One has to be careful jumping to conclusions, as things are not always as
they seem. If that photo was taken for instance in Phoenix, you could assume
that it was a couple of Nancy's out for a lark. But those guys are from SoCal,
and they are actually the local Shaman from SWSA, who have jo
Martin,
Whass happening to our business?
I too, have seen some fellows in orange suits.
Check out the fotos of these guys holding hands.
Are they the same ones you seen?
Ain't they cute!
http://www.sc-2.org/web/news/SC2-June06/Page16.htm
<>
Martin,
Take a look at the following link and the 3-4 subsequent pages.
Are the fellows in the orange clothing the same ones that you saw at the
SC-2 contest?
They seem to be a real pair to draw to!
http://www.sc-2.org/web/news/SC2-Web/SC2Frames.htm
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Martin <[E
Futaba ROCKS!
Lets see... I have spent how many hours trying to figure out how to program my
Futaba H.. None!!!
Its that intuitive...
I'd rather spend my time with my 24 year old girlfriend who is half my age :-)
I have my priorities and you JR and Airtronics guys apparent
Good question. Lots of answers.
I'm flying the same sailplane I've been flying for the last 10 years.
(Usually followed by good, go to 2.4. Less chance of a conflict for me).
I have 25 sailplanes. How many RX do I need to replace?
I'm waiting for them to work out all the problems. (Windo
I remember seeing the guys with the orange shirts at our (SC)2 contest
(the ones covered with "Futaba" and "FASST" and the like). Worth a
picture...they were quite obviously flying on 72MHz.
Martin Usher
PS. I fly with a Futaba radio. "Works fine for me"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill and Dar
Bill and Darwin,
You know I love both you guys even though you wear those Orange shirts, and
I have to concede that it is possible to do more with 14 than 12. I want to
point out that the discussion was 2.4 and sailplanes, and I still feel IMHO
that JR offers more flexibility and better RX
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when it comes to the expensive big stuff there is just one choice, the 12X.
Larry, all due respect one Fan-Boy to another, when JR comes out with a
radio that allows full flexibility in the assignment of functions,
switches, mixes and conditions, then I might a
Larry you make a lot of reasonable points as always. I am going to give
Sanwa the time they requested to produce the first stage of the Stylus
replacement (the 2.4 module) and having failed that will be looking at JR. I
have no issues with Futaba but I have to state that data logging really
appeals
I'm a little biased being on Team Futaba. Despite the brand loyalty, I've
looked at all of them and find the Futaba 2.4 receivers the most practical for
the soaring application.
Darwin,
I can't fault you for being a little biased being a team flyer and all. But
in all fairness it is obvi
If Futaba's system is THE 2.4 system to have why isn't there support for the
other brands? I think JR / Spektrum / Horizon have done a good job in
nudging people to their equipment by offering other brand support. I can
point you towards many happy former futaba fliers that converted to the 2.4
v
Comments inserted.
On May 29, 2008, at 8:55 AM, David Webb wrote:
Darwin, I think your answer lies in the unique qualities and general
low numbers of the soaring communities.
The standard TX for many soaring enthusiasts is the Sanwa /
Airtronics Stylus and many are waiting for a 2.4 GHZ
In a message dated 5/29/2008 7:14:31 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Admittedly, I have
not used the system in a crowded environment, but I have no doubt it
will work fine.
Darwin,
I have converted all my current models to 2.4. Most to the JR/Spektrum
system
Darwin,
Do you have problem with the heat in AZ? The
Futaba rxs have problem with temp above 150°F.
The rx shuts down. There had been crashes in
major events link to rx temperature problems.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=861949
There are talks on the 14mz.com Futaba suppor
Darwin,
While I am listed on Ch 17, I had Ron switch me to 2.4. I will be
flying it in my old Encore variant, and my New Spider DLG.
My Original Fuselages are all Kevlar.
Chris Adams
> Original Message
> Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4
> From: John Erickson <[EMA
Darwin, I think your answer lies in the unique qualities and general low
numbers of the soaring communities.
INMHO I think the lack of Soaring adoption into 2.4 occurs for a few
reasons that follow but are not limited to:
The standard TX for many soaring enthusiasts is the Sanwa / Airtronics
St
lly used.
