Spektrum DX6 6-channel DSM 2.4Ghz System

[cpd1343]

I asked Spektrum if I could get this unit with BOTH sticks self centering. Here is their response:

Les,

Hello and thank you for your question. Yes we can modify the sticks
on the DX6 radio to have both centering. There is no charge for doing
this, all you have to do is ask when you are ordering to have the radio
sent to service for modification. Hope this helps, and have a great day.

Thank you,
Dennis Davenport
Horizon Hobby Consumer Sales
800-338-4639

So, for those of us tankers and boaters, you can have your cake AND eat it too.

[Kmot]

Kewl. :cool:

[LtDoc]

...I don't suppose you happened to ask them about a 'dual' throttle thingy, did you? Hey, I can dream, can't I?
- 'Doc

[ropanach]

Wished I would have know before I go my DX7. :censored:

[no stick]

It will be interesting to see what ground check distances you get with the R6000 aircraft Rx for your boats. The ground systems have different receivers and are optomized for surface running. ;)

Ed

[Massey]

Well I use the AR6000 in a couple of my ships and I can get over 100 yards with the TX about chest level and about 150 yards with it over my head. At that distance it is really hard to see my boat, but if I want to recover my hydro then I need to go out that far. I have even used binoculars to keep sight of the boat when I sail out that far.

Oh yea the boat I did the range tests on was my Atlantic Tug with the Rx inside the hull near where the factory one is and both the antennas are also inside the hull, with no extentions. The AR6000 is a great boat Rx and I would imagine that the AR7000 is/will be just as good.

Massey

[Massey]

Oh yea I forgot to mention that in order to get the best possable reception you need to keep the antennas at 90degrees from each other.

Massey

[Shaun Hendricks]

??? 90° from each other?

All 2.4ghz systems I've been exposed to (802.11, Bluetooth, etc.) specify that the antennas remain in the antenna's optimal polarity configuration. Some are vertical and some are horizontal. Most 'whip' styles are 360° bias with vertical setup.

Are hobby transmitters set up for vertical polarity and not horizonal setup? I'd love to see the antenna spec sheet for this transmitter...

This is a pretty classic 'rubber duck' style of antenna pickup pattern (albeit a 9db gain one!):

[Kmot]

Shaun, go to the Aircraft Radio forum and you can read up on the DX6 and other 2.4 systems till you can't stand it anymore!! :p

They are not anything like the 'old' radios as far as antenna radiation patterns, etc. The geeks get going over there and I am lost in a couple sentences. :D

[CG Bob]

Well I use the AR6000 in a couple of my ships and I can get over 100 yards with the TX about chest level and about 150 yards with it over my head. At that distance it is really hard to see my boat.

Oh yea the boat I did the range tests on was my Atlantic Tug with the Rx inside the hull near where the factory one is and both the antennas are also inside the hull, with no extentions. The AR6000 is a great boat Rx and I would imagine that the AR7000 is/will be just as good.

Massey
I routinely run my model of USCGC TAMAROA over to the far side of our club lake, about 300 yards away. TAMAROA is 51" long and I use a Futaba 6 channel FM radio on 50 MHz. The rx antenna in TAMAROA runs around the perimeter of the hatch coaming that secures the main deck house. I routinely run some of my smaller models, 20" - 30" long, out beyond 200 yards with various Futaba radios. I'm usually sitting in my camp chair about 10 feet from the water's edge, with the Tx on my lap.

[ropanach]

I bought the DX7 so I could get away from the HAM radio operators in my area, my AM radios will not even try to operate my rx in the boat when they fire up, it's a hit and mis kida thing with my FM units, so I am hopeing that the DX7 will stop the problem for me.

[Kmot]

Probably because those hamsters all know how to use illegal power. :p

[Umi_Ryuzuki]

Seems like I just stuck a centering arm and spring into a DX6...
Maybe those weren't extra, but came out of mine when it was modified. :o

[Massey]

OK... Shaun, what I ment by 90° from each other is the actual angle of the wires that come out of the box. If you look at the AR6000 there are 2 antenna wires comming out of the case and they are at 90° of each other. This has to do with the freq. and how long the wavelengths are apart. I cant remember all the details off the top of my head right now but I used to have to play with Diapoles on the F-14D Radar dish and if they were not 90° to the surface the pilots would complain about false tracking and dropping targets. I dont think that the AR6000 is as complex as APG-71 radar but there are some similarities to them ( and many other items that use radar and close to radar frequencies.).


CG Bob, Yes with your Futaba radio you should get considerable more distance. I try to keep all my antennas in side my hulls if I can and I can usually control the boats fine well past my visual range and almost past practical with my binocs. The Spektrum DX6 was intended for park aircraft operated at short range therefore the output of the Tx was limited. As for the Spektrum systems used for "ground" like the DX3, they have more power output at the Tx so the range is greater.

Ropanach, The DX7 should provide you with better reception around the Ham guys. 2.4 GHz have closer wavelengths which make it harder to insert interfearance. The lower the freq. the higher the chance of interfearance. A 2.4 GHz wavelength is about 2.5-3 inches long where a 75MHz is somewhere around 3 feet long. Can you see how some one with an overpowered radio can add some unwanted noise into your signal?

