HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Aug 27, 2007, 07:14 AM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2005
284 Posts
Discussion
Can a satellite receiver be connected to main XPS 8/10 channels receiver ?

I might be out of date here, but can you nowadays connect a satellite receiver to one main XPS 8/10 channels receiver ?


Thank you
JF.
jellyfish is offline Find More Posts by jellyfish
Last edited by jellyfish; Aug 27, 2007 at 08:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Aug 27, 2007, 08:53 AM
You can call me FANBOY!
Goodlettsville, TN
Joined Sep 2006
3,058 Posts
Satellite Rxs are in the pipeline but not avialable yet. Of course they arent necessary unless you just like ling or want to run dual Rxs for power.
chrisf testpilot is offline Find More Posts by chrisf testpilot
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 08:19 PM
Registered User
United States, FL, Coral Springs
Joined May 2007
66 Posts
Chris,

I thought the 'extra' receivers could fill in any dead spots that the main receiver couldn't see. For instance if something was blocking the main receiver (engine, CF etc) the secondary receiver(s) that would be mounted in different positions would still 'see' the signal?

I for one know that Jim would sell a lot more systems if we had receiver diversity like the other brand. I know of a couple guys right now (I just left them at the hobby shop) that are about to jump on the 2.4Ghz bandwagon but are going to go with Spektrum because of the multiple receiver system.
I couldn't convince them that the multiple receiver option was a waste...they just felt better knowing that they had multiple receivers....just in case!
martinan is offline Find More Posts by martinan
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 08:46 PM
You can call me FANBOY!
Goodlettsville, TN
Joined Sep 2006
3,058 Posts
Thats the difference, with Spektrum its a necessity and Xtremelink its not. Its a security blanket for people who think they need it because of marketing propaganda. There are plenty of people using it in jets, helis, and giant scale that havent had any issues without having mulitple Rxs. From what has been said its being done to fulfill a want, not a need. If it needed it it would have been that way from the beginning.

You are right though about what diversity is for. It just really isnt needed on this case. But, the customer is always right I guess.
chrisf testpilot is offline Find More Posts by chrisf testpilot
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 10:10 PM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2005
284 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisf testpilot
Thats the difference, with Spektrum its a necessity and Xtremelink its not. Its a security blanket for people who think they need it because of marketing propaganda. There are plenty of people using it in jets, helis, and giant scale that havent had any issues without having mulitple Rxs. From what has been said its being done to fulfill a want, not a need. If it needed it it would have been that way from the beginning.

You are right though about what diversity is for. It just really isnt needed on this case. But, the customer is always right I guess.

it might sound wired, but jets will pass quicker any dead spots, where gliders, which are full with carbon, and are moving much slower in relation to the TX, will most likely will lock out the receiver.

and I also have freinds which are buying as we speak Spe*****m because they offer satellites.. i for one likes the idea that i can have one or two more RX in the wing ( located near the aeliron servos ) ..
jellyfish is offline Find More Posts by jellyfish
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 10:15 PM
Registered User
United States, FL, Coral Springs
Joined May 2007
66 Posts
Chris,

I think this is what 'Jellyfish' may be hinting at: Please see Jim's answer at the bottom of the page to a similar question a while back.
The reliabilty portion may be of special note. I know it may not be necessary, but it could be if....the main receiver is buried in fuselage, then a satelite receiver could be placed in the tail or something to provide coverage. I for one would 'feel' better knowing that just in case I had a poor main receiver installation location that I could back it up with another smaller receiver mounted up high in the tail or something. But hey that's just me.

I'm glad I went with XPS because I knew about the spherical radiation pattern, but do we know what the Spektrum or Futaba patterns look like?
Are they even close to spherical?













JimDrew
Xtreme Power Systems


Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lake Havasu, AZ
Posts: 3,101 OK, let me clarifiy a few things...

We are going to give full receivers the ability to share with another full receiver. This way you could have two 8 channel receivers operating at the same time, some channels in "stereo" while others are individual. The channel mapping will help determine this. In this case, everything is bi-directional. We should actually be able to add as many receivers as you like, each bound to the same transmitter. A link cable between the receivers will be necessary to accomplish this.

We will also have satellite receivers (which have no servo control ability) available.

If you were to place a satellite receiver in the wing tip or tail, you could improve the reliability of the system if you had large metal or carbon objects and you were flying very far away. This would reduce or eliminate the chance of having all of the recievers blocked by the objects. Is it necessary? Thousands of systems currently running now prove that it is not, but for those who would like the ultimate protection, this would do it.
martinan is offline Find More Posts by martinan
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 10:35 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,820 Posts
I think the biggest reason why people will want these is more for a freedom of installation. You can treat the satellite receiver as an external antenna. You could mount the main receiver where ever you like, perhaps not in the most optimal position. It will probably work most if not all of the time, but a satellite receiver could be mounted just about anywhere as it is very small (1.45" x 1.07" x .43") and would make sure the system had better "ears".
JimDrew is online now Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 10:56 PM
You can call me FANBOY!
Goodlettsville, TN
Joined Sep 2006
3,058 Posts
Quote:
.they just felt better knowing that they had multiple receivers....just in case!
Like all the guys who run dual Rxs in giant scale and large imac planes. Its a comfort thing. And the "other" guys have beaten it into everyone that diversity is necessary for 2.4. The installation part would be nice in some scale planes where space and "best" practice may not be acheivable, but is still something necessitated but the user not the system. Of course that is one of the reasons I am a fanboy, the masses get what they want
chrisf testpilot is offline Find More Posts by chrisf testpilot
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 08:50 AM
Registered User
United States, FL, Coral Springs
Joined May 2007
66 Posts
Is there anything on the web from Spektrum or Futaba regarding their radiation pattern? Is it close to XPS?





