Welcome to The FlyingGiants! - please login or click this bar to join our community...

HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
 

Welcome to The FlyingGiants Community! We're all about fun, and inside you'll find the greatest, friendliest, and most helpful group of people around! If this is your first time visiting, please check out site, and click here to sign up! We hope to see you soon!!

Go Back   FlyingGiants > Technology > What's Hot
Forgot your password? Create a new account


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-15-2008, 10:57 AM   #61
Zeeb
Bad-ass Super Contributer!
 
Zeeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pleasant Grove, UT
Age: 61
Posts: 2,077
Awards Showcase
F3A TEAM USA SUPPORTER!: F3A TEAM USA SUPPORTER! - Issue reason: You are BAD ASS, Thank you for supporting the 2009 F3A TEAM USA! 
Total Awards: 1
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Pardon my ignorance if the answer is obvious; if you're running a power expander, why not just use an AR9000/R921 instead of the AR9100 power safe rx?
Zeeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2008, 02:24 PM   #62
kevinc
What's a rudder??
 
kevinc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Post Falls ID, usa
Age: 45
Posts: 449
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Im not using a power expander. Im using a turbo regulator.
kevinc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2008, 02:42 PM   #63
Zeeb
Bad-ass Super Contributer!
 
Zeeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pleasant Grove, UT
Age: 61
Posts: 2,077
Awards Showcase
F3A TEAM USA SUPPORTER!: F3A TEAM USA SUPPORTER! - Issue reason: You are BAD ASS, Thank you for supporting the 2009 F3A TEAM USA! 
Total Awards: 1
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Well I'm guessing the buss is common like it's predecessors and there's a guy over on RCU who's posting some results of tests he's run on the 9100. He said it runs just fine on one set of power inputs which would indicate that it is a common buss. I don't see why your idea wouldn't work.
Zeeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2008, 07:03 PM   #64
2leftthumbs
Wantabe Hucker
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: United States, FL, Melbourne
Posts: 87
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Do you need to run a regulator with the 9100? It list a range of 6-10v.
2leftthumbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2008, 01:28 PM   #65
cjcyclesrc
Bad-ass Super Contributer!
 
cjcyclesrc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: United States, NC, Winston-Salem
Age: 30
Posts: 3,411
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Quote:
Do you need to run a regulator with the 9100? It list a range of 6-10v.
No. You don't need to run a regulator with the 9100.

The problem comes from your servos. The 9100 doesn't regulate power. If you have 7.4 volts going in your servos will get 7.4 volts.
__________________
Charles
Fly Extreme! Extreme Flight RC
WrongWay RC
cjcyclesrc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2008, 03:09 AM   #66
TailTouch
Gettin' Lower!
 
TailTouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 67
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Hello experts.
I am moving from a 50cc gas plane to a 100cc mainly for IMAC (Basic). Since this will be my first 100cc, I want to keep things as simple as possible. My philosophy always has been "less the better".

As I understand, the need for powerboxes etc. arises because of the heavy amp draw of the newer super powerful servos like 8711 & 5955. The need for matchboxes is because you would need 2 servos for ailerons or rudder and if you are not an expert at mechanically aligning servos you have to use them (or a Hitec programmer) to prevent excessive current draw.

My question is that these new servos have more than enough torque to be used singly on a control surface for a 100cc plane. Is their any other reason besides torque (like control surface flex or flutter) why you would need more than 1 servo. Does a composite plane vs a wood plane make any difference.

If I want a really really simple setup, can I just have 5 8711's on all surfaces, 9100 Rx & 2 A123 batteries.

No matchbox, no extra switches, no regulators and no powerboxes.

I understand that everyone has their favorite setup and a lot of guys like a lot of gadgets in their planes but I am shooting (no pun intended) for a simple & inexpensive setup.

Thanks.
TailTouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2008, 03:30 AM   #67
dubd
Turbine Hucker
 
dubd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 1,458
Default Re: New 2.4GHZ RECEIVER NO NEED FOR POWER BOXES

Tailtouch, some guys recommend 2 servos per aileron so that the load can be spread across the entire surface. Some planes that require 2 aileron servos per wing have one aileron servo on both ends of the actual aileron. Using only one might pose a structural issue.
dubd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
JR-9303 2.4 Field Results 1bwana1 Radios 186 08-22-2011 03:23 AM
FlyingGiants Exclusive! Introducing The Futaba 12FG, Modules & More! madmax Leading Edge Homepage Article Discussions 473 01-24-2010 11:01 AM
FG EXCLUSIVE: All New JR 12X & 9303 2.4GHZ! Cracky Leading Edge Homepage Article Discussions 70 01-11-2009 07:50 PM
Independent tests prove lack of frequency hopping with XPS XJet Radios 1501 11-21-2008 10:24 AM
DX-7. This Changes Everything.. Again! LeadingEdge Leading Edge Homepage Article Discussions 112 12-03-2006 04:58 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 AM.

All Flyinggiants.com content copyright 2006-2012 by RCGroups.com, LLC except where otherwise indicated. The Flyinggiants.com logo is a trademark of RCGroups.com, LLC.
Please report any misuse of our trademarks or copyright violations using the contact form.
RCGroups Network :: RCGroups :: The E Zone :: Lift Zone :: RC Power :: Crackroll :: RC Cars

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.