JE
--
Erickson Architects
John R. Erickson, AIA
> From: Darwin Barrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 07:14:07 -0700
> To: Soaring@airage.com
> Subject: [RCSE] 2.4
>
> I thought 2.4 was all the rage. People abandoning 72 and ham band en
> masse to
I thought 2.4 was all the rage. People abandoning 72 and ham band en
masse to use 2.4 and selling everything off. So, why are we not
seeing it as much in the sailplane world?
At the SW Classic there were not nearly as many as I expected. I did
not get the count but it was far less than we
I posted a message several weeks ago about a 2.4 GHz installation in a
carbon Pike Perfect. I am continuing my conversions and now have a molded
Graphite Electric flying with a JR 9 channel receiver/X9303 combination. The
fuselage on the electric is like the pure sailplane version and is made of a
Don, which version of the 6100 were you using. ver 1.6 will reboot much
faster you can send it in to horizon and they will reflash it for free...
Jay
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 8:42 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 3/21/08 9:37:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] w
What kind of a pattern does the 2.4 tx antenna have? Is it sensitive to
orientation like
a 72 Mhz tx? In other words, do you have to point the antenna at the
plane or hold
it broadside to the plane?
Dee Smith
Round Rock, TX
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe"
This is in regard to Don Richmond's loss of plane due to the 2.4 receiver
taking too long to reboot.
Horizon will upgrade any DSM2 receiver (including the AR6100) to what they call
"Quick Connect". They do something to the "firmware" whatever that is so that
if the signal is lost it does not
In a message dated 3/21/08 9:37:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't 2.4Ghz very much line of sight?
-And poor at penetrating obsticles?
Thus, isn't it reasonable to say that a home or structure or earth topology
will block much of a 2.4 signal?
Bill
2.4 G
Good answer. I always wondered about the line of site trees question. If
your plane is out of your site you have other problems to solve.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:54 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pretty much a rhetorical question considering that 2.4 for RC has been
> operating in all disc
ay, March 21, 2008 9:37 AM
Subject: [RCSE] 2.4 Question
-Isn't 2.4Ghz very much line of sight?
-And poor at penetrating obsticles?
Thus, isn't it reasonable to say that a home or structure or earth topology
will block much of a 2.4 signal?
Bill Swingle
Janesville, CA
Pretty much a rhetorical question considering that 2.4 for RC has been
operating in all disciplines for soaring and ground applications.
On a comparison to 72mhz or some of the other Freqs like 900mhz, 2.4 has a
bit less ability to reach around objects. Spektrum handled that 'bit' of
lesse
-Isn't 2.4Ghz very much line of sight?
-And poor at penetrating obsticles?
Thus, isn't it reasonable to say that a home or structure or earth topology
will block much of a 2.4 signal?
Bill Swingle
Janesville, CA
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"u
Jack, check with Jack Iafret as I think he has been keeping up to date with
Profi 4K (2.4) things.
Regards, Dave Corven.
-- Original message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Strother)
> Does anyone know if there is any plans for 2.4 and the MPX 4000,
> commonly kn
Does anyone know if there is any plans for 2.4 and the MPX 4000,
commonly known as the Pizza Box...
seg !!
--
Jack Strother
Granger, IN
LSF 2948
LSF Level V #117
LSF Official 1996 - 2004
CSS Gold
-- Original message --
From: Daryl Perkins
For what it is worth,
In the latest Model Airplane News (May), page84, the President of Sanwa
states "Stylus users will be rewarded for their loyalty with a 2.4GHz
module receiver option"
Clarence
Albert E. Wedworth wrote:
Hi guys
I find it kinda silly that all of you converts using 2.4 need
Al,
You had me right up tell you said "Stylus" I thought your parents raised you
better Al :-)
Now if you had said Futaba 9C... One. I would of made $1 and two, you would
of shown how smart you are :- A Stylus up against a Futaba is kind of like
Dos up against Mac Very Ugly
Wow that's a silly post and I fly with a stylus as well. Besides the
cool feature of anyone on channel 51 being able to take you out nice
and quick what features are you thinking you get that someone on a JR
or Futaba 2.4 does not? I flew a friends 9303 last year. He had
everything I needed. Laucnh
Quiet Al!
Let them go! We'll be better off with out them. Well, that is until we join
them.
