HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Jul 15, 2012, 02:29 PM
Registered User
United Kingdom, England, Manchester
Joined Jun 2012
51 Posts
this is a photo of the screen after a 10 min flight,have i got a cause for concern or does all appear ok.

the only reason i ask is i only get 34 mtrs on this rec(ar9000) with range check but when i try another plane with an ar7000 i get well over 60 mtrs on range check, i know i should install telemetry in the model and see the results,

should i send the ar9000 rec back to spektrum for checking ??

thanks
digger951 is offline Find More Posts by digger951
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Jul 15, 2012, 04:20 PM
Electric Coolhunter
Thomas B's Avatar
United States, TX, Fort Worth
Joined Jun 2000
14,633 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by digger951 View Post
this is a photo of the screen after a 10 min flight,have i got a cause for concern or does all appear ok.

the only reason i ask is i only get 34 mtrs on this rec(ar9000) with range check but when i try another plane with an ar7000 i get well over 60 mtrs on range check, i know i should install telemetry in the model and see the results,

should i send the ar9000 rec back to spektrum for checking ??

thanks
Technically, it passed the range check and should cause no issues. The telemetry also shows that the RX is performing very well. But, I bet you can improve the RX range check performance in that model.

A little too soon to go as far as sending the RX in for service.

Have you tried rearranging your Rx installation and moving the satellites and the RX? I have greatly improved range check performance with some RX movement inside a model.

Move them away from any wire bundles or dense objects as much as is practical.

What is the model causing range difficulties? Any chance it might have carbon fiber in it?

The fact that an AR7000 has more range in another model does not mean much to the model with the 34m range check, given the vast differences between two given models.
Thomas B is offline Find More Posts by Thomas B
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: 2014 events and travel
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 04:22 PM
Air, Ground & Water
freechip's Avatar
Canada, ON, Rockland
Joined Aug 2008
24,347 Posts
0 holds is excellent.
Under 20 frames is normal I think from reading some info from manuals

Higher fades on DSMX is normal.
freechip is offline Find More Posts by freechip
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 04:27 PM
Registered User
Vienna, Austria
Joined Oct 2010
2,656 Posts
I would reposition the satellite connected to "B".

Which model and how far did you fly ?
Mukenukem is offline Find More Posts by Mukenukem
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 05:25 PM
Suspended Account
Rhode Island USA
Joined Aug 2010
5,350 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by freechip View Post
0 holds is excellent.
Under 20 frames is normal I think from reading some info from manuals

Higher fades on DSMX is normal.
Why is that?

VP
Victory Pete is offline Find More Posts by Victory Pete
Reply With Quote  (Disabled)
Old Jul 15, 2012, 05:50 PM
No bounce, No play.
davidmc36's Avatar
Canada, ON, Ottawa
Joined Oct 2010
3,694 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Victory Pete View Post
Why is that?

VP
Because the manufacturer says so.

"Flight Log Recording-Fades Higher than DSM2
Note that DSMX hops through the band while DSM2 finds two quiet channels and
remains on those channels. Consequently because DSMX operates on quiet and
noisy channels, itís common to have more Antenna Fades than when using DSM2,
when used in busy 2.4GHz environments. When taking flight log data readings, the
Frames and Hold Data are important and should be used a reference while Fades
are insignificant due to the nature of frequency hopping. A 10-minute flight will
typically result in less than 50 Frame Losses and no Holds."
davidmc36 is online now Find More Posts by davidmc36
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 06:18 PM
Registered User
richard hanson's Avatar
United States, UT, Salt Lake City
Joined Oct 2007
7,174 Posts
Yup-
I know I am just wasting space typing this -however- The DSM2 really is a better setup for most uses.

The argument about hopping superiority really relates to situations where LOTS of interferrence may be present -In our real world it ain't a issue
I use both and am presently doing extended range tests using a glider simply because I can see it at longer distances .
This week I am continueing the tests using the new 400 rx- It accepts the Flight log so I can compare rx performance with the 600 used last week-
It is pretty much routine so far and I really don't expect to see any issues
richard hanson is online now Find More Posts by richard hanson
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 06:27 PM
Registered User
United Kingdom, England, Manchester
Joined Jun 2012
51 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mukenukem View Post
I would reposition the satellite connected to "B".

