<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:#606420;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink="#606420">
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I know that I’ve had range problems
using PPM on certain ignition setups, but PCM made the range problems go away….
I would guess there are probably some variables in installation that make a
difference….<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Chris<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b><span style='font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Bob Richards<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Thursday, September 14, 2006
1:46 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> NSRCA Mailing List<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] RX
choices</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Most of what I use PPM receivers for are sport models or small
electrics. Even then, I have decided to stay away from the single conversion
RXs, even on the ultralight foamies. I've had too many glitches with the cheesy
single conversion sets.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Having said that, there are advantages to some of the PPM receivers.
With proper filtering, it is possible for a PPM RX to continue operating with
certain interference that would render PCM inoperable. Not very likely, but
possible. I do know of one case where PCM radios were having problems going
into failsafe, but people flying PPM were not having problems. At one
time (years ago) I was told that PCM did not work well on planes with ignition
engines. I never disputed it, though I never have seen proof of it.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>With PCM, you may not know that interference is present until it goes
into failsafe, then it may be too late. With PPM, you may get glitches, but
usually at least some control gets through.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I use the PCM RXs in my high-dollar planes, and have my failsafe
set to kill the engine. For most planes, I leave all the other
controls at the last good signal position.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Bob R.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br>
<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><b><i><span style='font-weight:bold;
font-style:italic'>Wayne</span></i></b></st1:place></st1:City><b><i><span
style='font-weight:bold;font-style:italic'> <Whinkle1024@msn.com></span></i></b>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #1010FF 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I have a question guys.<br>
<br>
I see in lots of posts guys using FM (PPM) RX's. Why is this?<br>
<br>
In today's market there are so many choices of good PCM RX's I can't <br>
understand why someone would actually choose to run FM. Back in the days <br>
when I started RC there was no PCM and we had the choice of AM or FM. I was <br>
taught that my model was too important to me not to run the best link <br>
possible, at the time FM was it.<br>
<br>
When PCM came in the price was much higher and I can see a reason to not use <br>
it. Today however both Futaba and JR have PCM RX's that are good for under <br>
$99, JR now even has one that PLL Synth. So why use FM?<br>
<br>
It is my understanding with today's PCM that noise rejection is so much <br>
better with PCM that it seems along with its F/S properties both model and <br>
people are better protected. I can see the reasoning among average modeler <br>
its price why else do MPI, FMA and so on make such a profit on off brand <br>
leads and servos that are in my opinion very sub par. I felt that in the <br>
pattern community with available models shrinking, and the cost of models <br>
hitting larger prices that guys would trust their baby to better equipment. <br>
I mean a basic pattern model that is on the cheap is going to be $1000 to <br>
$1500 all up. The difference in a 127 Futaba RX and say a Futaba 138DP PCM <br>
or JR 790 PCM version is about $40<br>
<br>
What am I missing?<br>
<br>
<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Wayne</st1:place></st1:City> <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>