Massey

[Ghost 2501]

the next step is cell phone technology on the DX system,

[Massey]

the next step is cell phone technology on the DX system,


I would hate to have to pay for minutes of R/C time.

Massey

[LtDoc]

A couple of things.

First, I seriously doubt if your local hams are messing up the radios in the 27, 72 or 75 Mhz bands. The only one there's a ham band close to is the 27 Mhz one, and then there's quite a bit of seperation there. I won't go so far as saying that they don't possibly cause some interference problems. But certainly not much, the bands are too far apart.
Radiation patterns. These primarily deal with transmitters, not necessarily receivers. Receiving antennas are not anywhere near as 'picky' as transmitting antennas are. For receiving antennas a very good rule of thumb is the bigger the better. That 'bigger' thingy also includes taller, not just longer. That holds 'true' for any band or frequency. Transmitting antennas being part of a tuned circuit have to meet certain specifications, have certain properties. Otherwise, the transmitter isn't gonna like it very much and won't put out the full power it's capable of. That means a weaker signal and a shorter practical range. One of those specifications/properties is length. Another is orientation or polarization. The 'right' length and pointed in the 'right' direction. The length part has electrical properties when dealing with radio frequencies. Sort of like trying to stick a 1" bolt into a 1/4" hole, it just isn't gonna fit very well (deals with impedances, reactances, and unless you're really interested, you don't wanna go there - lol). Matching polarizations is much easier to do. If the transmitter's antenna sticks up, then the receiving antenna should too. If the transmitter's antenna is horizontal, the receiving antenna ought to be laying down too. It can make a very big difference in signal strength and range. It's also safe to say that 'close' counts. If both are within about 45-60 degrees of each other, that's usually close enough, sort of. The 'sides' of the transmitting antenna tend to produce stronger signals than the 'pointy' end does. Pointing the transmitter's antenna -at- the model is probably the worst thing you can do, less signal gets to where it's going. You don't hit a ball with the end of the bat, but with the side of it, right? Terrible analogy, but it's closer than you might think.
I really think that's as far as I ought to go unless you want to do some really "high-falute'n" math (not to mention that I'm too lazy).

The 'Spektrum' receivers use two receivers, one vertically polarized, one horizontally polarized. It then it 'compairs' those two signals and picks the strongest (called 'voting'). That's why there's two antennas, one 90 degrees in orientation from the other. Also why tilting the transmitter antenna doesn't make much difference with them.
All of the above is more analogy than scientific statements. It's more than you ever wanted to hear, so I'll quit.
- 'Doc

[Massey]

Doc, I know there is enough seperation between the freqs. to not matter, but if you introduce enough RF energy even at different freq you can (can not will) cause interfearance. You will not piggyback any real information onto the carrier signal but you can slightly distort the information that is on the carrier. Radio and radar jamming works on this principal, Ideal jamming would just use the known freq and send jibberish at a higher power so it will override the wanted signal. Being that we rarly know the X-mit freq. we usually just rotate highpower rf static across many freqs and hope that the enemy cant see what they want to see. So while the ham freqs are not near our standard radios if some one has "modified" their radio to produce higher power than they could cause interfearance. That is the wonderful part of the Part 15 FCC regulations. From the factory we cannot cause any harmful interfearance but we must accept any interfearnace that will cause unwanted operation.

Massey

[Blackjack52]

Sidelobes, gotta love em. Sometimes we used sidelobes to find targets when being jammed. They can be beneficial.

When I run with the DX2, I set the xmtr ant at 45deg since I hold my xmtr at a 45deg angle (now the antenna is at 0deg straight up). Maybe coincidence that it works better.

Has anyone tried binding the AR6000 with DX2 or DX3 xmtr.

ropanach:
Why didn't you buy the DX3? (More model memory, or servo limitation?)

[ropanach]

Blackjack52:
I bought the DX7 because I was told (and did not reasch) that there were problems with the other DX units. none pacific just problems, MY bad, :o but I did wont the 7 chanles, and it was programable, witch I've not tried as yet, in hopes that I could control the Z drives sepritly, whateing for that mod. for the right stick to be self centering, and hopeing it can be used as a throtle as well.

[Massey]

Blackjack, I have tried to bind the AR6000 to my R1 with Spektrum Pro module, No Joy. I also could not bind the surface Rx to my DX6

Massey

[Blackjack52]

Dang. It's a bad thing when a Mig-29 is trying to send one up your pipe, on your 6, and everyone's yelling "No Joy." Hey, we were at 500', and he was below us. No wonder. It's been a while since hearing that verbiage.

Thanks for the info. I have a heli with the DX6 system that I'm not using anymore and was curious. I didn't want to waist the time breaking down the heli rcvr, taking the DX2 rcvr out of my boat, then finding out it doesn't work.

