Topic: Is it time to change from 35Mhz to 2.4G???

Are you really sure?
Yes, there's frequency control on the day but what about someone who's got the wrong crystals in his transmitter. Or someone who's dialled in the wrong frequency into his synth set?
What about when more than two competitors are using the same frequency? Have they switched the transmitter off when they return the peg?
Just a few possibilities that can still occur even when perfect frequency control is in place.

regardless of the majesty of channel check, surely you are not saying you no longer to a pre-flight check? 

regardless of the majesty of channel check, surely you are not saying you no longer to a pre-flight check? 

I think the quote you've used from me is perfectly clear? If it isn't then I'm just pointing out that any provided frequency control (whether at national competition of club level) is only as good as it can be if everyone present uses it as intended and do not make personal mistakes like those I mentioned in my post.

I HAVE been at one F3F event (I think before you started flying F3F) when someone did have his transmitter left one even though the peg was now being used by a fellow competitor. Glitching was occurring with the model while about to be launched but fortunately the model was not launched and the guilty person and transmitter were quickly found.

I think the quote you've used from me is perfectly clear? If it isn't then I'm just pointing out that any provided frequency control (whether at national competition of club level) is only as good as it can be if everyone present uses it as intended and do not make personal mistakes like those I mentioned in my post.

I HAVE been at one F3F event (I think before you started flying F3F) when someone did have his transmitter left one even though the peg was now being used by a fellow competitor. Glitching was occurring with the model while about to be launched but fortunately the model was not launched and the guilty person and transmitter were quickly found.

I'm just saying Dave, you seem to be implying that you can just turn on and chuck off. No offence intended. I'm just saying you still need to be careful. I'm sure we've all altered settings in a tx programme and found it wasn't the same as we were expecting when we got to the slope, regardless of frequency control.  The problem with f3f is that someone you are under pressure to chuck off and you can't really keep the flight line waiting. When it's stop-start the problem is worse, as you don't have the warning.  

The only issue I have with 2.4, as a 35 meg user, is that which Andy mentions. You are flying and you see someone turn up and chuck off without saying anything (or calling launching).  I've also experience people flying electric zagis up at Dassett at the other side of the park on 2.4ghz, but again you can't tell what they are doing when you are flying your own model looking in the other direction.

I have been considering going 2.4, but it's a lot of money to spend for nothing new or exciting in the toy department. It's like a new mouldie isn't it. Then again if one of your big jobs get shot down the cost of one model is more than changing over your whole fleet (taking 35meg sales into consideration).

In these days of 'mixed' frequency slope use (and abuse) 2.4ghz gear provides me with a nice and affordable insurance policy, in that I now don't need to worry about getting shot down by somebody somewhere either with me or elsewhere.

I swapped my stuff for my own protection.
 

I cant see me going 2.4 until I need a new tranny, but then I fly mostly solo, have pre flight checks engraved so deeply in my mind that nothing goes over the edge without having everything check twice and I dont fly crazy money mouldies.

Having said all that, I saw a Corona 2.5 DIY module for my pootaba set and have to say that I was tempted for a second, but then it dawned on me that even at good Corona prices I'd have to dish out a big wodge of cash to cover all Rx's I would need.

In these days of 'mixed' frequency slope use (and abuse) 2.4ghz gear provides me with a nice and affordable insurance policy, in that I now don't need to worry about getting shot down by somebody somewhere either with me or elsewhere.

I swapped my stuff for my own protection.
 

Yes, well worth the extra expense in my opinion.

It does work the other way though as well in that I now also know that switching my transmitter on is not going to result in me causing someone else's model to come down. Obviously that ability should not allow any Tom (no, not you!) Dick and Harry to selfishly switch on wherever they want. Unfortunately though that aspect does seem to be occurring which brings with it it's own problems.........

Apart from the cost issue, which is obviously an important one, there really is no reason not to go 2.4

agreed

Apart from the cost issue, which is obviously an important one, there really is no reason not to go 2.4

not now every brand has a 2.4 system.  I wouldn't have fancied a DX7 though.

If in the market for a new TX I would have to say I think 35mhz would be a bad investment. I know when I decided my 9Zap was getting on a bit that I only looked at 2.4 as it has to be the forward. I didn't go for a module system as I don't like them, I know constant removal of modules has a habbit of weakening the pins on the pcb so I went for a dedicated 2.4, plus I don't like the look or inconvienance of having an areial sticking out the back

I'm going to get the plug in module and 5ch Rx for the Flying Fish. If I like it then the Needle will be on 2.4. It'll be a sod to convert the Brio though. 

I'm going to get the plug in module and 5ch Rx for the Flying Fish. If I like it then the Needle will be on 2.4. It'll be a sod to convert the Brio though. 

I approve of the new avatar (this sort of post always looks weird in the future when avatars may have been changed) .

x2 on the Avatar Ed. Worthy of at least one compensatory Oscar that one.......
I'd go for the 6ch rx though and you're right - retro fitting is a pain but you'll just have to bite the bullet. Rest assured that your Brio is not as tight as my Freestyler was!

