -it causes no problems - why bother?
just range check with the equipment you intend to use .
The most expensive radio on the market on 72-as I have seen - is easily brought down by metal to metal contact -
the real cure -- get out of those lower bands !
05-03-2007, 12:03 PM
#40
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
We'll see how 2.4 works out when it starts coming up against numerous 100 plus watt telemetry systems. I know what I've experienced elsewhere and it gets interesting. In the mean time it looks lke there's going to be a lot of open frequency pins on 72 for a bit.
05-03-2007, 12:15 PM
#41
Senior Member
My Feedback: (40)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bear, DE
Posts: 4,104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
Let's not forget this is not proven technology yet... I watched a plane get completely locked out on SS 2 weeks ago at our field. The 2 brothers that were flying the plane are well known in the RC Rep world / Jet world. They have well over 30 yrs flying experience.. still don't know why the plane went in.
05-03-2007, 06:44 PM
#42
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Flyer\'s Paradise
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
There have been a bunch of crashes with some of the DX SS systems lately. Usually everything's fine, then there is a sudden loss of control, with the plane rolling one way or the other into the ground. There are some theorys as to why this is happening, but looks like it may boil down to software or compatibility problems within the system.
This is why I'll wait as long as I can before investing any more precious $$ in radio gear. I truly believe this 2.4 stuff will be the wave of the future, but there are bound to be a few bugs along the development trail. I would just as soon not be the guinea pig, any more than I am already with the DX-6 system. I'm sure I'll eventually have to get a more sophisticated system, and since I'm flying mostly on a Multiplex Evo 12, and like it, am hoping that the Extremelink module for the Multiplex works out well.
Time will tell.
AmpAce
This is why I'll wait as long as I can before investing any more precious $$ in radio gear. I truly believe this 2.4 stuff will be the wave of the future, but there are bound to be a few bugs along the development trail. I would just as soon not be the guinea pig, any more than I am already with the DX-6 system. I'm sure I'll eventually have to get a more sophisticated system, and since I'm flying mostly on a Multiplex Evo 12, and like it, am hoping that the Extremelink module for the Multiplex works out well.
Time will tell.
AmpAce
05-03-2007, 07:29 PM
#43
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: clinton township,
MI
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
There have been a bunch of crashes with some of the DX SS systems lately. Usually everything's fine, then there is a sudden loss of control, with the plane rolling one way or the other into the ground. There are some theorys as to why this is happening, but looks like it may boil down to software or compatibility problems within the system.
This is why I'll wait as long as I can before investing any more precious $$ in radio gear. I truly believe this 2.4 stuff will be the wave of the future, but there are bound to be a few bugs along the development trail. I would just as soon not be the guinea pig, any more than I am already with the DX-6 system. I'm sure I'll eventually have to get a more sophisticated system, and since I'm flying mostly on a Multiplex Evo 12, and like it, am hoping that the Extremelink module for the Multiplex works out well.
Time will tell.
AmpAce
This is why I'll wait as long as I can before investing any more precious $$ in radio gear. I truly believe this 2.4 stuff will be the wave of the future, but there are bound to be a few bugs along the development trail. I would just as soon not be the guinea pig, any more than I am already with the DX-6 system. I'm sure I'll eventually have to get a more sophisticated system, and since I'm flying mostly on a Multiplex Evo 12, and like it, am hoping that the Extremelink module for the Multiplex works out well.
Time will tell.
AmpAce
Very strange AmpAce. Brian never had any problems at all. Of course he has the DX7.
Jack
05-03-2007, 08:18 PM
#44
Senior Member
My Feedback: (117)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tullahoma, TN
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I have flown 5 different gassers close to 50 flights at 3 different sites on my 2 DX7s with not so much as one glitch or one bobble of any sort. . Some of these doom and gloom stories are just that "stories" as far as my experience has been.. I am "very" pleased, and I promise to let you know if I have a problem I can blame on the radio.. I have been flying RC since 65 and have seen a glitch or two in my days and know what a radio problem is when/if I see one.. Brian
05-03-2007, 08:23 PM
#45
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: clinton township,
MI
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
I have flown 5 different gassers close to 50 flights at 3 different sites on my 2 DX7s with not so much as one glitch or one bobble of any sort. . Some of these doom and gloom stories are just that "stories" as far as my experience has been.. I am "very" pleased, and I promise to let you know if I have a problem I can blame on the radio.. I have been flying RC since 65 and have seen a glitch or two in my days and know what a radio problem is when/if I see one.. Brian
I know Brian, keep up the good work. I am convinced, 2.4 ghz is the way to go.
