Sorry, my bad, I mean that the first couple hundred feet show more signal loss than the those last several hundred. And that actully supports my idea, not the other way around. Oops
-Charles
Charles Frey wrote:
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
I believe the original proposal was to normally transmit at 1/2 or 3/4 power, and then have the switch activate full power. I think it's a pretty good idea. We could be saving a lot of battery by transmitting less power when we're close, especially handy for things like park flyers where you're always well within low power range. And there's plenty of time spent on open class flights well within medium power range, especailly if you don't hook up with a big one. ;) I mean, think about how far some people can speck it out, especailly with the scale ships. With signal strength falling off at the square of the distance, those last few hundred feet are far more killer than the close in hundreds. Sign me up.
Anybody who's worried about forgetting to hit the switch or that they get a lot of interference can just leave it on high.
-Charles
Martin Usher wrote:
>better yet, a way to boost signal strength? (John Erickson)
I've been toying with this concept but it does have the drawback of being illegal. I'm also not sure the boost you could get by just tweaking the transmitter module would be enough to get the plane into control.
>We suspect another flyer about a mile away but we've yet to find him.
If its consistent interference then you could try using a directional antenna ("Foxhound") to track the person down. If you can see the transmission on a scanner the source may be quite close -- our radios have very little effective range at street level in a built-up area (but a lot more effective range above the houses and trees, that's why someone even a mile or more away can bring us down).
My paranoia is helecopters. They use our channels and they can be flown anywhere. I've come across them flying in all sorts of corners where you'd not suspect model flying -- an empty parking lot at an industrial facility would be one place to look.
Things that might use our channels are assisted listening devices (continuous, voice stuff) and pagers (bursts of transmission). We've had enough interference from assisted listening devics to bring a plane down even though its not supposed to travel outside the facility its used in. I've never experienced any problems with pagers, even when they were the boom technology (does anyone still use the things?).
Someone mentioned "Broadband over Power Line" in a post. I don't think it'll be a problem, its yet to show itself to be cost effective and it just doesn't seem to deliver compared to proper wireless technologies. (It has all sorts of other pitfalls -- an early test in England fell flat on its face because of the interference caused by streetlights.) That doesn't mean we should ignore it, I think the radio amateurs have got the right idea in opposing it tooth and nail, its a really stupid idea, one of those things that just because its sort of technically feasible doesn't make it viable or desirable.
Martin Usher
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
