So then it can be programmed to use, say, the "throttle" channel for an aileron then, right?...since obviously y-harnesses can't be used if full trailing edge control desired.

Originally Posted by cityevader

So then it can be programmed to use, say, the "throttle" channel for an aileron then, right?...since obviously y-harnesses can't be used if full trailing edge control desired.

Generally, with the higher end radios, like the A9, the physical relationship between a channel number and a device, like a stick, can be moved around.

Usually aileron (first one anyone), elevator and rudder remain fixed in their stick positions. Throttle can be anyware which frees up that left stick for other use.

On Hitec and Futaba channel 3 is the default throttle channel so many pilots mistakenly believe that the left stick is channel 3, but it isn't. It is a device to which channel 3 is connected by default. But if you move the throttle (channel 3) to a switch, the stick becomes an input device that can be associated with another channel or with a mix that may impact many channels.

So, on my Futaba 9C and probably on the Aurora, my left stick controls crow which moves channels 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 which is alieron, elevator, flap, flap, aileron. channel 3, if needed, is assigned somewhere else. Or you can put the wire from an ESC into another channel and use that channel to control the motor. I could put the ESC into channel 8 for example and assign it to a slider, a dial or a switch.

As far as training edge control goes, as long as you don't need the flaps to follow the ailerons as extended ailerons, you can have full camber, reflex, launch mix (winch/HS) , and crow/butterfly with the flaps on a Y cable.

Specific question:
In shopping for a rx for the A9, with the goal of full-span trailing edge control so flaps can be ailerons and ailerons can be flaps, without using y-harnesses, would a 7ch rx be adequate or would a 9ch be required.

Originally Posted by cityevader

Specific question:
In shopping for a rx for the A9, with the goal of full-span trailing edge control so flaps can be ailerons and ailerons can be flaps, without using y-harnesses, would a 7ch rx be adequate or would a 9ch be required.

You only need 6 channels for that.

Chris

So the rx outputs are not "fixed" at all then and can be programmed to do any function desired?
Good to know when shopping for a used system with receivers, as I'd need the smallest rx necessary in order to fit in a slender fuselage.

As of 9/26 281 people have responded. But the ratios are holding pretty well:

Futaba Radio/Futaba RF............... 15.66%
Futaba Radio/Other RF................. 4.98%
JR Radio/JR RF ............................ 0.23%
JR Radio/Other RF........................ 6.76%
Spektrum Radio/Spektrum RF...... 10.68%
Spektrum Radio/Other RF ............ 0.36%
Airtronics Radio/Airtronics RF ....... 16.37%
Airtronics Radio/Other RF ............. 0.71%
Hitec Radio/Hitec RF .................... 4.59%
Hitec Radio/Other RF ..................... 0.36%
Multiplex Radio/Multiplex RF ........... 2.14%
Multiplex Radio/Other RF ................ 3.56%
Graupner Radio/Graupner .............. 1.78%
Graupner Radio/Other RF ............... 1.42%
Turnigy/TH9X Radio ........................ 2.49%
Turnigy/TH9X Radio, Other RF ........ 3.56%
Other Radio/Same brand RF............ 0 0%
Other Radio/different RF .................. 0.36%


Of the top 5, JR owners are the ones most likely to be using a third party RF system. Approximately 32% of the JR users who responded are using a non-JR RF system. . It is possible some of these are using Spektrum modules, which work with JR receivers, and may have answered as using a non-JR module. It should be noted that there is a HUGE pool of module based JR radios out there which are easy to switch to third party RF. It should also be noted that there are more third party options for these radios than for many other brands so JR pilots would seem to have a wider range of choices. So, does this reflect dissatisfaction with the JR/Spektrum system or are pilots opting for third party system to access lower cost receivers or features not available from JR?


