Good points, all. Maybe this sort of feature could be tied in with an autopilot system to level the wings and maintain altitude until the interference is gone.<br><br><br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/21/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">
Ed Alt</b> <<a href="mailto:ed_alt@hotmail.com">ed_alt@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>
<div bgcolor="#ffffff">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Any RF link can be interfered with, marketing hype
aside. The DSS systems will primarily offer protection from each other,
which is definitely a good thing. It's not going to be completely
effective at rejecting other sources of RF on the same channels that arrive
after initial open channel has completed at startup. Not everyone plays by
the same rules from a protocol observance standpoint. Net-net, they won't
be immune to intererence, although they may be a significant improvement from
what we have today. </font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Again, what I am proposing is simple to do and
could be incorprated in any radio technology. For that matter, it could
even be a pot (potentiometer replacement) to an unused extra channel if older
transmitters needed the feature. A small protocol module add-in takes over
the function of a pot, could be swapped by a skilled modeler or better yet,
Radio South, Horzon/Hobby Services etc. Bingo, you have your failsafe
protocol ready to interface with 3rd party kill switches, audible alert speakers
etc. </font></div></div><div><span class="sg">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Ed</font></div></span></div></div></blockquote></div><br>