[NSRCA-discussion] curious

[Bob Richards]

I heard once that the pylon racers did not use PCM due to the latency. Also, a lot used basic 4ch PPM systems, since the frame rate is shorter with fewer channels. The Ace Micropro that I mentioned earlier (which was a PPM only system) allowed you to program the number of channels transmitted. If you only transmitted 4 channels, the frame rate was much quicker.


--- On Mon, 3/22/10, Richard Strickland <pamrich47 at hotmail.com> wrote:


From: Richard Strickland <pamrich47 at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] curious
To: "NSRCA" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Monday, March 22, 2010, 2:21 PM




I think you are more likely to get better latency numbers from a matched system--but take the Futaba numbers, the 7 channel system has better--or at least as good--numbers as the more expensive systems. Maybe much less than the MZ/HS8 combo   I have a good friend who purchased one of the super cheap 2.4 module/receiver combos and he could hardly hover with it.
Craps anyone?
 RS


From: geobet4 at verizon.net
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:14:23 -0400
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] curious



#yiv1322204796 .ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-top:0px;}
#yiv1322204796 .ExternalClass BODY.ecxhmmessage
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10pt;}


I guess my next question would be,.......Is it possible that within the spectrum of the 2.4 Ghz technology could it be that there might
 be a difference in the processing speed of the low end receivers as opposed to the higher priced units?
 
I do have a low end rcvr.
 
G. 
 
 
 
 
 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Richard Strickland 
To: NSRCA DISCUSSION 
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 10:42 AM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] curious


 


#yiv1322204796 .ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
#yiv1322204796 .ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}

The original post was in '05 in that link.  He has been updating it as he gets new info.  It's worth a read--but takes a while.  Some feel the thread has contributed greatly to latency being decreased in radios across the board.  As someone pointed out "..radios got pretty damn fast pretty damn fast..."
Regarding Futaba modules--at least on the TM14, the information is sent in groups of four, so you would have minimum latency difference for example between channels 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, etc..  so it would be better to have dual elevators next to one another and possibly ailerons in one of the 1-4 groups if your transmitter has the capability to reassign channel positions.  It would also be helpful to those that have more than one servo per surface.  It's very important to the helo guys as they need the swash plate to move evenly.  Apparently not quite as noticeable in pattern.
I switched from 50mhz/5114DPS to the 2.4/TM14/6008HS combo and the best one word description I can give is "silky"--but it could be additional latency--Futaba says there should be no difference.  I think I like it--but I have to--it's what I've got! 
 
Richard
 
PS Anyone need any DPS5114s on 50mhz.?..yeah, that's what I thought...




Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. 



_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion



Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. 
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20100322/62eac08e/attachment.html>