MAJOR 2.4 Ghz Spread Spectrum Release! A FlyingGiants Exclusive!

[madmax]

Manny/Colo, the antenna plug has a 90 degree mount which only protrudes, I would guess less than a half inch from the back of the module. The antenna is designed to snugly fit the existing antenna mount, and is the appropriate length to avoid unnecessary slack in the wires.

Thanks for the informaiton and support Danny! You guys definately knocked this one out of the park!

[dsnyder]

No problem! I'm happy to help!

[coloradoz]

I'm glad this technology is available for sure , but I don't know how this will work in practice - I mean I've gone through my share of replacement antennas, and I'm reasonably careful. Now that we have a better RF link to the planes and heli's out there, my new fear now involves the question regarding how rugged is that cable? Is it designed to take day-in and day-out tugging and handling? I know similar antennas on my routers aren't rugged at all and are VERY intolerant to a lot of handling. Since the antenna wire is exposed, it is now subject to day-to-day handling, etc. The exposed cable is now the weak link. I realize that this suggestion is too late - but I'd rather make my installation semi-permanent. That is, I'd rather the connector exit the side of the module, drill the appropriate hole in the side of the plastic module receptacle and make all connections internal to the TX box. I can't imagine that I'd be routinely going back and forth between SS and 72. Hence my question about mounting options. Maybe an optional 'side connector' for those who wanted to make a more 'semi-permanent installation.

[Judge]

What it comes down to is that if you want to retro fit a system built for 72 MHz to SS you will have to make a compromise regardless of which system you ultimately decide to use.

With Spektrum you will have a small protrusion off the back and the cable to the antenna. The antenna is removable for easy storage when not flying.

With XPS you will either have a non-removeable antenna sticking out the back of the TX that will require you to remove the module to put it in a TX case, or you will have an external module with a cable and the same antenna that you plug into your trainer port.

Neither one is optimal. Both will work. And both are the type of compromises we will have to live with until the change over to ground up SS systems in complete.

For me it still comes down to the real choice being between a company with an established track record of reliability and customer service versus a company that nobody had heard of before last October and who has an unknown performance record. The antenna issue and such is not the major criteria I am focusing on.

[coloradoz]

I'm not sure I completely agree with you - it's not a matter of compromising, it is a matter of design packaging. The basic issue is that of choice - do I want to routinely interchange to 72 or not. My answer is no. The technical option does exist to completely make an 8103 look like a DX6/7 from the outside - that is, everything neatly tucked away - with a very simple relocation of the antenna receptacle. I've seen, as I'm sure you have, the way this equipment gets used on a daily basis. I do lay my TX on the ground or table when I fiddle with my engine, etc - so therefore it does, in practical use gets 'manhandled'. In my mind it is a practical matter of increasing the overall reliability of the equipment, and not moving the problem from one area to another. I really don't want to worry about whether I'm laying my TX on its antenna or antenna connection. I do agree with you regarding the comment of the small stub antenna out of back of the XL module. That does limit the use of the XL based modules to strickly hand-held situations (not TX trays).

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by coloradoz
	I'm not sure I completely agree with you - it's not a matter of compromising, it is a matter of design packaging.

That is exactly what I mean. Once we have dedicated SS systems this type of decision will no longer need to be made. So you look at your situation and decide which of the interim solutions works best for you.

[Kitman]

	Quote: Originally Posted by spektrumrc
	The two ports are "BATT/BIND" and "DATA". They are used for binding, data and/or redundant power. If two power sources are used they must be the same chemistry and # cells. Paul

Paul,

Thanks for bringing your knowledge and technology to our site!!

[Shakes]

	Quote: Originally Posted by coloradoz
	I'm not sure I completely agree with you - it's not a matter of compromising, it is a matter of design packaging. The basic issue is that of choice - do I want to routinely interchange to 72 or not. My answer is no. The technical option does exist to completely make an 8103 look like a DX6/7 from the outside - that is, everything neatly tucked away - with a very simple relocation of the antenna receptacle. I've seen, as I'm sure you have, the way this equipment gets used on a daily basis. I do lay my TX on the ground or table when I fiddle with my engine, etc - so therefore it does, in practical use gets 'manhandled'. In my mind it is a practical matter of increasing the overall reliability of the equipment, and not moving the problem from one area to another. I really don't want to worry about whether I'm laying my TX on its antenna or antenna connection. I do agree with you regarding the comment of the small stub antenna out of back of the XL module. That does limit the use of the XL based modules to strickly hand-held situations (not TX trays).

20 years ago, I could have easily used the same argument against a flimsy, telescoping piece of the metal used as the antenna now on current systems.

[KrisW]

[quote=Judge;187152]What it comes down to is that if you want to RETRO (note: authors enhancement) fit a system built for 72 MHz to SS you will have to make a compromise regardless of which system you ultimately decide to use.

quote]

If I may make a correction here. .not aimed at the person making the post, but in a general sort of way. . . . . .

RETRO fit means going BACK to what it had before. . like going from a modifed item (with Spektrum technology) back to 72mhz. .

RE-fit means to change UP, or ro modernize. . from 72mhz to Spektrum

Aircraft Carriers do not go into DryDock for a RETROfit .. .otherwise they'd be equipped with WW2 era aircraft when they went back to sea.

The fact that this nomenclature is lost on some of the best and brightest in our society is strong evidence that we ALL need to do a RE-think (not Retro-think) on what we are saying.

So. . folks. . . . please.

Upgrading to a Spektrum or 2.4G transmitter/receiver system, on your old junky 10X radio, is a Refit to the better, more modern stuff, not a retrofit to AM (does the 10X even DO AM?????)

Thank you all for your attention to this glaring, poignant, and irritating thorn in my side.

[madmax]

Danny, could you please share with us how the modules will interact with multiple models, and handle failsafe? There is also some great new technology built into the new Spektrums with the way they handle frequency hopping and locking. Pardon highly untechnical verbage, I forgot the correct terms.

Thanks guys!!

[Judge]

Let's see:

retrofit |ˌretrōˈfit| verb ( -fitted , -fitting ) [ trans. ] add (a component or accessory) to something that did not have it when manufactured : drivers who retrofit catalysts to older cars. • provide (something) with a component or accessory not fitted to it during manufacture : buses have been retrofitted with easy-access features. noun an act of adding a component or accessory to something that did not have it when manufactured. • a component or accessory added to something after manufacture. ORIGIN 1950s: blend of retroactive and refit .

On the other hand here is what an actual dictionary has to say for refit:

refit verb |rēˈfit| ( -fitted , -fitting ) [ trans. ] replace or repair machinery, equipment, and fittings in (a ship, building, etc.) : a lucrative contract to refit a submarine fleet. noun |ˈrēˌfit; rēˈfit| a restoration or repair of machinery, equipment, or fittings.

Just correcting the incorrect correction.

[madmax]

Not in here guys.