Futaba owners are the second most likely to be using a third party RF system. Approximately 24% of Futaba users responding are using a third party RF system. Like JR, there is a HUGE pool of module based Futaba radios out there which are easy to switch to third party RF. And, like JR, it should also be noted that there are more third part options for these radios than for many other brands so Futaba pilots have a wide range of choices. So, does this reflect dissatisfaction with the Futaba RF system or are pilots opting for third party systems to access lower cost receivers or features Futaba does not offer? As many will recall, even in the 72 MHz world, some Futaba users were using Hitec synth modules.

Hitec likewise has a very large pool of module based radios out there. However, only 2% of responding Hitec users changed to non-Hitec RF systems. Many of the third party modules made to fit Futaba radios also fit Hitec radios so Hitec users have a pretty wide choice of third party modules and options. What does that tell us about Hitec owners? Why are they less likely to switch?

Airtronics also has a large pool of module based radios, but it seems the third party module makers pay less attention to Airtronics as a market. Only about 4% of Airtronics users have switched. There are third party RF systems out there that can fit Airtronics but the choice is much more limited than for JR, Futaba or Hitec. Shall we see that as a statement by satisfied customers or the lack of options which are available to Futaba, JR and Hitec owners?

None of Spektrum's radios are module based so it is much harder to switch a Spektrum radio to a third party RF system, but there are kits that will let you make the change if you are willing to solder. We see 3% have moved to another RF system. So, are Spektrum users happy with their RF system for full house gliders or are they more locked in due to the challenge of making a change?

One listed, where third party RF exceeds the native brand, is the Turnigy/FlySky and the other labels on this radio. About 59% have changed to a third party RF system. Is the native Turnigy/FlySky system not suitable for full house gliders or did users change for options not available from the native Turnigy FlySky RF system in order to use them for full house gliders?


Edit: 9/28 - Just noted that Multiplex also has more users with third party RF than native. Sorry for the oversight. I don't have any specific comments here as I don't know the Multiplex line very well.


If anyone has comments about my analysis I would encourage you to post. I have no loyalty or vested interest in any of these systems. I am personally a Futaba user but I don’t think that really influences my analysis.


Of all of them the Hitec really sticks out in that these radio systems are just as capable of being switched to third party RF system as the other top brands, but few have done it. I will note that, when RCModelReviews did a "shoot-out" of available RF module systems, Hitec tied for first place suggesting they had an excellent RF system. You can read the report here. http://www.rcmodelreviews.com/2.4ghzshootout.shtml

So, has Hitec delivered a quality RF system AND found the right price point to keep its users loyal? My observation is that Hitec receivers are typically lower in cost than JR, Futaba or Airtronics receivers. What do you think is the reason for this apparent loyalty by Hitec users?

People pick their radio for its price and/or features typically. In the 72 MHz world you could choose from a variety of brands of receivers that would work with your native RF system. This is starting to occur in the 2.4 GHz market as well.

If you don't like the RF system in your radio, you have choices. In the 2.4 GHz world you can swap out your RF system for a different one to have access to third party receivers. And we are starting to see compatible receivers emerge so you can keep your RF system but have access to compatible receivers.

We will see how the RC Radio/RF system market evolves, but this survey has brought out some interesting results.

Originally Posted by aeajr

Is the native Turnigy/FlySky system not suitable for full house gliders or did users change for options not available from the native Turnigy FlySky RF system in order to use them for full house gliders?

FlySky RF lacks failsafe. It doesn't have a range check mode. Receivers are big. Receiver antennas are quite fragile. Performance can be quite variable depending on the actual unit you have. FlySky sometimes do undocumented and potentially unwanted changes (latest TX modules set all servos to center when they don't receive a signal from the radio, causing motor starts when the radio is actually trying to prevent you from causing that situation with a "throttle not idle" warning),...

It works, but really isn't a good, trustable solution. And when you can buy an FrSky plug-in module that solves all of these, works awesome and adds telemetry for $25, there are few reasons to stick with it.

Just thought I'd add some input.. I was just talking to someone close to Hobby People about their Airtronics radios. He stated that they will be dropping the prices of their receivers a bit more.

