TX RX compatability?

[cootertwo]

Maybe not a stupid question, I hope. But was wondering what is compatible with one another? Like, can you bind a Spectrum TX to a Futaba RX, etc. etc. Thanks, and forgive me if it's a stupid question.:tennis:

 

[Carapau]

In short, sadly you can't use one make of RX with another make of TX eg Futaba and Spektrum do not mix nor will Jeti or Multiplex. Some older JR radios were compatible with Spektrum and you can get cheap knock off receivers such as Orange which mix with Spektrum but most companies use proprietary systems. And no it is not a stupid question, there is no such thing on this forum. Anyone who thinks otherwise has clearly forgotten their start in this hobby

 

[PeterLester]

I will assume that you are talking about 2.4Ghz fhss RC systems.
Apparently the DJI A2 which has a built-in RC receiver is supposed to be compatible with a range of RC Transmitter such as Futaba and Spectrum.
But DJI seems to have a close alignment with Futaba such that the built-in receiver likely is a Futaba hardware and/ir firmware design taking advantage of s.bus etc.
While the Futaba RC systems seem to work well with the DJI A2 there have been a few issues with the Spectrum binding etc. to date but the newer A2 firmware is apparently resolving most of those issues.
It's getting more and more complicated....... in view of things such as FASST and now DESST (an acronym that seems as yet to have now published meaning).

 

[cootertwo]

Thanks Guys for the coments. I'm not really new, just old, and was out of the hobby for a few years. I have a barn full of nitro copters and planes, radios and equipment/parts. Quit flying about 5 or 6 years ago, and just got back into it with a Parrot AR Drone. Then a DJI Phantom, then a 550 hex, then a T580p+, and a new version 1.1.1 Phantom ordered. Will use older Phantom as a spare, and maybe put the NAZA in the T580p+. All this new 2.4 stuff is new to me. Bought a Spektrum DX7s radio, I like, and finally figured out how to bind my Corona 2.4 conversion module I put in my old Futaba 9C. No binding plug with those, go figure? Anyhoot, I'm enjoying my roto copters, and bought a Radian powered soaring plane, that I ground looped on first flight, and will be back in the air soon. (Old Timers set in, had elevator servo reversed.... duh) This is a great site, and tons of info here.:tennis:

 

[PeteDee]

If you have a Futaba FASST Tx then there is a few cheaper aftermarket Rx available from FrSky and others that are very good.

Most Orange Rx'ers, well all I think all are only DSM2 which is the older format and not as good as the newer DSM-X standard that Spektrum now uses.

Pete

 

[COMike93yj]

Pete,

I asked a bit ago in another thread about why you aren't fond of Spektrum TXs......can you elaborate? Also, why is DSM2 NOT a good format? There are a TON of guys that still use DSM2 around where I live and even with 10 or so of them flying there hasn't been an issue.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[Carapau]

Futaba v Spektrum is kind of like Mac v PC in my opinion. It can be a very polarizing argument. :tennis:

 

[PeteDee]

Pete,

I asked a bit ago in another thread about why you aren't fond of Spektrum TXs......can you elaborate? Also, why is DSM2 NOT a good format? There are a TON of guys that still use DSM2 around where I live and even with 10 or so of them flying there hasn't been an issue.

Cheers,

Mike

I answered in the other thread and I am fond of Spektrum, love my DX18, just not so much for MR's and FPV.

Pete

 

[COMike93yj]

I answered in the other thread and I am fond of Spektrum, love my DX18, just not so much for MR's and FPV.

Pete

Gotcha Pete!

Read them and will research some more! There happens to be a HUGE following here in CO (at least in my circles) that love the Spektrum stuff......

@Carapau.....there is a big debate it seems for Spektrum v Futaba.......perhaps we should do a topic on this very subject as there are many of us new to the TX/RX subject?????

Cheers,

Mike

 

[PeteDee]

I have a foot in each camp, seems I am pretty unusual in that regard but I see advantages in both, just selective in where I use them.

For MR's short range is fine with the Spektrum no problems at all, as soon as you want to push it a bit though the Futaba/s/FrSky/Graupner's and others are far more attractive.

Cheers

Pete

 

[cootertwo]

I just got Spektrums converter kit for my older Futaba 9C "SPMMSFUT720 DSM2 8 channel" It looks nice, comes with a AR7010 receiver and the little remote receiver. All for around $100.

