This is just my opinion, but at my club field I feel that there are now MORE crashes with the almost complete use of 2.4 systems than we used to see before the advent of 2.4. Every (non pilot induced) crash I've witnessed has been an apparent "lockout". The plane flies into the ground while the pilot has absolutely NO control of it. It's always on Spektrum (admittedly the highest percentage by far at our field) I'm not discounting the distinct possibility that other brands can do the same, but I've not seen it or heard of it at my club field. I personally have pulled my Spektrum receivers from most of my planes and now use Airtronics except for a few small parkflyers, and indoor planes still on Spektrum.

Dave

Originally Posted by davecee

This is just my opinion, but at my club field I feel that there are now MORE crashes with the almost complete use of 2.4 systems than we used to see before the advent of 2.4. Every (non pilot induced) crash I've witnessed has been an apparent "lockout".

Dave

I could not disagree more. Think about this - if people were crashing more - why on earth would they go to 2.4GHz? I feel more connected, more locked in that my best day on 72MHz. I can't believe how much better the 2.4 RF arena has been.

After many years of flying 72Mhz I am so glad to be done with glitches, mistakes where other pilots turn on YOUR channel, interference from industrial use and noise generated RF issues.

Dave - there are plenty of 72MHz systems available - have at it.

....but there is a reason you will then be in the tiny minority.

Mike

Any report such as this with no actual knowledge of why a crash occurs really offers no help to others .
Simply noting the crash occurs using Spektrum is also far too vague to give insight on to what is actually occuring.
If you beleive there is a reason why the crash occurs - try to gather info on -model radio battery used etc..
Check into the particulars of the crashes - then note the common factors .

Both of you are missing the point. I'm not saying 72 is better than 2.4. I'm not saying I know what is causing the crashes. I'm not making any judgements or accusations or "hate" of a brand. These are just my observations, and my actions. Should I not make such a post if it doesn't meet your criteria? I would think that general honest observations would be OK. I'm not about to try to diagnose the reasons for what I see. I see it, I learn from it and I take action I feel is appropriate for me.

Dave

BTW, I don't fly 72.

Dave you can post what you want.

What you say is you switched from Spektrum due to the number of crashes. You have gone to Airtronics. Great.

You are saying there are more crashes on 2.4GHz. That seems to indicate you think it was "better" in the old days. Great - have at it.

But what you miss is RC pilots crash airplanes and heli's. It is a part of the hobby.

Most of those guys don't want to blame the #1 reason so they say - I got locked out, it gliched, brownout.

In reality I know the #1 reason we crash - the Pilot.

My very last crash was caused by my radio. It was doing exactly what I asked it to do (I flubbed and set negative expo instead of positive!). My other most recent crashes were orientation issues (that little stryker is fast and gets upside down quickly), me going into the wrong model and reversing ailerons then having reversed ailerons because I DIDN'T CHECK AT PRE-FLIGHT all me. You would think after 34 years of flying - I would be smart but I make mistakes.

One mistake I don't make is to blame my equipment.

So post as you wish - but when you make posts about the reliability of 2.4GHz RF plan on getting called out.

Originally Posted by pda4you

I could not disagree more.
Mike

Think about this, I'm reporting what I see. Are you saying I'm NOT seeing what I report?

Dave

Originally Posted by pda4you

Dave you can post what you want.

Thanks for allowing that.

What are say is you switched from Spektrum due to the number of crashes. You have gone to Airtronics. Great.

I agree, it's great.

You are saying there are more crashes on 2.4GHz. That seems to indicate you think it was "better" in the old days. Great - have at it.

Nope, that's not what I said, I dion't think it was "better in the old days. 2.4 has been a real boon to the hobby. I love it and certainly don't want to go back.

But what you miss is RC pilots crash airplanes and heli's. It is a part of the hobby.

Who knew?

Most of those guys don't want to blame the #1 reason so they say - I got locked out, it gliched, brownout.

That's human nature I guess.

One mistake I don't make is to blame my equipment.

So post as you wish - but when you make posts about the reliability of 2.4GHz RF plan on getting called out.

Called out? What on Earth do you mean by that. Are you saying I didn't see what I've stated?

Dave

Yes I am saying that 2.4GHz is MORE reliable than 72MHz. You said you see more crashes now. 1+1=2

Notice they've all been on one brand. Read my initial post again. I fly 2.4 exclusively. I did not in any way say that 2.4 is unreliable.

Dave

Why does everybody hate Chris? Cause he's the best.

This applies here too.

lol

Now Robbie, don't be that way.

Originally Posted by davecee

This is just my opinion, but at my club field I feel that there are now MORE crashes with the almost complete use of 2.4 systems than we used to see before the advent of 2.4. Every (non pilot induced) crash I've witnessed has been an apparent "lockout". The plane flies into the ground while the pilot has absolutely NO control of it. It's always on Spektrum (admittedly the highest percentage by far at our field) I'm not discounting the distinct possibility that other brands can do the same, but I've not seen it or heard of it at my club field. I personally have pulled my Spektrum receivers from most of my planes and now use Airtronics except for a few small parkflyers, and indoor planes still on Spektrum.

Dave

I have seen many DSM2 crashes too, also "lockouts" (total loss of control)
50% I disregard as poor installation etc. but the numbers are too high
to account for all.

I still see pilot's pointing Tx Antennas (All 2.4 systems)
directly at 'planes. I explain to them why they shouldn't .

I also see 2.4 Rx antennas too close together,not at 90 degrees, near wiring and running parallel to long servo leads,carbon rods etc.
again I explain why they shouldn't do this.

Many DSM2 crashes I have seen have been close in ,within 60ft
again total loss of control.
On checking their equipment it works fine ....... and is correctly installed

The last was a friends Trex 500 ( I built the heli. installed his gear and full setup)
It flew fine , he had many happy flights.

One day Total loss of control, again close in around 30ft range
Luckily no one was hurt. I checked his Radio system afterwards (JR DSM2)
no problem found .... another lockout.

Suffice to say, he lost faith in DSM2 and now runs Futaba with Freesky Telemetry module.

DSM2 is flawed IMHO better systems are here NOW inc. DSMX

Yep I see the Spektrum hate - it was easy to pick up. Since Spektrum OWNs the market I get that. When you have 80+% of the market you have more guys crashing on Spekky....

What is the percentage of Spektrum at your field - Dave?

Originally Posted by pda4you

Yep I see the Spektrum hate - it was easy to pick up. Since Spektrum OWNs the market I get that. When you have 80+% of the market you have more guys crashing.

What is the percentage of Spektrum at your field?

REALLY? Reporting what we see is hate?
Well, if I'm a hater you must be a ...........FANBOY
Probably 80%

Dave

You guys just don't want to get it. With dsm2 in certain environments it can be a problem. Picking channels n the ground (2) and then getting up in the air where there may be lot of noise is not the swiftest idea for a design.
Where it's relatively quiet it will work. I fly where it is quiet, rf wise but I still would rather depend on more than 2 channels. Big models on dsm2 can be dangerous.
On dsmx, hitec, futaba, dmss, etc. , not so much.
Don't have to be an engineer to figure that out.
If you fly in a relatively quiet environment you probably are just fine.
I don't comprehend people who argue it's safe..works here...is more valid than, it appears unsafe, doesn't appear to be 100% reliable here.
Both arguments are probably accurate.
Should have had right at the time of posting......IMNSHO...there, now the above is OK.