Independent tests prove lack of frequency hopping with XPS

[XJet]

	Quote: Originally Posted by jonkoppisch
	Was all the info released today about the telemetry etc? You know... April 1st???

It's already April 2 here :-)

[jonkoppisch]

Then the jokes only on us?

[zoomer260]

	Quote: Originally Posted by KrisW
	When I started into RC back in 1975, I had a choice. . AM or FM. . I chose FM because all the AM guys were having SOO many problems due to the CB radio craze going on back then. FM was up on the 72mhz band, AM was stuck on 27mhz with all the truckers. When I got bqack into the hobby 11 years ago, I immediately went with PCM due to it's many advantages over PPM. I find your attitude extremely ignorant when it comes to the safety of those around you, and trying to give me a hard time for being prudent is really wayyyyy off base. We stand under shelters because there is a very real danger, but the fool flying the plane, like you, thinks the danger is acceptable. It's not acceptable, in any way. Control loss at any time should be immediately rectified. When it's not, the PERSON has a major problem. Which is why XPS users worry me. I've seen too many instances of people with half-witted attitudes toward radio safety FINALLY cause a big enough problem that everyone stepped in and shut them down until they fixed their planes. It should not take that. At the first hint of a problem the plane should be on the ground or examined very carefully until the problem is determined and then the situation resolved. 2 years ago, at JN, I collared Kiwi and another guy for almost an hour while I sorted a weak receiver on my MX-2. At the FIRST hint of a control issue I had the plane on the ground, and then through careful examination and testing we determined which receiver was actually weak, and I immediately fixed the problem. Some people don't take it seriously enough. PPM users get a lot more "glitches" than PCM, which is why I only fly PCM systems on anything larger than a foamy. I'm not missing a damned thing by making sure the guys using PPM don't injure or kill me. You may laugh at that, but it takes one mistake to make it happen. Feel lucky, punk??

Now, now Kris ol' buddy, no need to get nasty. What I said was completely true and you confirmed it by saying you jumped on the FM PPM bandwagon because it was the "next greatest thing".

All I said that had anything to do with what YOU said was the "potentially unguided missile" part. Which if you can't get it through your head that ALL our planes are potentially unguided missiles you completely missed my point.

One thing that has bothered me about people on this site is the "safety" factor. Most (as do you) think that a large airplane turning a BIG prop really slow (6000RPM) is somehow 10 fold more dangerouse than a small plane turning a small razor blade APC 14000 rpm. IT AIN'T. That 14000 will cut you completely to pieces in an instant. On a .40 size plane.

I hear about duel recievers, duel Rx batts, power expanders all these great things (that work) In the name of safety because it is on a BIG plane. Bullcrap. It is the investment that is being protected.

I have only seen one pilot intentionally plant his crippled plane in the name of safety. And it was a Jet pilot at a Superman Rally. I was so proud of that guy. Everyone else tries their best to get the crippled "investment" back to the strip. Probably including ME.

I planted a .40 size quickie plane once on purpose and I still am proud I did it. Might could have saved it, I decide it wasn't woth the risk to others. If I had been alone at the field no doubt I would have tried.

So please, no more BS about safety and the size of the plane concerning equiptment. They all deserve the best you can afford.

That said, doesn't mean if you can't have all the latest and greatest you should be grounded.

And Kris, sorry to vent and it doesn't all concern you. Just that I don't understand how a .40 size plane turning 14000 rpm going 150 MPH can be in any less need of all the redundency and "safety factor".

And I have survived several "potentially fatal" injuries so yeah, I feel very lucky.

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by zoomer260
	Now, now Kris ol' buddy, no need to get nasty. What I said was completely true and you confirmed it by saying you jumped on the FM PPM bandwagon because it was the "next greatest thing". All I said that had anything to do with what YOU said was the "potentially unguided missile" part. Which if you can't get it through your head that ALL our planes are potentially unguided missiles you completely missed my point.And Kris, sorry to vent and it doesn't all concern you. Just that I don't understand how a .40 size plane turning 14000 rpm going 150 MPH can be in any less need of all the redundency and "safety factor". And I have survived several "potentially fatal" injuries so yeah, I feel very lucky.

And THAT is WHY we stand under the shelter when some people fly. . ya see. . the majority of that FM PPM stuff is in SMALL planes. . . . . . and small planes getting glitches are just as deadly as big ones with PCM lockout, perhaps more so, because PPM glitches happen a lot more often than PCM lockouts, and there are 50 small planes for every 40%er.

Thanks for making my point for me.

One last thing. .it's not "protecting the investment". . . it's protecting everything form a potential problem. . plane, equipment, innocent bystanders, grandpa with his PPM controllled trainer in the pits next to me. We use redundant systems to guard against ANY problem bringing the plane down in a bad way, and possibly hurting/killing someone. I've intentionally dumped a trainer, 45% Weeks Solution, 38% 260, and a Comp-Arf 40%er. All had suffered catastrophic control damage/loss or structural damage and were barely controllable, even though the radio gear was working as advertised (trainer got midaired, Weeks lost the top wing, 260 lost the elevator horn assembly, and the Comp twisted the fuselage in a blender)

But, I never lost the radio gear on them, and I was not flying on PPM. And unlike you, I've never had a scratch at the flying field. . I don't intend to start any time soon. Maybe being that little bit more safety cautious, and standing under the shelter, has kept me from those "potentially fatal injuries" that seem to plague you.

[buttface]

I have heard there will be a picket line in front of the XPS booth at Toledo this year. I will be there!Who else is gonna picket with us?

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by buttface
	I have heard there will be a picket line in front of the XPS booth at Toledo this year. I will be there!Who else is gonna picket with us?

And Video, live, would be even better ! ! ! !

[Reza]

I guess I'm going to miss this year's Toledo

	Quote: Originally Posted by KrisW
	And Video, live, would be even better ! ! ! !

[zoomer260]

Kris okay. I've decided that 2.4 is the way to go. I'm going to get the best I can afford.

If you personally have not lost a plane due to radio link issues why are you in this thread ?

You've flown PPM without losing a plane. You've flown PCM without lockout obviously or that would have you tossing your Rx's in the can (THAT'S SCARY). The "hit's" on PPM can be seen and the plane grounded as you yourself point out.

I don't want or need to get in the now passe' argument of PPM and PCM. Lost plane to PCM, never lost plane to PPM. Plan to go to 2.4 over the "idiot" turning on issue. No other reason.

I've got a JR PCM reciever I'll even pay postage on to send to you. Great shape, crashed only once and given a clean bill of health from horizon. PM your address.

[buttface]

2.4 is the way to go. As long as you don't consider XPS as an option.

[jonkoppisch]

Interesting post... It probably wont last long though...

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=127

[buttface]

Yea JD will sweep that post under the rug fast.

[ricoalonso]

Don't worry, I've got it in .pdf format if that happens