Thread Tools
Nov 05, 2013, 08:15 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
I don't agree, but to each their own. I fly everything from foamies to turbines, and nothing is spit. I will never use dual receivers unless they are parallel (diversity). Having them split is historically asking for trouble, regardless of the radio system. We learned that with 72MHz.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Nov 09, 2013, 12:20 AM
Registered User
Wow, I ordered my RFU's and another X10+ last weekend and they arrived today!

Excellent service.

Now I just need a receiver solution for a DLG... Its all carbon so need to get those antenna's outside but the x10+ is never going to fit, I'm not even sure about the proposed 8 channel version. Has any one else put XPS in an all carbon DLG?

Heather
Nov 09, 2013, 12:16 PM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather
Wow, I ordered my RFU's and another X10+ last weekend and they arrived today!

Excellent service.

Now I just need a receiver solution for a DLG... Its all carbon so need to get those antenna's outside but the x10+ is never going to fit, I'm not even sure about the proposed 8 channel version. Has any one else put XPS in an all carbon DLG?

Heather
the nose isn't kevlar?... most of them are making the nose in kevlar so that the receiver can get the signal. I'm finishing a Blaster3, using a Nano.
Latest blog entry: Updated Hatcam - Apr2016
Nov 09, 2013, 02:30 PM
Registered User
Thanks, on closer inspection it is kevlar!, just painted black on the outside so a Nano should be just fine. (It's a Helios 2)
Nov 09, 2013, 04:59 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew
I don't agree, but to each their own. I fly everything from foamies to turbines, and nothing is spit. I will never use dual receivers unless they are parallel (diversity). Having them split is historically asking for trouble, regardless of the radio system. We learned that with 72MHz.
So if I understand correctly, you do not advocate using multiple Nanos in an installation?
A case is all of a model's fuselage on one Nano, all wing on another, fail safe to neutral, would this be a risk?
Seems that many are using multiple Nanos successfully.
A Nano with X10's seems the logical way to go though.
Nov 09, 2013, 07:25 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
I am not a fan of splitting surfaces between receivers... like putting one elevator half on one receiver and the other elevator half on another receiver. We use to do that with 72MHz, and discovered quickly with PCM receivers (where lockouts first began) that if one of the two receivers was locked out, you really didn't have better control with everything criss-cross.

Setting failsafes to neutral definitely helps because at least you won't have some surface locked in one direction.

The X10+/Nano is a better solution. If I can ever get any free time between updaters and other projects I can finish the dual receiver support for the X10+ where you would have two receivers for redundancy. THAT would be the absolute best solution.
Nov 10, 2013, 09:14 AM
Registered User
I have seen somone lose one reciever with the plane split with the recievers (Not xps) and not only did he land safe but he finished his Freestyle routine. He did have fail safe to neutral.
Nov 10, 2013, 08:37 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
What receiver was this? To my knowledge, we have the only system on the market where you can set every single channel to a different failsafe type and position.
Nov 10, 2013, 11:43 PM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by firemedic305
I have seen somone lose one reciever with the plane split with the recievers (Not xps) and not only did he land safe but he finished his Freestyle routine. He did have fail safe to neutral.
well, I have to say that it was very uncool that the continued to fly his routine when half of his plane stopped operating. Not something to aspire to. It would also be helpful to know the nature of the failure if it is known.
Latest blog entry: Updated Hatcam - Apr2016
Nov 11, 2013, 08:32 AM
Registered User
Its been about 2 or 3 years so can't recall what recievers he had. He was near the end of flight and said he thought he somehow went to low rate it just was not as responsive, did not know he had lost receiver. He did still have throttle.
Nov 18, 2013, 02:10 PM
Live for speed
GoFaster's Avatar
Jim (or anyone else), can you provide some examples how to 'hard mount the antennas'?
From your warnings, it would be unacceptable to have the antennas just sticking out in the free air stream.
Nov 18, 2013, 04:28 PM
Registered User
Here is one way............
Nov 18, 2013, 06:29 PM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcyr1
Here is one way............

that works for me... antenna can't flop around, but the RFU can!
Latest blog entry: Updated Hatcam - Apr2016
Nov 18, 2013, 06:35 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
That would work, but I prefer to move the antennas a lot further apart. I separate them at least 1/2 down the length of the black coax. You don't want to split them apart right at the RFU, but an inch or two above where the antenna's come out is good. Of course, it all depends on how much room you have for your installation too.
Nov 18, 2013, 06:49 PM
Live for speed
GoFaster's Avatar
Thanks for the example and descriptions. I'm specifically looking for skinny glider installs, most with full carbon fuses, nosecones, wings and tails :/ I've only seen catfish style whisker installations of other 2.4GHz systems where the antennas are sticking out in the breeze.






Thread Tools