Here is a list of all the postings Roger Dyke has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: Understanding the numbers....|
Steve: That is correct as there really wasn't room for it in the aircraft and the receiver seemed to be functioning okay without. Is this bad news?
Just for interest for those who would like to know, I managed to get up to my flying field today after a few weeks lay-off due to the HS2 archaeological survey being carried out. I took two of the four of my aircraft recently converted from 35MHz to 2.4GHz. This was the first time that I was able to do an airborne test of the telemetry numbers. They were 4 successful 5 minute flights (2 each) both with an IC engine.
Aircraft 1 - Receiver Orange R620X V2 Aircraft 2 - Receiver Spektrum AR6600T
Aircraft 1 flight 1: A - 256, B - 36, Frames - 25, Holds - 0
Aircraft 1 flight 2: A - 211, B - 9, Frames - 6, Holds - 0
Aircraft 2 flight 1: A - 93, B - 0, Frames - 93, Holds - 0
Aircraft 2 flight 2: A - 113, B - 0, Frames - 113, Holds - 0
The antennas in both aircraft have been placed at 90 degs to each other and in the best places possible given the constraints allowed.
In looking at the telemetry figures whilst doing a range check on reduced power, it was a bit of a joke with the numbers dancing all over the place including picking up a couple of holds. That ignored, the control surfaces seemed to be working fine. Anyway, a good day for me, especially as one of the aircraft was even on it's maiden flight.
brokenenglish: I'm inclined to agree. We tend to get blinded by all the technology with all these wonderful statistics to look at, but the bottom line is are our sticks controlling the aircraft. The old type range check has always stood the test of time for me so maybe that's the way I will continue.
Steve: I do take your point about the telemetry being useful to check whether an antenna is best placed, which does give us the opportunity to move it if necessary.
Steve: Thank you for the info.
Cuban8: Like I mentioned to Don (above), I am in danger of over-thinking this and it is probably a case of too much information. Especially when we can't get a solid answer (even from the manufacturers) as to what it all means as to what is good and what is bad. Thanks for the information.
Don: I think that you are right. I am probably over-thinking this and are looking at all the numbers because I can and it's available. Perhaps the old method of 'does it work ok or not' is still the best test.
Martin: yes, I will be interested to see what the figures are next time I am at the flying field.
Mike: All of my antennas are in the top of the aircraft. But they are still only about 3 to 6 inches from the ground. The results are very similar from all the aircraft tested.
Mike: I have tried the test at a little shorter distance (probably about 27-28 metres) but the results are about the same. As I mentioned to Percy (above) the manual states to place the model on the ground restrained.
Reflections could play a part. Within about 3 metres to the side of the model is a aluminium framed 12' x 8' greenhouse. Maybe I need to do this test at the flying field. The reason I wanted to do this at home is because of getting a better feeling when I turn up at the field that I will be in with a chance of flying.
Don: I don't know as to what the telemetry number are when flying as I haven't flown any of my aircraft yet. I have only just finished converting them to 2.4GHz. On observing the numbers when operating the tx on reduced power my immediate thoughts were that the signals should be solid (no fades, no frames, etc.). Hence the posting. But thinking about it logically, if the idea of the reduced power is to simulate the aircraft being at the edge of it's communication range then I suppose I would be expected to see lots of antenna fades, bad frames, and even the occasional hold. Perhaps the telemetry is to be observed only when flying the model at full tx power and not when doing range checks on reduced power. Maybe I am looking too deeply into this as the models do seem to have full control. I am very used to 35MHz when I used to walk 30 paces with a collapsed aerial to check whether all the surfaces were moving correctly. If they were, job done. I am very new to 2.4GHz so am still a little bit nervous of it as at the moment it is the unknown.
Percy: Thanks for your reply. I'd thought about doing that, but thought that I would follow the manual which states:- "With the model restrained on the ground, stand 30 paces (approx. 90 feet/28 meters) away from the model.".
I might try raising it up just to see if it makes any difference.
I have recently purchased my first 2.4GHz transmitter/receiver. It is a Spektrum GX6 G3 with an AR6600T receiver. I think that I am now almost up to speed with programming it's capabilities. However, the range check is a bit of a puzzle. My back garden is 30 metres long so am using this as a preliminary range check just to make sure that I am in the right ball-park before I disappear to the flying field.
