HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Nov 22, 2008, 06:00 AM
Registered User
Joined Jan 2008
1 Posts
Discussion
One Tx and two Rx 2.4GHz

Hi,
Just a quick question. I'm trying to design a radio remote system for a kite video set-up. Is it possible to program a 2.4GHz Tx to run (bind) 2 Rx's at the same time? One Rx at kite running channels 1, 2, 3, and the other Rx at ground level for winch on channel 4 (or 5 or 6 etc).
Cheers
Iain.
Designsync is offline Find More Posts by Designsync
Last edited by Designsync; Nov 22, 2008 at 08:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Nov 22, 2008, 07:41 AM
Proud to eat Kraut ;-)
Julez's Avatar
Germany
Joined Dec 2003
4,972 Posts
Yes, this is possible with Fasst, and also with Spektrum I believe. But both RXes will always give out all channels, so you will have to use a 6ch RX also if you only want to use ch6.

You can try the new JETI system, here you can use 4ch RXes, and program channel 8 to pin 1, if you like.
Julez is offline Find More Posts by Julez
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2008, 12:13 PM
Will fly for food
Maryland
Joined Sep 2004
8,424 Posts
Yes, you can bind two Rxes to a Spektrum Tx. Only caveat is they both have to be DSM (AR/BR6000) or DSM2 (all other Rxes).
Pinecone is offline Find More Posts by Pinecone
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2008, 05:09 PM
Registered User
Kings Park, New York
Joined Jan 2005
1,236 Posts
I'm curious about this too. How would you bind two Rx's to the same Tx and same model number? Is it as simple as: 1) power and bind the first Rx, and then 2) power and bind the second Rx?

Once both are bound, do they simply provide multiple outputs for the same channels? If so, why would someone do that and not just use y-connectors and aileron extensions, etc.?
Ken
kenmalecki is offline Find More Posts by kenmalecki
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2008, 06:59 PM
Registered User
pilotpete2's Avatar
The Northeast Kingdom, Vermont
Joined Jun 2004
5,084 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenmalecki
Is it as simple as: 1) power and bind the first Rx, and then 2) power and bind the second Rx?

Once both are bound, do they simply provide multiple outputs for the same channels? If so, why would someone do that and not just use y-connectors and aileron extensions, etc.?
Ken
Right on all counts
The reason that this is done is to provide a level of receiver redundancy on very large, high dollar models. In case one receiver fails you only lose one aileron, one elevator, and if you have two servos on the rudder, that will also work .
Pete
pilotpete2 is offline Find More Posts by pilotpete2
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2008, 08:36 PM
Flys with Thumbs
Danal Estes's Avatar
Frisco, TX, USA
Joined Sep 2001
1,858 Posts
Actually, you can bind sequentially or at the same time. Your choice. Both work fine.

In addition to large models, where this is very common (as pp2 mentioned), I saw this put to a really clever use the other day. A scale aircraft, with wing supported well above the fuselage entirely by thin struts... no place to run wiring, etc for the servos in the wing. So, the guy put a second battery, RX (and servos) in the wing itself. Worked great, no wiring exposed, very pretty airplane.

I've also seen dual RX in P-38 like models to avoid a bunch of wiring.
Danal Estes is offline Find More Posts by Danal Estes
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2008, 02:04 PM
Registered User
Lincoln, NE
Joined May 2005
847 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinecone
Yes, you can bind two Rxes to a Spektrum Tx. Only caveat is they both have to be DSM (AR/BR6000) or DSM2 (all other Rxes).
There is another condition if using an X9303 transmitter, both receivers must have the same resolution. You can bind a 921 and 1221, both have 2048 resolution, together. You can't bind either with an AR7000 which has 1024 resolution. I assume you can bind two AR7000 together. I haven't tried that as I have only one of those.

If you are using a Spektrum module without the model match and the 2048 resolution, I would assume that you could possibly bind any combination.

Allan
AWorrest is offline Find More Posts by AWorrest
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2008, 03:24 PM
A man with too many toys
United States
Joined Feb 2001
17,006 Posts
Is there a way to disable model match ?
RC Man is online now Find More Posts by RC Man
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2008, 08:46 PM
Flys with Thumbs
Danal Estes's Avatar
Frisco, TX, USA
Joined Sep 2001
1,858 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RC Man
Is there a way to disable model match ?
No. That would defeat the purpose.

But... what are you trying to do? There are "best practices" for many things, with model match fully in force. So, what are you doing?
Danal Estes is offline Find More Posts by Danal Estes
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2008, 06:18 AM
A man with too many toys
United States
Joined Feb 2001
17,006 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danal Estes
No. That would defeat the purpose.

But... what are you trying to do? There are "best practices" for many things, with model match fully in force. So, what are you doing?
For helicopters I like to have several transmitter programs so I can try out various setups. Its a real pain with Spektrum transmitters. They could still have that safety feature but allow the user to determine the match code that would eliminate the problem and allow multiple transmitter setups for the same receiver.


I am probably going to get a Futaba 12FGH and sell all my Spektrum stuff. That has much more flexibility and can do everything I need. Spektrum is cheap but I am just not that happy with the transmitter programming for helicopter flying.

RC Man is online now Find More Posts by RC Man
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2008, 11:44 AM
Flys with Thumbs
Danal Estes's Avatar
Frisco, TX, USA
Joined Sep 2001
1,858 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RC Man
For helicopters I like to have several transmitter programs so I can try out various setups. Its a real pain with Spektrum transmitters. They could still have that safety feature but allow the user to determine the match code that would eliminate the problem and allow multiple transmitter setups for the same receiver.


I am probably going to get a Futaba 12FGH and sell all my Spektrum stuff. That has much more flexibility and can do everything I need. Spektrum is cheap but I am just not that happy with the transmitter programming for helicopter flying.

To have several setups: Bind to memory 1. Keep the different setups in 2, 3, whatever. Copy 2>1 before flying. Or 3>1. And so forth. Made changes to TX setup on that flight? Copy it back... or not... your choice. Very flexible. Very easy.

Or... Fly the 2.4 module in an 8103 or 9303. No model match.


As for the Futaba... try it before you buy it, somehow. I know there is a lot of brand loyalty out there... and, as a disclaimer, I choose to fly JR/Spektrum for my personal stuff... but I also help tons of people setup helicopters. Therefore I use both on a regular basis. Also, I watch people who have no brand bias learn setup, and choose radios. For heli flyers, it's JR, hands down. When people pick for helis, it seems about 2 or 3:1 for JR.

You should pick what you like (of course), and strongly consider what other people around fly for helicopters because local setup help is invaluable. They are both good systems, each with some subtle pros/cons. I just wouldn't expect a large difference between either brand's 12 channel radios.
Danal Estes is offline Find More Posts by Danal Estes
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale Futaba 7 Channel Tx Rx 2.4GHz KSI_barbasnoo Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 9 Nov 20, 2008 05:40 PM
Alert * Spektrum TX / RX / 2.4GHz Radios and Scorpion Motor and ESC Owners * Crash-n-Hard Power Systems 7 Apr 17, 2008 05:10 AM
For Sale Spektrum Tx + Rx 2.4ghz trab1925 Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 6 Apr 14, 2008 05:40 PM
Sold Hitec Neon Tx + SPF-5 Rx + 2 SPMS75 Servos rivers Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 1 Jan 03, 2006 10:16 PM
First Test: XCam2 / Engel RX 2.4ghz thelocust Aerial Photography 0 Sep 13, 2004 12:01 PM