Which model and how far did you fly ?
I cannot reposition sat plugged in to B because A and B are in the main receiver,it's an ar9000

And also the model was flown about 50 Mtrs out and a maximum of 70 mtrs high, the model is my trusty old Pheonix accipiter
digger951 is offline Find More Posts by digger951
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 06:38 PM
Canada, BC, Burnaby
Joined Sep 2010
40 Posts
When used in DSM2 mode, does each antenna use a different frequency to each channel or do they both transmit both frequencies to each channel ? (I hope this is clear)
Fricotin is offline Find More Posts by Fricotin
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 06:51 PM
No bounce, No play.
davidmc36's Avatar
Canada, ON, Ottawa
Joined Oct 2010
3,694 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by richard hanson View Post
....The DSM2 really is a better setup for most uses.

The argument about hopping superiority really relates to situations where LOTS of interferrence may be present -In our real world it ain't a issue
....
I would agree with the "it ain't a issue" part. I have never had a hint of a glitch or anything like it, now on my third season with DSM2.

Based on Spektrum's own advice when looking at the upgradability chart. They state that unless you are in a noisy environment or going to events where massive amounts of radios are going to be on, they say it is not worth bothering sending in my DX7 to upgrade to DSMX.

From the update page:

"DSM2 users who rarely, if ever, fly in big events or other exceptionally "noisy" 2.4GHz environments may find the DSM2 equipment they have now is all they will ever need."

Whether DSM2 is "better" would be a point of debate I think. I certainly had better RF performance with the -18 on DSMX vs th -7 on DSM2 (It was an apples and oranges comparison though since I am talking about two different airplanes and different amounts of Sat. Rx's). What was evident was the drop in fades on every antenna. It will be interesting to see the difference using the -18 on the same airplane, just in DSM2 mode, and compare whether the dual Tx antennae appear to improve the DSM2 performance.
davidmc36 is online now Find More Posts by davidmc36
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 07:30 PM
Fly low, fly fast.
Reaps's Avatar
United Kingdom, Scotland
Joined Dec 2005
63 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyKunz View Post
The next version of the STi app will allow you to open the files. The radio is a bit ahead of the other support software.

Andy
Could you nudge them to make a windows program to view the information and maybe create graphs etc? Even just an export to a csv would do.

Also it would be greatly apprieciated if you could get to work on exporting the gps information from the soon to be released gps module into gpx format? With that I can import it into google earth and see my flight track in 3d along with a timeline track which would be awesome.
Reaps is offline Find More Posts by Reaps
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2012, 07:51 PM
Electric Coolhunter
Thomas B's Avatar
United States, TX, Fort Worth
Joined Jun 2000
14,633 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by digger951 View Post
I cannot reposition sat plugged in to B because A and B are in the main receiver,it's an ar9000

And also the model was flown about 50 Mtrs out and a maximum of 70 mtrs high, the model is my trusty old Pheonix accipiter
You could reposition the B antenna by moving the entire RX....
Thomas B is offline Find More Posts by Thomas B
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: 2014 events and travel
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2012, 03:24 AM
Certified Propellerhead
Copenhagen, Denmark
Joined Mar 2001
320 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael Pedersen View Post
Two other planes (old and reliable), both equipped with AR600 receivers, has just been rebound to the DX18 instead of my old DX8. Nothing else has been touched in the planes. Both displayed several hundred antenna fades, and one even exceeded 100 frame losses on one flight. Still no holds at all.
They have never been anywhere near these numbers on my DX8. And as the only thing that has changed is the transmitter, I am inclined to blame the DX18.
Update:

Yesterday I was out again, this time with a Radian Pro (with an AR600 receiver).
The weather wasn't too cooperative, but I managed to get a 19 minute long flight. The result was 47 antenna fades, a nice and low number for this duration of flight. And 43 frame losses, which is well within acceptable specs.