Bill Swingle
Janesville, CA
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe
messag
Hi guys
I find it kinda silly that all of you converts using 2.4 need instructions to
install a receiver in a plane Can't have Carbon/Kevlar in your fuse,
drilling holes in a fuse so the silly little antennas wiskers stick out just to
find it didn't work, data loggers. ( just pure silli
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The obvious good location would be in the fin since they are usually
fiberglass above the stab. There is a limit to how long the aux reciever
extension
There was a thread in RCGroups recently that showed how sattellite
receivers were mounted at
e
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 6:33 PM
To: soaring@airage.com
Subject: [RCSE] 2.4 install how to?
Hi Robert,
Installation is pretty simple, but ground range testing is important. Follow
the instructions. My tips below are for JR systems with aux
Hi Robert,
Installation is pretty simple, but ground range testing is important. Follow
the instructions. My tips below are for JR systems with aux receivers
(satelite receivers).
In a DLG with a CF fuselage, simply poke the antenna through the sides of the
fuselage. You mentioned Larry Jolly
Ben Clerx and others have gone all 2.4. I'd certainly appreciate it if he
(they) would share the specifics of their installations. For me, particularly,
in the Organic and in a TabooGt, if possible.
Larry Jolly showed me his installation in a Blaster2.
Anyone else out there with successf
Gordy,
I am glad to see that you are now discovering 2.4 and the wonderful
advantages it brings to us.
I would like to comment on a couple of points that you brought forth in the
article penned by Dale.
Before I start I want you to know that I think it is great that there is
more than one ap
I just posted some actual data logger results for my Spektrum installation
in a carbon Pike Perfect. I had 4 flights today (3 with the data logger)
with no issues visible from the ground. It is not exactly where I want it
yet but it is close. The thread talks about what I will do next.
http://www.
cember 28, 2007 7:23 AM
To: soaring@airage.com
Subject: [RCSE] 2.4 IRCHA
I see in MA that there were 712 flyers at the chopper event, and only 150 on
72, but I do not see any mention of how many flyers were allowed up at the same
time. Any of y'all hear? Thanks Brian Smith
PS I'm sure Gord
I see in MA that there were 712 flyers at the chopper event, and only 150 on
72, but I do not see any mention of how many flyers were allowed up at the same
time. Any of y'all hear? Thanks Brian Smith
PS I'm sure Gordy is wondering too. ;o)
As is normal on RCSE if you say "anything" it will be taken out of context by
someone.
YUP.. I'm so happy with my DX7s and the X9303 that I'll probably start
giggling soon. ;o) For me it was the best thing since the original
red/white-green/white-yellow/white.. Remember that? I'll start wor
**See AOL's top rated recipes
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop000304)
--- Begin Message ---
Robert, Neither of your installations are optimal.
In the Organic you are still dealing with the Kevlar Carbon Weave of the
main Fuselage
When you range test are the planes on the ground or on a table? If they are
on the ground put them on a table and then do the range check. The ground
causes terrible range checks.
Jay
On Dec 13, 2007 5:16 PM, Robert Samuels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I bought a 2.4 9303 and installed an AR
I bought a 2.4 9303 and
installed an AR6200 in an Organic which has an all Kevlar nosecone.
But it does not work. I put the main receiver in the nose with the
antennas fore and aft and the remote receiver on the bottom of the fuse
behind the tow hook with the antennas exiting the fuse through
, 5 Dec 2007 07:40:02 -0600
> To: soaring@airage.com
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4 GHz
>
> I agree that the Evo is the best available transmitter for most
> sailplanes. Since Hitec, Futaba, and JR make transmitters that are
> capable of doing what I need, my
Wow, in 1933 it must have just been you and Karlton out in the middle of no
where. You guys were way ahead of the times. LOLOccasionally/often
frustrated;...never defeated...> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 07:40:02 -0600> To:
soaring@airage.com> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [R
Chuck Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In 1933, I had a booth next Karlton at Visalia and he tried to sell
me on his pizza box transmitters
Dam Chuck.. Your old and those transmitters were way ahead of their time
:-) hehe
I agree that the Evo is the best available transmitter for most
sailplanes. Since Hitec, Futaba, and JR make transmitters that are
capable of doing what I need, my choice is based on feel and balance
as well as programming methods. I still remember the disgusting feel
I had when I tried to ge
flying
because you would not be able to program it.
