are we taken for a ride by JR and futaba ? the 2.4 ghz tech has been around at least since the last 5 years or more and spektrum as i know had been marketing it as a park flyer tech. only it never made it to the main stream mainly due to the regulations on use of RC radio frequencies in various countries. there has been no real R&D on this tech and when 2.4GHZ has been made free for hobby use they have suddenly started to market the same. i still feel there is still a lot of ground to be covered on refining this tech to be reliable and robust.  there may be a whole new class of radios especially by futaba in the near future as they are the biggest radio company in the world. making a sudden introduction of a new type radio may hurt their products line and users who has invested big money may switch. futabas 8 channel 8 fga is a case in point. i feel in another 2 years all our current tech type 2.4 ghz radios may be totally obsolete and new radios on 2.4ghz with a totally new tech may take the place. but for now enjoy the good times of an obsolete technology. have any one you has opened your spanking new 9 channel radio and checked inside ? there is no change except that there is a module to fit in the 2.4 ghz in place of our old FM/PPM module. this is most true on JR radios. prove me wrong.......

Good lord !! Another radio thread ?    Was that a wake up call ??!?!

I have not seen any reference to a "new generation" of 2.4G (or other) radio technology (that is completely a step up from the current ones) being discussed anywhere.  Do you have any references ? Would love to see those.

I would rather see people fly with the peace of mind offered by just moving from 72 to 2.4 !

Spektrum came out with their DSM1 range of products first, and they were referred to as "park flyer tech" only because its relatively low range.  When they came out with DSM2, everybody including themselves called it "full range".  And within about a year of that, Futaba came out with their FASST technology, which was full range from day one.

JR is a non-player on the transmission technology side, they just provide the underlying hardware and basic software; it is always Spektrum technology used in JR 2.4 radios. JR never claimed they have anything great in their new radios, they just make enough number of channels available, as required by the hobbyist.  There are subtle other features added (for example, a back-lit screen) which are clear in their feature list.  While these are nothing revolutionary, this is what you pay extra for !

The Futaba 8FG radios took some features already available in their higher end radios, and put them together in a more affordable package.  I see nothing revolutionary there either (ok, they have this cool sensor touch type of dial, but the iPod had it for many many years now, assuming they are alike).

So what are we talking about ?    I would really love to learn about what is coming in the future, in terms of radio technology.

for one....  the resolution of 1024 offered by the 8fg. boosting range is no big deal but resolutions are. processing power is another. computers are way ahead but our radios are not... they are way behind for the last 45 years 3 switches from AM to FM to 2.4 ?  how come ? fancy displays, rotary dials , touch screen, unlimited model memory ,fancy case , sticks, come on man..... its just make up and lipstick situation. if your battery fails you are gone . is there any radio TX /RXwith a secondary emergency power, will land the model in case the main battery drops power/fails without cutting out the link between RX and TX. ever thought of a secondary back up servo ? a mechanically/electronically linked micro servo that will only be activated in case the main servo fails that too automatically so that the model can be landed ? is it possible to discard the servos completely and make a sort of fly by wire model where a single power controller can move all our controls electronically ? when we started in RC the real aircraft and our tech were the same. what about now? still in bullock cart age comapred to modern fighter jet. why ? its called bussiness....  very good bussiness...  by JR and futaba

Yeah! FBW would be nice and so would be an autopilot so that when you get bored you can switch it on and go have puff/drink or nookie with your **. Or How about something which would totally do away with all the Tx business and where the aircraft is controlled by your thoughts or your eyes (yes this technology exists and is used for locking on an tracking a target for air to air combat). Sure that would make sense for the radio makers so that they can bill thier deep pocketed customers for multi billion products.
I would rather switch to flying free flight blasa and tissue models so that I get what I look for in the hobby, something to do with my hands and brains rather than rely on my deep pockets   

Quote from: harikeshpk on September 17, 2009, 08:17:02 PM
for one....  the resolution of 1024 offered by the 8fg. boosting range is no big deal but resolutions are.