Andy

Can you prove that? There are very few traders that stupid  

I have competed at the nationals 4 times and flew at shows across the UK as part of the Ripmax team flying in slots with up to about 15 models and not once had a glitch. I know there were incidents with other pilot switching on and shooting a display model down, usually after the person responsible had been asked to change channel and forgotten. Seen that twice but apart from that it was very rare at well organised events.

2.4 is obviously safer from this respect but to say 35mhz is only any good if you fly on your own is nonesense.

Yes I 'proved it' - we stomped into said trader and threatend to punch his lights out if he didn't pack it in  - seemed to work too  

I flew shows for 5 years - had two incidents alone in that time - two too many though - that quick model (a Weston UK Magnum) was at Ascot and it could have killed someone!

I recall another occasion when Ali was practising with a big 3D model at Woodspring a few years back - it leapt about a bit and he landed - 'problem' says I 'just somebody 'f***ing about with a transmitter I expect' he said (implying that this wasn't for the first time in his experience)

The old 'I've never had a problem' just won't wash - you don't, till you do (if you catch my drift)!



We've had this conversation before on this forum but power is NOT the same as sloping - slope groups shoot one another down all the time - sad but true - on a power field you're all standing together - parked together - pit together - sloping isn't like that!

I

I'm sure most people would use 2.4ghz if they were starting now but the obvious issue is cost and problems with carbon models.

Tom there is NO problem with carbon models (if you know what you're about)!

This 'carbon myth' needs putting to bed!

Steering back on topic (ish) ...

I am in the same boat - Futaba FF9 on 35Mhz, maybe 10 receivers, and three carbon
nosed mouldies.  I'm looking for an excuse to go 2.4G, probably Futaba 10 or 12.

Question is - Apart from the obvious elimination of frequency clashes, is there anything
else that 2.4 will do for me that my 35Mhz kit won't ?

I have heard tales of faster response, but how much of this is urban myth I dont know, I
would love to see a practical demonstration. I believe the frame processing rate of 35Mhz
is about 25ms, and on 2.4G its 14ms or so. Now thats effin quick, but is this really
perceptible to an average Joe like me ? I certainly dont sense a 'lack' of response on 35Mhz.

So - No frequency clashes, possibly faster response time ... anything else ? I really really
want to change over, but need to justify it.

Scott I switched from a 9 Zap running many different RX's from small 6ch to PCM to my current 2.4 DSX9. I don't know what it is about the 2.4 system that makes it better but for me and my mostly 3D models the improvement was very noticable. Everything feels more precise and smoother, all my models run less expo on the DSX9 as a result. It's hard to desribe, you need to try it and see 

Other advantages of Spektrum 2.4 or JR are model match and servo sync 

I reckon if I'd had 14ms control responses I would have caught that thermal I obviously missed out on my second flight on Saturday 

Seriously, though, Steve - after seeing the completely ridiculously simple installation in your Sting, which obviously works perfectly well for you, I have to say 2.4 is becoming more attractive all the time to me. Problem is I've just gotten decent at doing internal V tail aerials for 35mhz!

Zim

well i wish they would stop making fuselages that break because they are glass at the front!

All they need is a "Better by Lambretta" radio tray Tom. Feckin' bullet proof. My land-out with the Strega was a typical "towards the slope" landing, and put it into the ground up to half way up the canopy. Not a mark on it. Taking the radio tray right back to the joiner as per Adam's design would completely eradicate the problem you refer to with any 2.4 friendly nose. Having said that, I've not heard of loads and loads of models with 2.4 noses getting broken, but as with most breaks, usually the best way to avoid them is to avoid crashing!

Z

according to lord slopetrashes recent article, it is the most common break the the Fu-meister does. I rest my case.

Otherwise why would you make the part of the model that get's the most hammer the weakest part of it.

Maybe the model makers are believing the myth

Coz they don't have a "Better by Lambretta" radio tray 

Tom, The carbon in model fuses is to make them stiffer, not stronger.
Not much carbon (none in fact) in my heaviest lead sled fuses and they are for one point landings.
Those of you smashing the fronts off your models want to try a little bit of grace with your landings. I find missing the big green bit when travelling at speed helps a lot!
 

Andy

a sled fuse is a much heavier layup than a sport mouldie though! I hope!

I agree with andy on missing the green bit on landing.
Unless of course thenasty rotor slams you into the ground.

carbon is stronger than glass surely?!

No-one hits the green bit on purpose .

I'd go for the 6ch rx though and you're right - retro fitting is a pain but you'll just have to bite the bullet. Rest assured that your Brio is not as tight as my Freestyler was!
Andy

I only need 5ch for the Fish and Puncies deal on the module with a 5 is good.  As for the Brio, well its that slip on 'cone. I've already go a lot going on in there...