When I place my model on the ground at the top of the garden, I then switch it on and walk back the 30 metres. With the tx set to Range Check I observe from the telemetry readings that antenna 'A' gets the occasional fade with no 'Frame' losses and no 'Holds'. So far so good. Now, if I press the 'trainer' button to reduce the transmit power, the 'A' antenna seems to start counting endlessly with the 'B' antenna not far behind. Also the 'Frame' starts slowly counting up too. I also get the occasional 'Hold' too. If I move the tx in different directions, the numbers count either a bit slower or a bit faster depending on tx antenna position.
I have four aircraft. One with the Spektrum AR6600T receiver in, and the other three with an Orange R620X in. I have been very careful with antenna placement in the aircraft but am a little disappointed with the telemetry results coming back with the tx on reduced power. Am I missing something here.
I welcome the thoughts of all you experience 2.4-ers out there.
Many thanks in advance.
|Thread: Delivery time....|
David and flight1,
Thank you for your replies.
Would you believe it.10 minutes after my last post it arrived through the door. Sods law I suppose.Unfortunately wasn't home at the time.
My thanks to you all for your valued replies.
Edited By Roger Dyke on 10/04/2019 12:05:53
Dennis: My status says complete and has done for two weeks.
Tony: Thanks for that. That makes me feel a little better.
I have ordered a couple of small items(receivers) from Hobby King two weeks ago today (27th April) from their European facility. I live in the midlands UK. As yet I've seen no sign of them. The following day after placing the order I placed another order for another one. The second order I received last week. The items were in stock and processed the day after the order. Should I be getting bothered yet or is there still plenty of time for my order to arrive?
The postage was standard with no extra frills.
Stuart: Uncanny that you should just post this. Earlier on today I ordered a couple of OS No 8 plugs to try out. Thanks for your little story about the Evo 46. It does seem like some engines are more picky than others as to what type of plug they like.
Martin: I agree. With all the postings, the consensus seems to be that the prop spinner tightness may be the problem. As previously mentioned, I usually tighten the prop nut as much as I dare. This includes my judgement as to not wanting to snap the crankshaft prop spindle or strip the thread. I am using a standard length 1/4" spanner for tightening. Perhaps I need to be a bit more zealous.
flight1: The settings mentioned are the current ones and with these settings it runs absolutely fine. And no, it doesn't throw the prop when it's running. Only when flick starting it. The cylinder finned part of the engine is not cowled and is open to the airflow.
Engine Doctor: I purchased this engine myself brand new so I can confirm that it has never been dismantled. Because of this I would rather not dismantle it just for a look, as it was a real work of art trying to mount it in the space available. I do rather favour the plastic spinner as being the problem. I tighten the prop nut as much as I dare before I predict that the plastic might split.
Stuart: I have never used OS No 8 plugs but I believe that they are a good medium heat plug. I usually use Model Technics Firepower 5 plugs which are also medium heat and find them very good. I can fully understand why you have your props set to ten past eight. I think that we all have our own preferences. I no longer use an electric starter and find my prop setting ideal for my chicken stick flicking. I am going to look into a new style spinner.
flight1: It's good that you should mention the spinner. I am using one of the 'cheaper' plastic spinners and it has occurred to me whilst tightening the prop nut that if I tighten it any more than I dare, it will split the soft plastic that it's made from. There are other spinners available made out of a harder plastic (or fibre-glass, etc.). I also have a domed prop nut I could use instead if all else fails. I'll look into that.
I tried a brand new Firepower 5 to start with, but for some unknown reason the filament went open circuit after just two weeks. I have tried a few other different plugs but I still have the same result.
This engine runs perfectly on 1 and 3/4 turns open just on the edge of rich 4 stroking. 2 and 1/4 turns would be well over rich with this engine. The bleed screw is about 1/2 a hole and seems to idle nicely at about 2400 RPM.
cymaz: No, I don't think that this engine has ever been stripped right down, As I said previously it has only ran for about 5 hours or so. It runs absolutely fine after start.
Martin: I suppose it depends on the direction of our flicking technique as to where the prop's start position is. I flick directly downwards so the start of compression at 11:30 to 11-o-clock is exactly the right place for me as I flick it quickly through the compression part of the cycle. I'm not really a newcomer to this. I'm an old git now and have been doing it this way since in my teens after cutting my teeth on diesels. I really don't think it's anything to do with my flicking technique. Thanks for the suggestion though.
JD8: I could run it without the spinner but as I've just finished covering it and decorating it, I would rather have it fitted by choice. I do rather fancy the tip of a back to back sandpaper prop washer as suggested by Jon (second poster).
I too am not sure if the click I hear is actually the pre-ignition or the prop nut coming loose.
Edited By Roger Dyke on 02/04/2019 21:10:19
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!