- Original Message -
From:Craig Allen
To: soaring@airage.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 6:45PM
Subject: [RCSE] 2.4 G Futaba v JR, .Thanks :-)
I just want to thank everyonefor the very thou
If you bought a transmitter one year earlier you would have gotten the Futaba
8ua you would not be flying because you would not be able to program it.
- Original Message -
From: Craig Allen
To: soaring@airage.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 6:45 PM
Subject: [RCSE] 2.4 G
On Dec 4, 2007, at 11:07 PM, Kevin O'Dell wrote:
As far as Spread Spectrum systems. From purely an engineering
point of view, the Futaba system is by far more reliable.. Sure
the JR system might work just fine. Although we have already heard
reports of problems with satellite receivers.
I just want to thank everyone for the very thoughtful and informative post.
I was expecting a lot of flames :-) hehe
Just a little background... I left Soaring in 1979 after moving to LA to work
in the Film Industry.
I took my trusty Kraft 4ch transmitter and my Super Esprit, White Trash and
I tried to respond to Jack Iafret's posting but got bounced by the system so
I am posting this separately. I agree with Jack that the Profi has very
powerful programming. However, I traded mine for 2 - 12 Ch Evos because, for
me, the programming is even easier, although with a few less options (mos
Cc: Soaring@airage.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
The Profi 4000 has all of the 14MZ functions that count (sorry- no audio)
"plus' several more that most sailplane guys will never use but are there for
the really
Cc: Soaring@airage.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
The Profi 4000 has all of the 14MZ functions that count (sorry- no audio)
"plus' several more that most sailplane guys will never use but are there for
the really
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've never had any Futaba transmitter above the 9Csuper so maybe
other can tell me what those high end Futaba transmitters can do
that a 9Csuper can't.
Phil
May be a little more progemas but you get more little holes in the
receiv
Phil Barnes wrote:
I've never had any Futaba transmitter above the 9Csuper so maybe other
can tell me what those high end Futaba transmitters can do that a
9Csuper can't.
These rcgroups threads might be useful. I have not read them.
Differences
in 9C and 9303?
JR
9303 vs Futaba 9c
Jon
The Profi 4000 has all of the 14MZ functions that count (sorry- no audio)
"plus' several more that most sailplane guys will never use but are there
for the really technical applications.
Not very popular because of the style but it is fantastic if you use a tray
or strap. Programming is really log
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Now if Futaba would just provide the superior sailplane programming the
JR 9303 has I would consider switching.
As a long time Futaba user but also a guy who keeps looking at the JR9303
and wondering; Should I switch? I'd be interest
Ed Anderson wrote:
Craig,
There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the
Futaba.
1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater
acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters.
True enough. Unfortunately not en
Craig,
There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the
Futaba.
1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater
acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters.
2) Futaba entered the 2.4 GHz market with a very limit
Now if Futaba would just provide the superior sailplane programming the JR 9303
has I would consider switching. JR was the first to bring SS to the market and
Futaba has some catch up to do.
-- Original message --
From: Craig Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm jus
I'm just curious as to why all the talk is about the JR 2.4 system?
>From everything I have read, the Futaba 2.4 is the only one to use true spread
>spectrum and is a much better system that the JR...
Like I said "I'm just curios." So flame away :-)
Craig
Is there anyone out there that is using the 2.4 in a Sharon or simular SMALL
fuse
-
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
I wouldn't use the word "Avionics". It is designed for ground based
Transmitters. Range is only 3000ft.
Although it is interesting.
At 07:28 AM 10/17/2004, Jimmy Andrews wrote:
Looks like the Wi Fli by Model Avionics that was put on hold a few
months back has re-appeared - at Horizon Hobby Inc.
Looks like the Wi Fli by Model Avionics that was put on hold a few
months back has re-appeared - at Horizon Hobby Inc.
http://www.spektrumrc.com/
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and
>(These people claim 1.2 miles. I don't believe it. With the much
>smaller antenna and 1/8th the power, I'd expect maybe 0.3 miles tops.
With the wavelength shrinking from 4.13 to 0.125 meters, can't the antenna be
practically made more efficient with no size increase, or even a net decrease
fr
So what if in certain circumstances a tree or something similar is in the
line of sight ??
- Original Message -
From: "Ryan Flowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4 ghz Digital Spread Spect
70 matches
Mail list logo
