Originally Posted by PeterVRC

China New year... must be very soon I expect!!

FRsky FCC.... you would have to check with FRsky, or the FRsky thread Max. I am sure people would know.....
Wifi and Bluetooth on, and got some servo jitter - but it had to be close. And I am sure that all 2.4G would do the same in such a case... or worse.
.....

Ya apparently some of the older stuff is but most of the ER9X & FrSky most are saying isn't.

As for noise floor. That jitter is like having an ear bud of EMF in your ear vs on the other side of the house where you can't even hear it.
The problem in your, where it counts is that it can happen, who knows if this is JKs case, that the interference source is like concert speakers far away from you. From your position, its all quite, but as your aircraft gets closer to the concert speakers it starts having a harder time hearing anything.

Still we had them on top of the data center that I worked at a decade ago I still flew my 450 around them with no effect. I was trying to see how it impacted DSM2 at the time.

That's where frequency hoping helps if you can listen outside of the frequency range that the concert is playing in. Then that becomes like picking up on the English conversations in a crowded restaurant with many speaking various languages.
Its more difficult, like with a bunch of pilots all together, with everyone speaking the same language in the same restaurant talking all at the same time. And worse if the concert turned up their volume in the middle of all that. So ya bullet resistent, but not proof or the military would have no worries.

As for some of the manufacturers, smoke and mirrors and they have our dollars backing them to perpetuate the cycle getting more certs for mediocre innovation. ER9X proves it can be done but because they don't have our dollars, its harder for them to put up the money to certify a series of open sourced, pieced together items. That's where the problem may be. And if I can't use it, I just can't use it, even when it works. And some of the manufacturers know that continuing with status quo at full market price while their product devalues. Not my war, I just want everything for as little cost as possible. Selfish me

If the signal is strong enough, it doesn't matter what freqency it's on, it can overload the front-end of the Rx. At that point, all the fancy hopping schemes and filters are moot. If that's the case - find a new place to fly!

ER9X doesn't need cert. FrSky has the certificates on their website.

(ER9X and FrSky on a 16ch setup is in my Flanker )

Originally Posted by Odysis

If the signal is strong enough, it doesn't matter what freqency it's on, it can overload the front-end of the Rx. At that point, all the fancy hopping schemes and filters are moot. If that's the case - find a new place to fly!

ER9X doesn't need cert. FrSky has the certificates on their website.

(ER9X and FrSky on a 16ch setup is in my Flanker )

what the heck you do with 16 ch. ? I can see 15-1/2 ch...

At the moment - nothing

Eventually:
1 LH elevator
2 LH elevator (reduntant, on second Rx)
3 RH elevator
4 RH elevator
5 LH rudder
6 RH rudder
7 LH aileron
8 RH aileron
9 LH throttle
10 RH throttle
11 LH pitch vector
12 RH pitch vector
13 Rudder vector
14 Gear doors
15 Gear
16 Nose wheel steer

Overkill? Why yes, thanks for asking

Originally Posted by Odysis

If the signal is strong enough, it doesn't matter what freqency it's on, it can overload the front-end of the Rx. At that point, all the fancy hopping schemes and filters are moot. If that's the case - find a new place to fly!

ER9X doesn't need cert. FrSky has the certificates on their website.

(ER9X and FrSky on a 16ch setup is in my Flanker )

True dat... whichis why I said, if it were bullet proof the military would have nothing to worry about. So the question is what to look for to suspect a high noise floor.

As for the FrSky FCC Certs. did you match the posted certs with the actual modules that are in use or spoken of with the ER9X? I don't own any so I just looked across several conversations of various owners date 2012 where this was still all in play.
Trouble is every RX, every module, TX etc has to have approval to meet compliance so if several are still saying parts are still pending, I have to assume they're not referencing the posted certs. There is conversation where some said those are misleading but if you have better details, please some links.
Cause believe me I'd love cheap and working with robust features and compliance all in one package. I'm reviewing the Jeti but could save tonnes of coil with a FrSky if its all approved. Jeti is going through this with their DC and DS-16, every RX, Satillite RX etc. Some have got the approved DC-16 but don't have any approaved RXs to use with it yet. The DS is still in the works. At least the Jeti threads are posting the FCC certs for each device so you can tell what is or isn't. I'm finding it harder to sort through that on the ER9x/FrSky thread. So ya links if you know where they are.

I've been flying exclusively off a grass field and have been having the retract's cases cracking often. I suspect it's from the trunion slamming against the case's back from the stresses involved.

I'm running low on replacement pieces and came up with the idea to add aluminum plates to take the brunt of the slamming forces. The plates are handmade from 1/16" thick aluminum stock. See the photos for more.

I haven't had any problems with the plastic trunions cracking/breaking yet, but I'll be ordering some with metal trunions when the time comes.

Does anyone have some other ideas for beefing up their retract systems?

My main gear oleos are still tending to bend with a twist to the, "toe out," angle. I still haven't determined what part is actually twisting.