 

[sledge57]

I just got Spektrums converter kit for my older Futaba 9C "SPMMSFUT720 DSM2 8 channel" It looks nice, comes with a AR7010 receiver and the little remote receiver. All for around $100.

Interesting, I have an old JR X347 that I'd like to revive for MR use. I'm thinking of using it for UHF if I ever go down that road, but it's a very nice computerized 7 channel Tx. I also have a 100" sailplane that need a newer radio, this would be a good Tx for it too.

Shame to let it sit and rot...

 

[cootertwo]

Corona also makes 2.4 conversion kits. They have some that plug into the trainer port for radios with no plug in module. Also make one that hard wires in. Pronanly about the time I get everything set up to 2.4, we'll be using something else. Right now, the only thing I like about the 2.4 stuff, over my old 72 stuff, is the shorter antenna! Ha!

 

[multiman]

Am I wrong or does the old 72 radios have more range than the 2.4 stuff?

 

[gtranquilla]

Keep in mind that parkflyer quality 2.4Ghz RC systems are lower power than the more robust longer range 2.4Ghz RC systems.

But yes.... In order for 2.4Ghz RC systems to operate without risk of interference from others using 2.4Ghz, there has to be significant bandwidth to allow for FHSS. Wider bandwidth spreads out the radio transmit energy with a corresponding reduction in the radio distance, i.e., range. Also apparently the higher frequencies are attenuated more easily by atmospheric moisture etc.

72Mhz requires a much narrower bandwidth such that the transmit power is not spread out and therefore can penetrate further. There are also add-on kits for 72Mhz such as signal boosters and amplifiers that can extend the range even further. But at some point you may be operating at a power level that is illegal unless you are licensed such as via a HAM radio license etc.

Am I wrong or does the old 72 radios have more range than the 2.4 stuff?

 

[Electro 2]

Am I wrong or does the old 72 radios have more range than the 2.4 stuff?

Question of the ages. With 40+ years of RF industry experience behind me, on the surface of it, I'd say yes. Power levels are higher and the instantaneous, per-symbol, bandwidth is about the same. But...., all the tests I've seen tend to indicate only just slightly so. Most of the 2.4 systems seem to hit 2-3 miles under typical slant-range conditions and most of 72 systems hit 3-4. Not much difference. I, personally, haven't tested this, so I hestiate to say anything absolutely. If you need reach, go with any one of the popular LRS systems out there. The operate near the bottom of the 70cm Ham band and do require a Ham licence to operate legally, but the reach is there. Double digit miles are routine. Using specialized antenna systems, I recently saw videos from a Mexican group operating a fixed wing aircraft at *48miles*, with a Dragon Link brand set up.

 

[PeterLester]

Thanks Electro 2.... very good information........4xx Mhz should do the distance with some high dB gain antennas especially a Yagi on the RC Transmitter I would assume. I forgot to take into account that the bandwidth for 2.4Ghz remains narrow but jumps all over the allotted spectrum. And there is also the 900Mhz fhss which I use with my DJI Ground control station suitable to 10km + especially with higher gain vehicle roof mounted omni. VE6GLT

Question of the ages. With 40+ years of RF industry experience behind me, on the surface of it, I'd say yes. Power levels are higher and the instantaneous, per-symbol, bandwidth is about the same. But...., all the tests I've seen tend to indicate only just slightly so. Most of the 2.4 systems seem to hit 2-3 miles under typical slant-range conditions and most of 72 systems hit 3-4. Not much difference. I, personally, haven't tested this, so I hestiate to say anything absolutely. If you need reach, go with any one of the popular LRS systems out there. The operate near the bottom of the 70cm Ham band and do require a Ham licence to operate legally, but the reach is there. Double digit miles are routine. Using specialized antenna systems, I recently saw videos from a Mexican group operating a fixed wing aircraft at *48miles*, with a Dragon Link brand set up.

 

[Electro 2]

4xx Mhz should do the distance with some high dB gain antennas especially a Yagi on the RC Transmitter

Precisely what the Mexican group were doing. They had the Dragon Link TX in the high-power mode, (500mW), and an 8 element yagi for TX. TX was mounted on the antenna mast for no feed-line loss, too.

And there is also the 900Mhz fhss which I use with my DJI Ground control station suitable to 10km + especially with higher gain vehicle roof mounted omni. VE6GLT

I don't believe that DJI's 900 mHz data link product is a hopper. I'm pretty certain it's a conventional, narrow band, architecture. Have you actually looked at it on a spectrum analyzer ?