52% Weeks Solution Test Flight (Hempel)

[tony-amps]

Bill,
Great looking plane and lady luck is with you. You know this plane will last many years. Funny how we listen to those little voices in our head. Good decision on going with the second rec.


Tony Fandino

Have many many days of enjoyment with your creation.......

[forgues research]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JEFFRO503
	Well.....i can say one thing , and this will probably start some sort of a debate in here ( when doesn't this topic start a debate??? ) I think bill can safely say that the " 1 receiver crowd" would of lost their airplane , while the " 2 receiver crowd" ( including bill) saved their planes so they can fly again. Some people insist on sticking with the idea that receiver never ( or almost never) fail......well.......that $100.00 extra receiver just saved a multi thousand dollar aircraft. I'm only flying a 35% , so i'm staying with a single , anything larger , i would never fly it without two receiver's....my $.02 Jeff PS......BTW bill....planes looks friggin' awesome man!!

Good point Jeff, but I'm at a lost, why single receiver in a 35% and two receivers for bigger, the chances of losing a receiver is the same , as a matter of fact its the same with a trainer with a buzzing llittle .40 size , you r lost is the only thing different.
and your always left with a single transmitter.

I don't get the point.

On another note, there is a new system coming out for two receivers that will chose the good receive in a two receiver system, so you won't have to fly on only half the airplane, and its from Sombra Lab,

Roger

[Tim G]

I think this is worth repeating. Are there any Dean’s connectors in this plane, we recently had an IMAC pilot go through this. I know it doesn’t look like they could fail but they can.

If the receiver is good then does that mean that landing the plane twice with only half of it working could have been prevented with one receiver? I’m not trying to smart, just a question.

Tim

[Dangerous Dan]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Tim G
	I think this is worth repeating. Are there any Dean’s connectors in this plane, we recently had an IMAC pilot go through this. I know it doesn’t look like they could fail but they can. Tim

View post 29 no deans

[Tim G]

Sorry I missed that; my scanning abilities aren’t what they use to be.

Thanks Tim

[sweetpea]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JEFFRO503
	Well.....i can say one thing , and this will probably start some sort of a debate in here ( when doesn't this topic start a debate??? ) I think bill can safely say that the " 1 receiver crowd" would of lost their airplane , while the " 2 receiver crowd" ( including bill) saved their planes so they can fly again. Some people insist on sticking with the idea that receiver never ( or almost never) fail......well.......that $100.00 extra receiver just saved a multi thousand dollar aircraft. I'm only flying a 35% , so i'm staying with a single , anything larger , i would never fly it without two receiver's....my $.02 Jeff PS......BTW bill....planes looks friggin' awesome man!!

I love this topic........so had he only ran the good side of the plane he would have had no problems......or had he ran the bad side of the plane he would have no control..........so what is one to do with SS technology? you only run 1 rx with satellites to that RX.

Its everyones choice........its like the debate between choke servo and optical kill.......both are good and both have their faults.

I do want to know why Bill lost 2 RX's on the same side of the plane. That is not good

[DKjens]

I believe Bill has already admitted that the Rx that failed on the first flight was in fact an Rx that he did not have full confidence in due to its previous "exposure," but he lost track of that, didn't record it for memory, or what ever, but it could rather be contributed to a mistake by Bill than an actual unexpected Rx failure.

I think I missed that he changed that Rx, but I would expect he did, before further operation of the plane. The fact that the second Rx failed in the same manner would point to something, as pointed out, in the power supply, or just a different component.

It's a moot point, there will always be multiple Rx supporters and single Rx supporters. Sure, some times dual Rx will save a plane, but some times thay will crash it. If the Rx with the kill switch goes out in a hover, low high alpha, right after take off, etc., the it will cost the plane. A single Rx supporter will argue, that by running 2 Rx's you double the chance of this happening over running just a single Rx.

I do like that dual Rx switching thingy, I may want to try that in an airframe I trouble with on 72MHz. Only thing is, why did they only make it 7 channels? I need 8 channels when having smoke he he.

[sweetpea]

Please let us know what you find Bill........its down right nerving to see the same side of the plane fail twice.....even if one RX was suspected bad from the start

[DKjens]

Sorry guys, I just got the last one from AI he he, now maybe I can get some flights on my Krill KatanaS.