[QUOTE=martinan]Chris,

I'm glad I went with XPS because I knew about the spherical radiation pattern, but do we know what the Spektrum or Futaba patterns look like?
Are they even close to spherical?
martinan is offline Find More Posts by martinan
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 09:17 AM
You can call me FANBOY!
Goodlettsville, TN
Joined Sep 2006
3,058 Posts
You could pull the data sheets for the Cypress CYWUSB6953, thats the RF chips the Spektrum is using. Futaba we will probably never know, their stuff is proprietary.
chrisf testpilot is offline Find More Posts by chrisf testpilot
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 11:09 AM
Registered User
United States, FL, Coral Springs
Joined May 2007
66 Posts
Thanks Chris, I'll give it a shot!
martinan is offline Find More Posts by martinan
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 11:45 AM
You can call me FANBOY!
Goodlettsville, TN
Joined Sep 2006
3,058 Posts
You will notice when looking at the specs that the Maxstream chips have a much higher sensitivity than the Cypress chips. This is one of the big reasons why antenna diversity isnt as important with Xtremelink as it is Spektrum. Since they didnt use mulitple Rxs I would take a shot and say Futaba did dual antennas as much for marketing reasons as technical. Of course we will never know since Futaba would probably never divulge that information.
chrisf testpilot is offline Find More Posts by chrisf testpilot
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 11:59 AM
BANNED!!!
soholingo's Avatar
Laurel, MD
Joined May 2001
12,686 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew
I think the biggest reason why people will want these is more for a freedom of installation. You can treat the satellite receiver as an external antenna. You could mount the main receiver where ever you like, perhaps not in the most optimal position. It will probably work most if not all of the time, but a satellite receiver could be mounted just about anywhere as it is very small (1.45" x 1.07" x .43") and would make sure the system had better "ears".
Right on Jim!! With 72 mhz RX, you can route the antenna around carbon issues and out the fuse early. Remote receivers or longer antennas allow us similar functionality. The quick reboot of your system probably over comes some of the concerns, but you don't want to lose a plane due to a failed link.
soholingo is offline Find More Posts by soholingo
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 12:18 PM
Proud to eat Kraut ;-)
Julez's Avatar
Germany
Joined Dec 2003
5,291 Posts
[QUOTE=martinan]Is there anything on the web from Spektrum or Futaba regarding their radiation pattern? Is it close to XPS?





Quote:
Originally Posted by martinan
Chris,

I'm glad I went with XPS because I knew about the spherical radiation pattern, but do we know what the Spektrum or Futaba patterns look like?
Are they even close to spherical?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisf testpilot
You could pull the data sheets for the Cypress CYWUSB6953, thats the RF chips the Spektrum is using. Futaba we will probably never know, their stuff is proprietary.
I am sorry chris, but you should be advised, that the radiation pattern depends on the antenna system in use, not on the chip creating a signal.

I explained this whole "spherical" thing here and here in the best way I could.

In a nutshell, an antenna with a spherical radiation pattern in all axes does not exist. It is a physical impossibility.

XPS antennas are not more "spherical" than Spektrum's, Fasst's, Assan's or any conventional 72MHz system's antennas.

Sorry to rain your parade,

Julez
Julez is offline Find More Posts by Julez
Last edited by Julez; Aug 28, 2007 at 12:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 12:34 PM
You can call me FANBOY!
Goodlettsville, TN
Joined Sep 2006
3,058 Posts
You are correct, but that doesnt mean they are all using the same antennas, the Tx antennas may be close but that doesnt mean the Rx antennas are.

It may be impossible, but it can still be close. And you cant definitively say that its not more so than one or another without having measurements from each device. So its pointless to keep arguing it one way or the other. The fact of the matter is whether its possible or not XPS works without having multiple antennas where as the others do not. Its that simple.
chrisf testpilot is offline Find More Posts by chrisf testpilot
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question Can ESC and Receiver be mounted in close proximity Sctholson Micro Helis 1 May 04, 2007 10:20 PM
Discussion Can a Nano Receiver be used on a Trex XL? muscleflex Mini Helis 16 Jun 17, 2006 04:52 PM
Question Can a 27mhz receiver be changed to 72 mhz? Sparkorama Electric Plane Talk 5 Jan 29, 2006 05:17 PM
Question Can the Hitec Receiver be fixed? Shogun Radios 1 Aug 25, 2005 02:55 PM
Can two BEC ESC's be connected together? n3jpu Sport Planes 10 Jan 30, 2002 12:04 PM