2048 resolution has been commercially offered for many years now on the high end radios of the major vendors. Not revolutionary at all.

I think what we are forgetting is that like anything else, this is also "evolutionary".  Small changes over time (except for like the jump from PPM/PCM to 2.4, which was somewhat revolutionary).  I can be perfectly happy with a 6 or 7 channel radio that is 5 years old.  I have a fellow flyer who still flies happily using his 13 or 14 year old radio. One does not necessarily have to pay and upgrade.

You are right in that more can be done, and should be done.  But a backup power system for a TX is probably least in demand by customers. We have to be realistic on what "useful" features are.  Since this is not a rocket carrying humans, there has to be a cost-benefit analysis.   There has to be distinction between a "dream list" and a "needed list".

Backup power systems for RX is available already.

yes anwar i can see ur point of view lets for the time being stick to what is there rather that what may be.

I know some people who refuse to drive "automatic transmission" cars. They think "stick shift" is the way it should be done, and automatic gears take the fun/control out of it.  Many of them converted recently, because of the traffic situation in cities, but very reluctantly.

Not all FBW is fun 

2048 is a case in point where "more" is really meaningless. Let me elaborate.

I have just checked the stick movement on a Tx that was at hand  - A T7CAP. I will assume this is fairly typical. The TOTAL movement is 40 mm. If one divides this by the "low resolution" figure of 1024 steps it works out to 0.0039 mm per step.  Thats 40 MICRONS (rounded off) !! Would like to know ANY one who is capable of "resolving" that with their thumb/finger.

In short, the flier will never be able to "exploit" the doubled resolution. It's pure marketing hype. For the suckers who wan't "the latest", assuming newer is always better.

Quoteworks out to 0.0039 mm per step

Sorry ! That should read 0.039 mm.

1024 versus 2048 resolution is something that even the pros may be unable to distinguish.  All people say in general is "I get a more connected feel" to the response of the model by going from 1024 to 2048, and that is the small minority who actually feel any difference at all.

One thing..

Is all these advancements really necessary for a hobby? I mean building a model, preparing for flight account for major time and interest anyways. So what are we actually talking about?

Pankaj

Maruti Vs BMW   

And you only care about a few of the additional features in the BMW, like the ABS brakes and the side impact airbags   The rest is all about style than utility !

There are features in higher (or medium) end radios that are really convenient for users. For example, I find it really useful that my timer automatically starts and stops based on my throttle stick position, which is a convenient way to time my flight (as compared to pressing a button everytime I take off). It is all these small things which you like ( and sometimes dislike), that the radio manufactures make you pay for !

Anwar,

I think Maruti vs BMW analogy will not fit exactly here....

If we leave the number of channels aside, then there are two things that we need to talk about - 1) frequency of operation (well we are not talking about modulation anyways) and 2) the feature lists (airbags, power steering, et all).

So as I understand, in all of the leading brands, most of the feature list has been taken care of anyways - baring an exception of programming the entire flight on auto pilot - from take off to flying 3D to landing. This seems to hold true for almost all of the leading brands. Across the models they may be offering some more features than the competition, but that's it.

That leaves the first part which is the frequency of Tx and Rx which really has not evolved much - but then does it really matter? Your Tx needs to be able to communicate to your Rx irrespective of the number of Tx/Rx combinations in the field and not worry about interference. If, supposedly, the 2.4GHz takes care of this, then it is the signal strength that matters where the analogy between 800cc and 4500cc engine would come in play.

Well, in one area that the analogy could hold true would be reliability of Maruti vs that of BMW - the Futaba, Spectrum of the world vs Asans of the world. But then again, isn't the later catching up as well?


So all in all how does it matter if 2.4GHz were to become obsolete in 4-5 years anyways? Servicing issues? Aw, Come on!!! The MHz technology is still around and lot of people swear by it.