However, the frame loss count in relation to the fades is quite high. I think that is what the DX18 does different from my DX8. I am used to frame losses being much lower than antenna fades.
Could it be that the new dual antenna setup on DX18 is more likely to result in frame losses? With one of the two antennas pointing directly at the airplane at all times (which I would never do with my DX8), I would suspect this could be the case. And if so, I have no worries anymore.
I may test that next weekend, taking my DX8 and having a flight with the antenna pointed straight at the airplane.

Now, if only the flight logger could display the number of consecutive frame losses during a flight, so I would know if I have been close to a Hold or not. That would be a wonderful information to have.
Mikael Pedersen is offline Find More Posts by Mikael Pedersen
Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2012, 05:34 AM
Suspended Account
Rhode Island USA
Joined Aug 2010
5,350 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael Pedersen View Post
Update:

Yesterday I was out again, this time with a Radian Pro (with an AR600 receiver).
The weather wasn't too cooperative, but I managed to get a 19 minute long flight. The result was 47 antenna fades, a nice and low number for this duration of flight. And 43 frame losses, which is well within acceptable specs.

However, the frame loss count in relation to the fades is quite high. I think that is what the DX18 does different from my DX8. I am used to frame losses being much lower than antenna fades.
Could it be that the new dual antenna setup on DX18 is more likely to result in frame losses? With one of the two antennas pointing directly at the airplane at all times (which I would never do with my DX8), I would suspect this could be the case. And if so, I have no worries anymore.
I may test that next weekend, taking my DX8 and having a flight with the antenna pointed straight at the airplane.

Now, if only the flight logger could display the number of consecutive frame losses during a flight, so I would know if I have been close to a Hold or not. That would be a wonderful information to have.
I was wondering about phase cancellations with the 2 antennas. My DX8 always have 0 frame losses and the fades are always under 50. I fly until my T-34 is a spec in the sky sometimes. I get the most fades when I fly areobatics.

VP
Victory Pete is offline Find More Posts by Victory Pete
Reply With Quote  (Disabled)
Old Jul 16, 2012, 05:56 AM
Registered User
Kambalunga's Avatar
Deutschland, Hessen, LA
Joined Jan 2009
1,208 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael Pedersen View Post
Update:

Yesterday I was out again, this time with a Radian Pro (with an AR600 receiver).
The weather wasn't too cooperative, but I managed to get a 19 minute long flight. The result was 47 antenna fades, a nice and low number for this duration of flight. And 43 frame losses, which is well within acceptable specs.

However, the frame loss count in relation to the fades is quite high. I think that is what the DX18 does different from my DX8. I am used to frame losses being much lower than antenna fades.
Could it be that the new dual antenna setup on DX18 is more likely to result in frame losses? With one of the two antennas pointing directly at the airplane at all times (which I would never do with my DX8), I would suspect this could be the case. And if so, I have no worries anymore.
I may test that next weekend, taking my DX8 and having a flight with the antenna pointed straight at the airplane.
Fades and frameloss are near equal with the AR600. A lower frame loss as fadeout is impossible with the AR600. The AR600 is a single RX with antenna switch. Fades and frame loss should equal or the frame loss slightly higher with a single RX.
Kambalunga is offline Find More Posts by Kambalunga
Last edited by Kambalunga; Jul 16, 2012 at 06:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion Spektrum DSM2 and the Nats - Question for Spektrum/JR users aeajr Sailplane Talk 25 May 29, 2012 04:14 PM
Sold Spektrum DX6 6-channel System with Spektrum AR6000 Receiver $50 shooboy Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 6 Dec 20, 2011 06:12 PM
Sold Spektrum DX6 6-channel System with Spektrum AR6000 Receiver $50 shooboy Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 4 Dec 14, 2011 08:30 PM
For Sale Spektrum & JR 2.4 Ghz DSM2 receivers for sale I have a sailplane sized Spektrum AR93 zaptherio Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 1 Nov 15, 2011 06:14 PM
Sold SPEKTRUM DX6i DSMX with Spektrum Ni-cads and charger- like new condition shooboy Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 6 Oct 19, 2011 05:59 AM