Is it only the mains? Or the Nose also?

Problems with them all. Useually it's the mains, but the last time the nose cracked.

Maxthrottle, I really procrastinated, but here's finally a video so you can see how the Turnigy nano-tech 5,000mAh 6s 25-50C performs. This video was of the tenth flight using this particular pack. I haven't noticed any drops in performance yet.

20130105 - Freewing Su-35 Flanker (4 min 7 sec)

That aluminium plate is one 'sort of' solution.....
Firstly there is the freeplay in the trunions - which is what you are stopping but.....

Whenever you 'strengthen' some area, you are just feeding the forces into another area. In this case into the mounts.
As long as a 'strengthening' stops the weak point you did it for, from getting damaged AND also the new area the forces go into, then all is well.

In the case of passing forces into the retract mounts, they will probably gfail over time. Glue breaks out etc.

When you have freeplay in this sort of area, it is actually a very USEUFUL thing, if harnessed correctly.
Not by blocking it, but by USING it to allow installation of an "energy absorber" rather than an "energy redirector" (like that plate is).
If you fit a damping system to the leg, you can absorb energy instead.

The problem was working out HOW to do that effectively in this case.
Things like.... a rubber/foam block in the retract wall to comrpess via the trunion (but not a great long term solution really). Or a 'ram rod' like the nose leg has, fed into a spring (like many have done for the nose leg). Because a spring has as good as indefinite lifespan, so it will keep on working 'forever'
It is just not overly easy to do for the mains - but it is possible to do.

So be wary of "solid stop" fixes, versus "Energy Absorbing" methods. Because energy absorbing is a many times better solution. Especially in this main gear legs case - because the freeplay assists in its implementation.

Hmmmm.... possibly a retract could have a 'compression pin' idea built into and onto it. A pin that comes into the trunion sidewall, to pass the trunion 'banging' out of the retract to a spring assembly external to the retract, but its assembly is fit onto the retract (bolted to it via a wrap around bracket that uses the trunion bushing thread for attachment. Change to using metal trunions for that is best.

This retract issue is something ALL aircraft suffer from almost!! They need to put a bit more effort and thought into implementing a decent energy absorbing mechanism onto retract themselves, which is actually quite easy to do, and not that big to add either!

hmmm, the 25C seemed to perform very well !!! Amazingly well.
And how do they like their job??? Hot?

Nice video, although im not sure if it's the camera speaker or what but your Su sounds different...almost like a muffled sound.

as for the retracts that's a nice lil mod, but it could also be from the compression of the trunnion brass hitting the housing of the retract. The only way to find out is to fly it with your aluminum support, other than that the only thing is to go to a more expensive retract like the Eflite metal 25-46 retracts. Or wait for the new FMS all metal retracts to be released which are slightly larger and equivalent to the eflite 60-120.

Originally Posted by PeterVRC

hmmm, the 25C seemed to perform very well !!! Amazingly well.
And how do they like their job??? Hot?

agree and will follow how they hold up.

Ya I posted using the metal plates off my old RCL retracts which were the original to these pz15090 while back after one person suggested the same using wood blocks.

• Only I added an L bracket to the same plat to brace the strut a little further down; not enough to be visible.
  
• metal trunnions ...
  
• others have added trailing link struts
  
• Toe out, I reset my strut pins to toe in a little expecting the drag of the grass to pull them straight. It tracks straight at least.
  
• the sliding grub I replaced with a modified 3mm nut with thread only in the lower strut leg but a smooth peg to travel in the slot on either side.
  
• Changed out the tires to Park Zone P-40s and added a metal sleeve to the axles with hardened steel socket nuts for axles.
  
• added small washers to the back screws of the retract to angle the struts slightly forward that the shock takes more of the compression.

For the nose strut.... well Pete said it. It takes a different kind of shock because the strut is longer. For that I added the shock trailing link. There is impact force and constant force. The jerky impact is what's doing the damage compared to the continuous drag from the grass. The mains work better because they share the load while the nose takes all the leveraged force of the bouncing nose. So training and top force springs do well to dampen that impact shock.

Yes, the batteries come down quite warm. But I would say they are borderline hot. I've heated and puffed quite a few batteries in my experience and these seem to be holding well. Not near as hot as I've had in the past. I'll have to bring my temp meter next time I fly, then I can eat my words, LOL.

I was just looking at my nose gear strut and had a thought, two more of those would be nice for the mains. But I didn't pull out a ruler and compare the lengths. I didn't like the idea of the tires hanging so far down when retracted.

I like the idea of energy dissapation and the spacers to angle the mains forward. As far as energy dissapation though, you have less than 1mm to work with where the trunion meets the backplate. That doesn't present for many options. Anythin that would add resistance when the gear nears extension will draw more amps from the BEC, and I REALLY don't want to do that after my past fiasco with burning up BECs.

Aluminum plates it is for now. I suspect the next weak failing point will be the plastic trunions.

Intersect the failure point at the x-road before it bites you. I say replace the trunnions asap