<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18876"></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>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</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial> be a difference in the processing speed of the low
end receivers as opposed to the higher priced units?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>I do have a low end rcvr.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>G.</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=pamrich47@hotmail.com href="mailto:pamrich47@hotmail.com">Richard
Strickland</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA DISCUSSION</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, March 22, 2010 10:42
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] curious</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR> <BR>
<STYLE>
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
</STYLE>
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..."<BR>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.<BR>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! <BR> <BR>Richard<BR> <BR>PS Anyone need any DPS5114s on
50mhz.?..yeah, that's what I thought...<BR><BR><BR>
<HR>
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. <A
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850553/direct/01/" target=_new>Sign up
now.</A>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>