Apart from the cost issue, which is obviously an important one, there really is no reason not to go 2.4

Yes cost!

Oh and being locked into to one manufacturers equipment.

But then again, nobody expected the Spanish inquisition.

So - No frequency clashes, possibly faster response time ... anything else ? I really really
want to change over, but need to justify it.

Say goodbye to glitches.

Say hello to telemetry (with some brands).

Fewer crashes.

Fewer crashes.

Different crashes...

carbon is stronger than glass surely?!

Carbon is more brittle and snaps easier. Kevlar makes the best fuses for impact resistance but is not very stiff. Carbon makes the stiffest but breaks quite easily.
The best of both worlds is the kevlar/carbon weave which can make an impact resistant, stiff yet lightweight fuselage. That sort of thing is what composite modelling is all about. Composite being the operative word.
Carbon of course gives 2.4ghz shielding problems and I've proven these at one time or another.
Having a glass fronted model does not make a weak model. My old Acacia 2 is proof enough of that. Alex McMeekin once described it as the Battle tank of f3f!

Andy

The majority of faults that cause our crashes are as inherent in 2.4 as they are in 35MHz (broken servo wires, duff switches, duff batteries, dodgy servos etc., and the biggest cause of all, our brains and thumbs!).  These accident causes will not disappear overnight, but modern surface mount pcbs and the very small components in 2.4 Rx's make them much less susceptible to shock and vibration.

Most people are worried about the radio link at 2.4, which is a small part of the system.  Curtis Youngblood (ace heli pilot for many years) did some trials a while ago, where he modified an Rx (actually 72MHz being US) to monitor missed signals.  At 35MHz or 72MHz we are at frequencies that are very susceptible to electrical noise, from many sources, including our own servo motors.  He found that even at close range with a heli many bits of data were lost, effectively reducing the update rate.  Spektrum systems allow similar monitoring, and it is clear at 2.4 that frames just don't go missing.  This may well be one of the main reasons that the systems do feel more locked in than 35MHz (and I noticed a huge improvement going from normal 35MHz PCM to the fast (for 35MHz) G3 system, and an equally noticeable improvement going from G3 on 35MHz to 2.4).

2.4GHz is here to stay (for the moment) and the systems work.  A little more care is needed with Rx antenna placement, especially in all carbon models, but there is plenty of data out there from US thermal comp pilots on how to do it (check out RCG), and they fly a long way away!

I have done extensive testing of both Spektrum and Fasst systems in helis, large power models and all sorts of gliders, and I am convinced there are significant operational and functional benefits to 2.4.  I do not worry about range any more.  It is beyond the limits of my eyesight, and I fly a long way away.

Simon

In a previous life I did a deal of slalom canoeing - Kayak's were made from one of three materials - Diolin was the cheapest - then Kevlar and top of the money tree was carbon which was what the top folks (sponsored...) paddled.

Carbon boats would break in half if you wrapped them around a rock - Kevlar would bend around the rock like a bag of washing - Diolin was far the toughest but folks liked the 'bling' of Kevlar and carbon! Carbon was paddled by those who could afford to break boats, where it's strength to weight ratio made the slalom boat quicker to turn in the right hands!

Carbon is stiff and light and I wouldn't choose it as the best material for a nose cone if crash resistance is to the fore!

The Carbon shielding issue has now been engineered around - it's not an issue if your radio installation is executed with that understanding as those who fly 2.4 composite models have proven!

So - to the 'Carbon is stronger than glass' - no not really - it's stiffer and lighter per cross sectional area but who cares about that in a nose area where you're about to stuff a great big slab of lead anyway.

 

  I do not worry about range any more.  It is beyond the limits of my eyesight, and I fly a long way away.

Simon

x2. In the interests of proper testing (you understand) I have specked out along a slope (and very close too it) with 2.4ghz gear (I'm estimating a mile) and it was solid. When I tried that with even a Multiplex IPD I used to get a failsafe kick in.
Upwards next, to see if I can break my UK Altitude record perhaps.......

 

Forgive me if I missed this in an earlier post - I've jumped in late...

Short aerials at the Tx are a huge advantage on the slope, unless you want somewhere to hang your windsock.  (I miss the wind direction ribbon)  Not having nearly a metre of wire to fix at the model end helps too.

There is almost no aerial to trip over / leave at home / break in the wind with 2.4G.  Murphy's rule applies - The chance of leaving behind / breaking it is proportional to how far away a spare is.

Sorry guys, I've not had time to read all the posts yet! I've been to work, been to the gym, been shopping and been getting models ready for posting!! Its been a long old day and I'm due up in 5 hours -noooooooooooo!!!

I promise I will read them all when i return from work on Thursday -honest 

Cheers for all the advice inadvance

Matt

I agree with andy on missing the green bit on landing.
Unless of course thenasty rotor slams you into the ground.

Shouldn't be landing in the nasty rotor - get walking....