[NSRCA-discussion] RE: 2.4 Ghz radio

[Rick Kent]

Just a FWIW, there are already at least a couple of folks who have taken the
'magic DSS module' bit of the DX6 transmitter and successfully transplanted
it into another radio, e.g. the JR 6102 tx. Presumably this is for taking
advantage of the enhanced programming capabilities and feature set of the
6102. Judging from the ongoing discussions, the JR 9303 may be the next
candidate, as experiments continue. Still others are already discussing
exploring compatibility with Futaba transmitters.

Draw whatever inferences from this that you will. R/Cers are an inventive
lot, and usually don't like being told what they 'can't' do. I can't help
believing it will lead to more and more people putting this transplanted
setup into large aircraft, as there have already been field tests documented
that reportedly refute Spektrum's claim of limited range with the DX6
system.

You can follow the discussion on RCGroups.com in the radios discussion
thread.

Rick
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Petterson" <rcpilotjohn at comcast.net>
To: "'Jay Marshall'" <lightfoot at sc.rr.com>; "'Troy A. Newman'"
<troy_newman at msn.com>; <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 7:46 PM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] RE: 2.4 Ghz radio


> Folks,
>
> The only word of caution about these systems is that the 2.4GHz band is
> unlicensed, and unregulated. Anyone can put up transmitters on that band
in
> any legal power, (there are some limits, but they are much higher than the
> RC transmitters use) and most systems HAVE TO accept interference from
other
> users. Not only does your local 802.11 wireless network in your house use
> this band, but many municipalities are now rolling out networks using that
> band as well. Soon there will be too many users to guarantee glitch free
use
> of this band in many areas.
>
> Although the frequency hopping encoding helps to reduce the impact of
> interference, this is NOT a frequency band I would trust to anything
capable
> of causing more damage than a foamie. This technology (as long as it is in
> the 2.4 GHz band) is not going to be ready for .40 size planes let alone
> pattern planes. It is just too dangerous and possible for the plane to go
> out of control.
>
> Now if we can convert the already reserved for R/C bands to this
technology
> or get the FCC to allocate us some specific spectrum for low power RC use,
> then we could get excited about this. But please don't start using them on
> the bigger planes.
>
> I can find some more information about this if anyone is interested.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
On
> Behalf Of Jay Marshall
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 12:45 PM
> To: 'Troy A. Newman'; discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: RE: 2.4 Ghz radio
>
> Thanks. Very informative. New item on my Xmas list....
>
> =================================================
> If you want your reply email to go to the list, you must Cc: the list!
>
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>
> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
list.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion