Topic: Is 2.4 all its cracked up to be (again)

Yes
Amazing this new 'trickery' was viewed.
I am now amazed when i see people on 35meg 
4 years...god i am getting old..

Paul G

Perhaps amazed was the wrong word...it’s just unusual now to see it.
The Nationals this year was 2.4 only as are a lot of the events I attend.
We still have one or two people on 35meg in our club, but, it is increasingly rare to see the long aerial and flag!


Paul G

Perhaps amazed was the wrong word...it’s just unusual now to see it.
The Nationals this year was 2.4 only as are a lot of the events I attend.
We still have one or two people on 35meg in our club, but, it is increasingly rare to see the long aerial and flag!


Paul G

Do you mean the "showline" at the nationals was 2.4 only, Wiz suggested that the amongst the actual competitors the were people on 35mhz

Do you mean the "showline" at the nationals was 2.4 only, Wiz suggested that the amongst the actual competitors the were people on 35mhz

There were certainly some competitors still on 35 Mhz at the Silent flight nationals, but the comp I flew in was 90% 2.4GHz.
Some World Champs in recent years have been "2.4 only" - makes it so much easier for the organisers - and the competitors can check/adjust things whenever they want to.

Dick

Do you mean the "showline" at the nationals was 2.4 only, Wiz suggested that the amongst the actual competitors the were people on 35mhz

The showline was i am not sure about the rest as i spend my time a the Showline.
But we are being a bit picky here, the point is that 35 meg gear is becoming increasingly rare!
Does anyone still make it?
Is anyone still buying it (new)?

Paul G

I don't think its being picky. Show pilots have all gone 2.4g although sometimes because they had to!. But 35MHz is still used perfectly well up and down the country. At the slope I fly at I would say 35MHz outnumbers 2.4g by at least 5 to 1. I have nothing against 2.4g just think that unless people have a reason to change 35MHz is still a viable, reliable and proven system.

I'm not buying new but I'm certainly hoovering up some top class 35meg gear at bargain prices..  How about three Weatronic twin Rx for less than a hundred squid for the lot!? and a few top class synthesized Rx'.

It is literally decades ago that I last had a serious incident that could be blamed on the (35mg) radio link.  I fully understand and see the benefits of 2.4 but I won't be making the switch for a long time yet.  As I see it 35 was good and is now even better as there are many less users. I don't fly at shows, therefore I have no need to change.  If I did, my show models would be 2.4, - thats all.

All power to those who go 2.4, every migration away makes it better for those who are left on 35.

stu k

I'm not buying new but I'm certainly hoovering up some top class 35meg gear at bargain prices..  How about three Weatronic twin Rx for less than a hundred squid for the lot!? and a few top class synthesized Rx'.

It is literally decades ago that I last had a serious incident that could be blamed on the (35mg) radio link.  I fully understand and see the benefits of 2.4 but I won't be making the switch for a long time yet.  As I see it 35 was good and is now even better as there are many less users. I don't fly at shows, therefore I have no need to change.  If I did, my show models would be 2.4, - thats all.

All power to those who go 2.4, every migration away makes it better for those who are left on 35.

stu k

That was originally my philosophy Stu, but I'm afraid its a case of change one, change the lot. I think you need to be EITHER 2.4 or 35, not both. I am going to have to change all, or I'm sure one day I will take off with my aerial down....

That was originally my philosophy Stu, but I'm afraid its a case of change one, change the lot. I think you need to be EITHER 2.4 or 35, not both. I am going to have to change all, or I'm sure one day I will take off with my aerial down....

Get a floppy one like the gliderests use, and keep it up all the time!

Get a floppy one like the gliderests use, and keep it up all the time!

I can imagine the hay day that PDR would have if I got a floppy one like the gliderists have!

I don't think its being picky. Show pilots have all gone 2.4g although sometimes because they had to!. But 35MHz is still used perfectly well up and down the country. At the slope I fly at I would say 35MHz outnumbers 2.4g by at least 5 to 1. I have nothing against 2.4g just think that unless people have a reason to change 35MHz is still a viable, reliable and proven system.

I went 2.4 as soon as i could, not because i had to.
You wont find many 35 meg sets in my area, they are now the exception.
Anyway, each to his own.


Paul G

All power to those who go 2.4, every migration away makes it better for those who are left on 35.

Well thats one way to look at it, there is another greater concern and it has happened down on our field. There were some local yobs that had bought themselves a 35MHz setup at a car boot and were driving a buggy with it on the bridle path near our field less than a year ago. So you may well feel comfortable with less users but the new users may be less knowledgeable.

J

In all fairness John, that sort of thing went on before 2.4ghz appeared, and it's certainly true that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Purely personally, I do feel the advent of 2.4ghz has, in some cases, led users to feel that they no longer need be as careful with installations.

I guess we'll have the answer to the opening post in 20 years or so, when we're truly able to compare it with what went before......but at least the current crop of UHF gear doesn't seem at all blighted by the issues encountered by the first UHF sets which appeared on the market in the the late 70's. That said, the problems with many of the Reftec and Cotswold Controls sets I saw being used seemed to be down to lack of development. It seems it wasn't just British Leyland who used their customers as unpaid R&D staff........

In all fairness John, that sort of thing went on before 2.4ghz appeared, and it's certainly true that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Purely personally, I do feel the advent of 2.4ghz has, in some cases, led users to feel that they no longer need be as careful with installations.

I know, but in the past it wasn't so easily affordable, now the 35 MHz gear is worth nothing, thats the real danger.

J

A very valid point John and one of the reasons I (and the Club I formed) fly in the middle of nowhere, miles from anyone......