I consider the Airtronics an excellent choice due to the nice programming, good looks and reliable performance. But I don't like the high prices on receivers. They will still be spendy, but they are going in the right direction.

Hitec users seem to be a little different then most radio systems. I think they are the most loyal users of a given radio system. For many folks, they have been on nothing but Hitec for decades, and have been very happy with their equipment. Where the other brands tend to see folks jumping in and out. Hitec doesn't make a lot of changes to their lineup, and always makes a solid radio. They lost some customers since it took them so long to switch over to 2.4, but in the long run, they produced an excellent system, and did not force their customers to upgrade equipment 2 or 3 times. (I have a steady flow of customers that call me and are excited that they can upgrade their OLD Hitec gear to 2.4 for very little money. They just love their old radios. )

At least that is my take on some of this.

-Wayne

Originally Posted by Rotozuk

Just thought I'd add some input.. I was just talking to someone close to Hobby People about their Airtronics radios. He stated that they will be dropping the prices of their receivers a bit more.

-Wayne

That's good to hear. I was a little hesitant to go Airtronics because of the cost of receivers. It seams a little backwards to put a $50 rx in a plane you made with $5 of dollar tree foam. Also they don't have any receivers that run on single cell lipos which is a little annoying as I have some kits that are designed for 1s lipos. I recently got a Eclipse 7 and I'm putting a FrSky module in it. For now I just plan on using it with my 1s planes but I might start using it elseware. A receiver with telemitry for $25 is really appealing.

You mean $21:
http://www.alofthobbies.com/frsky-6-...telemetry.html

Originally Posted by Rotozuk

Just thought I'd add some input.. I was just talking to someone close to Hobby People about their Airtronics radios. He stated that they will be dropping the prices of their receivers a bit more.

I consider the Airtronics an excellent choice due to the nice programming, good looks and reliable performance. But I don't like the high prices on receivers. They will still be spendy, but they are going in the right direction.

Hitec users seem to be a little different then most radio systems. I think they are the most loyal users of a given radio system. For many folks, they have been on nothing but Hitec for decades, and have been very happy with their equipment. Where the other brands tend to see folks jumping in and out. Hitec doesn't make a lot of changes to their lineup, and always makes a solid radio. They lost some customers since it took them so long to switch over to 2.4, but in the long run, they produced an excellent system, and did not force their customers to upgrade equipment 2 or 3 times. (I have a steady flow of customers that call me and are excited that they can upgrade their OLD Hitec gear to 2.4 for very little money. They just love their old radios. )

At least that is my take on some of this.

-Wayne

I fly with a guy in the Eastern Soaring League who has a JR 9303 with a Hitec 2.4 module in it for at least 2 years. He swears by it as being solid as a rock.

Also fly with ESL pilots on FrSky in their JRs. They are very happy too. Love the radio and love the FrSky system.

And we fly them way high and way far out in the ESL.

Originally Posted by UberZogster

That's good to hear. I was a little hesitant to go Airtronics because of the cost of receivers. It seams a little backwards to put a $50 rx in a plane you made with $5 of dollar tree foam. Also they don't have any receivers that run on single cell lipos which is a little annoying as I have some kits that are designed for 1s lipos. I recently got a Eclipse 7 and I'm putting a FrSky module in it. For now I just plan on using it with my 1s planes but I might start using it elseware. A receiver with telemitry for $25 is really appealing.

All the ATX Rx run just fine on 1s
Dave

What does ATX stand for? I can't find anyting related to rc with a google search.

I was looking at the 8 channel rx.
http://www.alofthobbies.com/frsky-d8...telemetry.html

I ordered my module and recevers from aloft hobbies and got them 2 days later.

ATX= Airtronics

Well they all say 4.8-6 volts and I was advised not to run them on a 1s lipo.

Either way the price was right for the Eclipse 7 (free) and FrSky stuff. The module and 2 recevers were the same as one airtronics recever. As long as it works I don't really care if it is name brand.