[toc pilot]

	Quote: Originally Posted by sweetpea
	Please let us know what you find Bill........its down right nerving to see the same side of the plane fail twice.....even if one RX was suspected bad from the start

Hello everyone!

1-receiver or 2 receivers? I have had good luck running planes with both systems. On my 3.3 meter Comp ARF Yak, I only have 1 receiver. On my 52% Black Edge I only have 1 receiver. On this Weeks bipe and on my old Pitts Challenger I ran 2 receivers. On my Turbo Raven, 1 receiver. On my 41% Extra 300 I am running 2. On my 2 turbine aircraft I am only using 1!

The 52% Weeks (as with most of my new planes) is going through the "teething" stage. I am very greatful that I still have the plane. Last Sunday I stated that I lost the left side receiver agian. This was a brand new receiver that I installed with a new crystal. I changed the crystal in the other "good" reciever just to make sure it was not a crystal thing. Because I have had issues twice with two totally different peices of equipment, I have to rule that the receiver is NOT the problem. Next in line has to be the Powerbox Board that I am using. I have been talking to Aircraft International and Gerhart has contacted Powerbox Systems. We are looking at a few things but so far have not found anything. The Powerbox Champion board has never failed me before and I use them in just about everything I fly.

I am wondering if there is just not something right with the way I have the receivers layed out in the plane? You all know that a receiver will not provide power to the servos without a clean signal. Maybe my transmitter is not transmitting right? Maybe the other receiver is causing the issue with the left side receiver? There is some carbon rods surounding the receivers too, this could be causing some type of blockage. I just have no idea. My next step is to continue changing components until everything starts to work properley. I will be sending the Powerbox Champion back for testing. I will replace it with a new one and I hope to install the new RRS system but I don't think there are any more "prototypes" in the US right now.

This DRR system is perfect for the dual receiver set up. As stated in prior posts, if you have a reciver problem, you will not loose any control over any specific parts of the plane. This will be a very safe item to have. It will also display how many times the device switched between recievers and also the sigal strength each receiver "saw" during each flight. This would certainly provide me with 'piece of mind' after landing and know how each receiver performed.

I guess I will just have to wait. I will continue to test and look at different things. I will change out more stuff and try it agian. I will keep you all posted.

Now, lets get back to the 1-receiver, 2-reciver! lol hehehe

Bill Hempel

[Tim G]

Now, lets get back to the 1-receiver, 2-reciver! lol hehehe

Bill Hempel[/quote]


I vote 1

[MattyMatt]

Bill... do you think that the reciever is going into lockout or is it just shutting down?

I agree... not a reciever issue a component issue.

[JimC-MD]

Bill, Sweet plane and I hope you get the gremlins exorcised before long.

As for the one Rx or two, people should do what they like. I just think that if you really want true redundancy you need to set it up that way. Two individually powered Rx with split work load. Any time you start to combine them you are not being true to the "Redundant" mantra. That is why I do not understand the excitement over this new unit by the duel proponents. If the Rx switching unit fails then it is game over.

[DKjens]

I am looking forward to trying that RRS. They say to run the antennas for each receiver in different locations, actually they say to run a whip antenna on one and the wire on the other. You can then log each flight pertaining to which receiver was used how much and how strong the system was. If the result shows to be mostly one particular receiver, then that would show that this receiver is mounted in the best way, has a better antenna (system) and/or is just the better receiver. One could with piece of mind switch back to using just that one particular receiver then.

The RRS could be used to sort out teething problems or it could be used continously.

As long as people have used two receivers, plugged into one PowerBox, and one receiver has failed, there has always been speculation that the two receivers have a detrimental affect on each other, and that causes the failure.

The RRS truly isolates the receivers and there should not be any undesired interaction between them.

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by innovator
	It might be just me, but when ever you get the electronics just perfect, you get a engine issue. Fix the engine and the covering wrinkles. Iron down the covering and the cowl loosens up. Loctite the cowl and a muffler falls off. Get all that straightened out and you end up nicking your prop pullin the plane out of the trailer. Replace the prop, and it starts to rain. Man, I love this hobby.

You, sir, are a man of experience!!! I'll have to give that explanation to my wife next time she asks why I am always doing something to my planes, even if I am not flying them!