[NSRCA-discussion] Hitec Aurora 9

[Bob Richards]

"Feedback" to me implies some sort of a closed-loop system, which would use that feedback information to change the controls going back to the plane. IMHO, the rx battery voltage does not meet the "feedback" criteria. It would not be a bad idea, however, to add a clarification in the rules to this effect. 
 
Thinking about this a little more, this is less of a "feedback" than the automatic low battery / low throttle failsafe that we have now. JMHO.
 
Bob R.

--- On Wed, 5/12/10, Joe Dunnaway <dunnaway at hbcomm.net> wrote:


From: Joe Dunnaway <dunnaway at hbcomm.net>
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Hitec Aurora 9
To: "nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org >> NSRCA" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 2010, 11:41 PM


   One of our club members showed up at the field the other day with a new Hitec Aurora 9.  The interesting feature of this radio is telemetry back from the receiver showing voltage of the airborne receiver battery with a programmable low battery alarm on the transmitter.  I think this is something we have needed for a long time but It looks like our rule book prohibits any type of electronic signal or feedback from the model.     Do we need to change this rule or propose some type of exception to allow this kind of data to be used? 
Thanks
Joe Dunnaway

_______________________________________________
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/20100513/7814d92f/attachment.html>