[Rustbucket]

I was wondering can a DX 6 reciver be use on a 2 channel spectum ,? I know it can be done dealing with Futaba's ? Any one know of an answer? DON

[toesup]

Its possible to take the ratchet off the 'throttle' stick yourself..
To engage the 'throttle centering' (by spring) on the throttle stick, take the back off the transmitter and attach a return spring on the throttle stick (Look at the way the other stick is done), then disengage the ratchet (one screw) from the quadrant on the back of the stick. Its a simple process... ;)

I fly the reverse mode to everyone else here in the US (coming from GB) so had to reverse the throttle on my aircraft radio's when i bought them.. :o

[Umi_Ryuzuki]

When I first got my Spektrum it had a spring on the right stick.
I took that and the centering arm off, and installed a rachet bar from a
JR radio. So reversing it may be possible.

[green-boat]

For receiving antennas a very good rule of thumb is the bigger the better. That 'bigger' thingy also includes taller, not just longer. That holds 'true' for any band or frequency.
I'm glad someone besides me knows/ realizes this. I'm tired of debating with people that you can't lengthen your reciever antenna. I know that you don't want to shorten it if at all possible, you will reduce your range.

The longer the antenna, the more RF energy it will pick up, the greater the range.

Remember the long wire antennas that you used with your shortwave reciever, the longer the wire, the better the reception.

[Kmot]

From the Spektrum website:

IS ANY PERFORMANCE LOST DUE TO THE SHORT ANTENNA?
The highfrequency 2.4 GHz band requires a short antenna. The Spektrum receiver comes with an 8.5-inch antenna, and it’s every bit as effective as the really long antennas included with the 27 and 75MHz receivers. In fact, the included antenna is 8.5 inches long so that it can make its way out of a receiver box. According to the instructions, it can be cut to 3.6 inches for touring cars and other installations without any loss of performance. The antenna should be installed so it stands vertically, but it doesn’t have to come through the body at all.

[Blackjack52]

Thanks for reminding some of us about that.

It goes to show that the length/size of the antenna on the system it is being used for is dependant on the resonant frequency. So by lengthening an antenna on some applications, might actually be detrimental.

And this is also the reason why a shorter antena in my boat works better than the length it was with the micro antenna (hooked up to the Spektrum antenna). DX2 Spektrum antenna is 8", and I had an additional six with the micro antenna. Range checked my radio yesterday and it's better without the micro antenna. Hmmmm. I should have stuck with my own sense about adding the micro antenna last year. This is perhaps the reason why I had the inadvertant loss of signal problem, and not due to the batts.

[Massey]

I was wondering can a DX 6 reciver be use on a 2 channel spectum ,? I know it can be done dealing with Futaba's ? Any one know of an answer? DON



Read up a post or 2 from where this post is and you will get your answer.

Massey

[Shaun Hendricks]

Okay, I get it now. The receiver is really 2 recievers that have a voting system. THAT I understand!

[Yam916]

This is an FYI to LtDoc and anyone else who wants one. I picked a DX6 with the dual throttle mod off of ebay. I kept browsing and browsing for a regular DX6 for a good price and then one day....what the..is that what I think it is...holy! So they are out there.

Dimitri

[green-boat]

I bet that was the one that I had bid on and lost :mad: If I would have been home it would have a different story.

[Rustbucket]

ok that answers what I needed to know , DON

[Umi_Ryuzuki]

This is an FYI to LtDoc and anyone else who wants one. I picked a DX6 with the dual throttle mod off of ebay. I kept browsing and browsing for a regular DX6 for a good price and then one day....what the..is that what I think it is...holy! So they are out there.

Dimitri

I bet that was the one that I had bid on and lost If I would have been home it would have a different story.


And some of here know who that was, so it's too bad he didn't let us know, He might have gotten a rally good offer on that sale.

[Yam916]

Thats right Green-Boat, that was me. :D I was really quite surprised that it was only you and I interested in it. I guess most people looking at those DX6's are air plane guys. And I don't think the story would have changed if you where home, I would have paid alot higher then what I did. It would have been ugly!

Dimitri

[green-boat]

Considering what a new radio costs and that special joystick costs, it would have been interesting to say the least.

In a way it saved me money in the long run. I would have bought all new recievers for all the boats and converted everything over. You've helped me put it off, maybe something better will come down the road when Futaba comes out with their new radio. Who knows.

[Shaun Hendricks]

Ya wanna know the real kicker here? 2.4ghz DSS is the same for 802.11 networking and Bluetooth. Could you imagine using custom written software to control a bluetooth or wireless networking card off a PC or Laptop or PDA and running your boat, car or plane? Technologically, there is nothing preventing it from happening, or even an adapter card to plug your 'Spektrum' module into and letting your computer play away. It might be the solution to all the control problems boaters have...

You could literally run a battleship with independent guns, radars, searchlights, etc. All off a 4 channel receiver and a multiplexer on the other side. The PC would handle all the multiplexer encodings on the transmitter side.

Any super techno-geeks on the board? Your opportunity is knocking... LOL! :D

[green-boat]

I remember somewhere on one of the forums where someone was going to try just that. Now I wish I could just remember where I saw it.

[Ghost 2501]

basically rather than an x-tal as we know it you will get tx and rx sim cards,
would still be free but instead of 80, try about 8 million channels