Jack K8BVJ (since 1956)
05-03-2007, 10:18 PM
#46
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
Thes "bunches of crashes and unproven etc.." all common comments any time something new comes out
Just imagine how many crashes would be published if all the 72 Mhz mishaps were noted ,day to day.
Having been through the 27/72 stuff - the failure rate of my 2.4 is way off - - notably with my teeny weenie foamies I fly at a public park ,which has very high power steel tower lines runing along side. I was always getting bumped -especially with some of the cheapo small 72 rx. I have had 2 (count em ) up elevator bumps w/2.4-since resolved -
for the uncertian-----------maybe this will offer comfort
Just imagine how many crashes would be published if all the 72 Mhz mishaps were noted ,day to day.
Having been through the 27/72 stuff - the failure rate of my 2.4 is way off - - notably with my teeny weenie foamies I fly at a public park ,which has very high power steel tower lines runing along side. I was always getting bumped -especially with some of the cheapo small 72 rx. I have had 2 (count em ) up elevator bumps w/2.4-since resolved -
for the uncertian-----------maybe this will offer comfort
05-03-2007, 10:24 PM
#47
Senior Member
My Feedback: (40)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bear, DE
Posts: 4,104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
ORIGINAL: Brian Smith
I have flown 5 different gassers close to 50 flights at 3 different sites on my 2 DX7s with not so much as one glitch or one bobble of any sort. . Some of these doom and gloom stories are just that "stories" as far as my experience has been.. I am "very" pleased, and I promise to let you know if I have a problem I can blame on the radio.. I have been flying RC since 65 and have seen a glitch or two in my days and know what a radio problem is when/if I see one.. Brian
I have flown 5 different gassers close to 50 flights at 3 different sites on my 2 DX7s with not so much as one glitch or one bobble of any sort. . Some of these doom and gloom stories are just that "stories" as far as my experience has been.. I am "very" pleased, and I promise to let you know if I have a problem I can blame on the radio.. I have been flying RC since 65 and have seen a glitch or two in my days and know what a radio problem is when/if I see one.. Brian
My point is not that this technology isn't great.. but more so that it's not as perfect as it may seem and for people to be cutting corners using metal on metal everywhere is just asking for trouble. Regardless of what radio you have there is no need to be careless and ignore rules that have been standard for many years.
05-03-2007, 10:26 PM
#48
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Flyer\'s Paradise
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
Apparently at least some of the crashes with the DX Spread Spectrum systems can be attributed to low voltage causing the reciever to re-boot, which takes several seconds. JR reportedly lost a model during a demo flight at SEFF to this very problem! What better way to get JR's attention to a problem, huh! Must have been a little embarrasing.
There have also been some crashes reported where this does not appear to be the cause. Of course, some of these have to be taken with a rather large pebble of salt. Some pilots will blame anything, rather than admit to a pilot error.
Rather than I trying to describe it all, here is a link to a rather extensive thread over on RC Groups. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...t=672912&pp=25
AmpAce
There have also been some crashes reported where this does not appear to be the cause. Of course, some of these have to be taken with a rather large pebble of salt. Some pilots will blame anything, rather than admit to a pilot error.
Rather than I trying to describe it all, here is a link to a rather extensive thread over on RC Groups. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...t=672912&pp=25
AmpAce
05-04-2007, 10:01 AM
#49
My Feedback: (35)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bowling Green,
KY
Posts: 2,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
If you have 2.4gig radio how can you range check in FM. within the next 10 years nobody will use 72. You range check your plane based on the radio you fly. If it's good FLY. I have only used PCM in my gas and get good range why bother with FM. If PCM works it works. If the receiver cant't see it, it's not there. If PCM see's it fix it. Dennis
05-05-2007, 12:13 AM
#50
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Spread Spectrum or PCM for Gassers
You can't range check in 72. I agree that it makes no sense to even consider it. What concerns me most is there will now be a bunch of people that pay no attention to the integrity/quality of their system installations because the radio will hide it. There's no excuse for a poor installation, which will bring on a crash by itself.