Pankaj

I read your post twice, and I am still not sure what you are trying to say 

Basically, you can stick with your old 6 or 7 channel radio, and there is probably no reason to upgrade (whatever brand).  If you upgrade, that is typically for small incremental features (or the somewhat big jump from 72 to 2.4). Some day 2.4 will be superseded by something else. Don't have that in sight yet. That is the summary of the discussion so far.

Now what exactly is it that you are trying to say 

Anwar,

My point, when I first replied to the this thread was essentially - why bother with 2.4 becoming or already being obsolete, when majority of the activity in this hobby is non RC related? The way I see it, most of us would just like to have a reliable tx+rx with the desired number of channels and use our skills to fly and not let machine control everything or give us controls at micron level movements.

So yes, while the other thread that you started, 72 vs 2.4 might be relevant, I was questioning the relevance of this thread itself as it was trying to figure out the future of 2.4. So when I asked "what is this all about?" you replied "maruti vs bmw".

Do you remember the song - "Que Sera Sera"? Whatever will be - will be; the future's not ours to see.....

So why bother?

Pankaj

well cutting edge tech does matter, especially  you fly high end chopper models or jets. when a  mid range jet without radio gear will cost in the range of Rs 2.5 lakhs, you  will want the best radio to go along with it. beyond a level cost matters little, only the best will do. that's why

Maruti vs BMW analogy comes into play.

Quote from: harikeshpk on September 19, 2009, 04:20:44 PM
Maruti vs BMW analogy comes into play.

Many a times we are so engrossed in technology that we fail to realize how much we miss out on the fun factor which brought us to this hobby in the first place........
when one has a bike, he longs for the pleasure of driving a car........ then he buys a maruti and drives around to his heart's content.......... eventually when he reaches the stage to buy a BMW, it is CHAUFFERED....... now the driver is having all the fun............

technology driver ...............

Maruti Vs BMW
90% of it can be called as male jwellery or "mine is bigger and better than yours" syndrome.
I would whole heartedly agree with Martian, you can have as much fun with a chuck glider as with a multi million jet loaded with latest on the market

Quote from: PankajC on September 19, 2009, 12:06:23 PM
So yes, while the other thread that you started, 72 vs 2.4 might be relevant, I was questioning the relevance of this thread itself as it was trying to figure out the future of 2.4. So when I asked "what is this all about?" you replied "maruti vs bmw".

Ah, you missed more than half the point of this thread    While the future of 2.4 was an issue raised by the original poster, the main question of the thread was whether JR and Futaba are making us pay for essentially no real innovation, and that is what I was addressing mainly with the Maruti Vs BMW analogy.

If you are paying good money these days and getting one of the newer (some would even term them as "fancy") radios, then it is like going from a Maruti to a BMW.  You only use a few of all the bells and whistles  in the new radio, but you do mind/enjoy its element of style/status.  The price you pay is less proportional to the incremental improvements and more proportional to the perceived "hipness".

Quote from: harikeshpk on September 19, 2009, 04:20:44 PM
well cutting edge tech does matter, especially  you fly high end chopper models or jets. when a  mid range jet without radio gear will cost in the range of Rs 2.5 lakhs, you  will want the best radio to go along with it. beyond a level cost matters little, only the best will do. that's why

Maruti vs BMW analogy comes into play.

I am not sure I am familiar with hobbyist who fly 2.5 lakh models, so for them I guess your logic and analogy works. However, most of us are in the less than 20K bracket as far as the model +  power system go. So for us, a Rx around 10-15K should suffice. It is there I do not see much point in R&D


BTW, I guess my DX6i should qualify as top end Maruti (the SX4), right?

Pankaj

QuoteI guess my DX6i should qualify as top end Maruti (the SX4), right?

yeah may be or a re-bagged ESTEEM 

sahil

dont worry about your radio gear. after all there are only 2 sticks still for your primary controls. what we have we should take care of it and maintain it. so it remains a dependable radio set. what really matters is flying. fly well.

fly well............... nothing else matters. that's my logic.