In all fairness John, that sort of thing went on before 2.4ghz appeared, and it's certainly true that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Purely personally, I do feel the advent of 2.4ghz has, in some cases, led users to feel that they no longer need be as careful with installations.

I guess we'll have the answer to the opening post in 20 years or so, when we're truly able to compare it with what went before......but at least the current crop of UHF gear doesn't seem at all blighted by the issues encountered by the first UHF sets which appeared on the market in the the late 70's. That said, the problems with many of the Reftec and Cotswold Controls sets I saw being used seemed to be down to lack of development. It seems it wasn't just British Leyland who used their customers as unpaid R&D staff........

20 years time? When we get introduced to the NEW fequency just for aircraft, 27meg!

Bob, 27megs wasn't just for aircraft. It could be used for any type of model........and still can as far as I'm aware.

Bob, 27megs wasn't just for aircraft. It could be used for any type of model........and still can as far as I'm aware.

ah, but in 20 years, when they come out with 'Super27tm' it will all be different....

Well Bob, in 20 years time I probably won't care......... I may well be too old/knackered/doddery to fly. Anyway, as it stands the BMFA won't (or at least didn't the last time I looked) cover anyone over 85 (with respect to those of advancing years).

Well Bob, in 20 years time I probably won't care......... I may well be too old/knackered/doddery to fly. Anyway, as it stands the BMFA won't (or at least didn't the last time I looked) cover anyone over 85 (with respect to those of advancing years).

they better had, I intend to spend my nineties being a bloody nuisance to younger club members!

Sent from my BlackBerry 9300 using Tapatalk

Well Bob, in 20 years time I probably won't care......... I may well be too old/knackered/doddery to fly. Anyway, as it stands the BMFA won't (or at least didn't the last time I looked) cover anyone over 85 (with respect to those of advancing years).

Age discrimination?

That's why I suggested the BMFA's position may have changed Marcellus. It hadn't last time I looked, although admittedly that was a while ago.

I do remember seeing (in the BMFA handbook) a reference to being fit/able to fly if one were still able to drive. That needn't necessarily mean a thing though. I've seen people half my age drive to a flying site, and their flying style has made me want to hide in a bunker........

In fairness, I dont think you can get insurance for very much at all beyond 85.....

A fair point Bob.

My neighbour, an extremely active 80 year old, has mentioned the ever increasing difficulty in obtaining travel insurance for his regular jaunts abroad. Needless to say, he still drives daily and owns the obligatory silver Honda Civic..........

Well Bob, in 20 years time I probably won't care......... I may well be too old/knackered/doddery to fly. Anyway, as it stands the BMFA won't (or at least didn't the last time I looked) cover anyone over 85 (with respect to those of advancing years).

The personal accident ceases at age 80, but i don't think there is any age limit on the third party cover.

  Tom

The personal accident ceases at age 80, but i don't think there is any age limit on the third party cover.

True, but all it needs to cover personal accidents is a pair of incontinence pants, so it's not really a problem.

PDR

True, but all it needs to cover personal accidents is a pair of incontinence pants, so it's not really a problem.

PDR

Thats not just the preserve of the elderly, looking at some of the flying at my club...... I should say incontinence pads are essential for some of the younger members..

We're getting awfully close to Jack Dee territory here...........

Speaking of which Bob, many years ago I once test flew an Extra type model with plug in wings for a bloke who wasn't sure how it might handle on it's first flight. Somehow he'd got the wings set at slightly differing incidences, which wasn't immediately obvious on first glance. The model was also very tail heavy in flight, despite the c of g appearing to be in the correct place. The first flight was a real ring twitcher, but I got it down in one piece.

The chap asked me what he needed to do before he attempted a flight with it. I replied "get yourself some bikeclips and a cork"...........

Thats not just the preserve of the elderly, looking at some of the flying at my club...... I should say incontinence pads are essential for some of the younger members..

It's very cruel to continually take the pi$$ out of the younger clubmates...

PDR

It's very cruel to continually take the pi$$ out of the younger clubmates...

PDR

Not the 'P' thats the problem!

Really? That's strange - I usually don't find myself in the sh!t until I come BACK from the field...

PDR

 

Really? That's strange - I usually don't find myself in the sh!t until I come BACK from the field...

PDR

The personal accident ceases at age 80, but i don't think there is any age limit on the third party cover.

  Tom

IIRC Not any more, different insurance company and the age limit has now been removed.

J

I fly most of my models on 2.4 but still fly some of the smaller stuff on 35. 

2.4 is good but i do miss my little orange wind direction indicator

I fly most of my models on 2.4 but still fly some of the smaller stuff on 35. 

2.4 is good but i do miss my little orange wind direction indicator

Make a black flag and put it on a stick of 1/4x1/4 spruce and gaffer tape it to that little aerial - perfect!

IIRC Not any more, different insurance company and the age limit has now been removed.

J

Looks like it has changed to 85 with age related reductions from age 70. This is personal accident only and does not effect third party insurance (which does not have an age limit).

From the 2010 handbook: "Personal Accident Scheme
Members of the BMFA between the ages of 3 and 85 are covered by a standard personal accident policy whilst participating in Association activities which include the building and flying of model aircraft for sport and recreational purposes as well as travel to and from the flying site.
The benefits payable under this policy are £5000 in respect of accidental death and up to £25000 for permanent disability (current as at 1st January 2010); however, the level of benefits payable may change from time to time. Reduced benefits are paid to members over the age of 70."

  Tom

I understand whats in the handbook, at the AGM we were introduced to the new insurance people who have made quite sweeping changes (all for the better) and I think this was one of them.

J

I understand whats in the handbook, at the AGM we were introduced to the new insurance people who have made quite sweeping changes (all for the better) and I think this was one of them.

J

Wasn't aware of that. Sounds good

Tom