[NSRCA-discussion] RX choices

[Adam Glatt]

Hey Chris, and all those who weren't supposed to see this ;>

As much confidence?  No.  I've used many JR receivers in many planes, 
and my friends have used many JR and Futaba receivers in many planes.  
The Berg has technology, features, and a good company name backing it, 
but it can't point to a large population of problem-free installations.  
That does go through my mind every time I look at my spare Berg.

-Adam

White, Chris wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> I'm going off-list with this because I think I'm confirming the obvious:
> I know diddely about electronics, but if I understand you correctly you
> would trust this receiver in an (eg: YS160 equipped Pinnacle with
> digitals) with as much confidence as any JR or Futaba receiver?
>
> Thank you,
> Chris White
> (Tulsa)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Adam
> Glatt
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:30 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] RX choices
>
> Wayne, I agree with you.  Prior to the new Berg models coming out, I 
> would not even consider running an FM receiver in anything over 2lb.  
> PCM is great because the control is perfect until there is too much 
> noise, then the RX does what you told it to: hold or failsafe 
> positions.  It also is pretty good about listing to my transmitter 
> instead of the guy on a different brand or FM on the same channel.
>
> I'm back to advocating FM because the Berg models have done it 
> properly.  These models have a lot of signal processing, allowing them 
> all the features that we love in PCM receivers:  perfect control until 
> it goes into hold or failsafe, which we program; transmitter signal 
> recognition.  So, PCM features in a receiver that costs $50, weighs 8g, 
> has a weird antenna that you can cut to any length with only 
> proportional range loss, has lifetime firmware updates through your 
> computer, and has additional features through the computer programming 
> system (that most of us won't use).  I say that this is a good receiver 
> to choose.
>
> It's not FM, it's Berg.
>
> -Adam
>
> Wayne wrote:
>   
>> I have a question guys.
>>
>> I see in lots of posts guys using FM (PPM) RX's.  Why is this?
>>
>> In today's market there are so many choices of good PCM RX's I can't 
>> understand why someone would actually choose to run FM. Back in the
>>     
> days 
>   
>> when I started RC there was no PCM and we had the choice of AM or FM.
>>     
> I was 
>   
>> taught that my model was too important to me not to run the best link 
>> possible, at the time FM was it.
>>
>> When PCM came in the price was much higher and I can see a reason to
>>     
> not use 
>   
>> it. Today however both Futaba and JR have PCM RX's that are good for
>>     
> under 
>   
>> $99, JR now even has one that PLL Synth. So why use FM?
>>
>> It is my understanding with today's PCM that noise rejection is so
>>     
> much 
>   
>> better with PCM that it seems along with its F/S properties both model
>>     
> and 
>   
>> people are better protected. I can see the reasoning among average
>>     
> modeler 
>   
>> its price why else do MPI, FMA and so on make such a profit on off
>>     
> brand 
>   
>> leads and servos that are in my opinion very sub par. I felt that in
>>     
> the 
>   
>> pattern community with available models shrinking, and the cost of
>>     
> models 
>   
>> hitting larger prices that guys would trust their baby to better
>>     
> equipment. 
>   
>> I mean a basic pattern model that is on the cheap is going to be $1000
>>     
> to 
>   
>> $1500 all up. The difference in a 127 Futaba RX and say a Futaba 138DP
>>     
> PCM 
>   
>> or JR 790 PCM version is about $40
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>> Wayne 
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>   
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>