Not so much a debate of the 2.4 system, more a light hearted look at the
radio control systems in general.
Chris Golds who writes for the Silent Flight magazine usually commences
his column with a flash back moment from his RAF days. Just recently an
occurrence whilst slope soaring caused such a personal flashback and
started a chain of thought about the R/C systems that we use.
1. Complication for complications sake? Before starting I must confess
that I, just like the majority of R/C users am a sucker for the latest
shiny thing or gadget. But do we actually need the level of
sophistication currently on offer. Over the past few years I have seen
and experienced the sights of many various model flyers, myself
included, bent intently over their transmitters desperately, the manual
having been or course left at home, trying to either enter some new
programming, or remove something that they had accidently introduced in
the first place. Out of the thousands of persons who partake in and
enjoy their model flying unless you are into complicated models
requiring numerous and obscure multi-point mixing wouldn’t a simpler set
suffice. Granted there are many functions which we now take as common
place that I wouldn’t wish to relinquish however there are many more
that I have no use for whatsoever.
In the seventies and eighties I was fortunate to have lived and worked
in Germany and due to the very favourable terms offered by the German
model company Simprop, I was a great fan and user of this system. Prior
to the computer age this TX was designed for you to open up and
basically play with. You brought a basic system and then equipped it
with whatever mixers you required simply plugging them into a central
board. This idea was further refined by Simprop with a TX into which you
could plug in either a Glider, Aerobatic or Helicopter module. In short
you had a TX which was not loaded with surplus features which whilst you
had paid for, would probably never be used. One of my TX’s is a Futaba
Field Force 7G which was purchased abroad. The normal FF7 TX was
equipped with four modes, one aerobatic, one glider and two helicopter.
The FF7G dropped the two helicopter modes and increased the mixing power
of the glider mode. Of all my TX’s this one always accompanies me up the
hills. At present it is on its sixth replacement battery and will
continue in use until the facilities to service it disappear.
2. Which frequency, 2.4GHz or 35mHz. Now I run the risk of being truly
burned at the stake. Again I possess both systems so I am not overly
biased one way or the other. During the past three or so years we have
seen the phenomenal growth of 2.4GHz. The advantages quoted being mainly
that of freedom from frequency clashes and the ability to download
information from the model. Could the ability to download and view
information from the model be taken as further unwarranted complication?
Mind you I use the word view lightly because in the majority of cases
the viewing screen is set on the bottom of the TX and is almost
impossible to view in normal use. Freedom from frequency clashes is an
important safety issue and must not be taken lightly. However this was
always an operator based fault rather than an electronics one. Users of
Multiplex 35mHz systems will of course be aware that their sets could be
equipped with a channel check system which prevented you the user
switching onto a frequency that was already in use. If this was such a
safety issue why did not other radio manufactures incorporate this
function into their sets? Taking aside the pros and cons of both
frequencies I feel that we are quickly sleepwalking ourselves into
losing the use of 35mHz. This is after all a dedicated frequency solely
for the use of flying model aircraft which is actually enforceable by
law. On the other hand 2.4GHz is one of the most congested frequencies
available being used for just about everything that requires a domestic
radio link and will no doubt become even more congested in the future.
So best not throw the baby out with the bath water just yet. With a
advent of 2.4GHz radio another not so nice commercial practise seems to
have emerged. About two years ago I and my flying companion took the
plunge and purchased two sets of JR 9 channel 2.4GHz radio along with
several receivers. Modellers of a certain age will understand the next
part being old enough to remember the competition between two rival
Video systems (Betamax and VHS, which VHS subsequently won despite being
the alleged inferior system.). Within a few months it was apparent that
we had purchased the “Betamax” version as JR promptly changed their
operating system and of course the new system was incompatible with the
old unless you decided upon the very top model in the range. To make
matters worse my flying companion recently sold his JR set, at a loss
and purchased a Futaba 12 channel 2.4mHz just prior to Futaba following
JR’s example and yes the old system is incompatible with the new unless
the 18 channel (£2500?) outfit is acquired. In all the years of 35mHz
use the only change was from AM to FM and you had the option of having
your sets converted. How many more times will we see 2.4GHz operating
systems changed in the pursuit of supposed excellence?
With my entrenching spade in hand and my control line team racing pit
helmet firmly on my head I will retire and prepare to fend off the
incoming hordes of brickbats. Oh I nearly forgot, what was the reason
for the flashback which prompted these purely personal meanderings. At
the end of last year, the Winter solstice in fact, my flying companion
and I were enjoying a very good days slope soaring. Flying with us was a
gentlemen with three models which he flew without drama, fuss,
complication or fear of frequency clashes for the whole of the day. He
was flying on 27mHz without even the aid of servo reversing. Was his
enjoyment any less for that fact, I think not.
Neil
|
