Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Discussion on the reviews of 2.4GHz radios, modules and receivers that have appeared on RCModelReviews..com

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby ra03111 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:51 am

RCModelReviews wrote:In fact, I'm thinking that a DIY kit might be a better way than a module to convert the V2 9X to another brand of 2.4GHz system. You could simply cut the internal antenna wire and remove that unit (the hot-glue isn't very strong) then remove the ciruit board from the Turnigy module and mount the bind-button/LED in the module with the wires going through the old hole they drilled for the antenna wire.

The DIY kit's antenna could then be fitted where the original built-in antenna used to go.

Nice, neat and tidy.
Actually, how big is the board in the Turnigy "module"? Seeing as how you're not going to remove the Turnigy module to use in another system nor would you use the base antenna with another module (has its own), why not make the Turnigy system internal? This would open up the module bay without having to deal with the antenna wire. Naturally this depends on how much room is available in the case.
ra03111
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:48 pm

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby mpthompson » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:01 pm

Sidewinder wrote:Below is the one that I used; it fits perfectly in the 9X V2 and the futaba plug on the batt fits the jack in the trans. Caution, I would only charge this lipo to storage level, ie: 3.8V per cell or about 11.4V on this 3 cell.

http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/stor ... (Futaba/JR)


Sidewinder, thanks for the suggestion. Is the thought that 12.6V full charge would damage the 9X? Unfortunately, my balanced charger doesn't have a "storage level" setting. I'm looking more into Bruce's DIY battery upgrade using the protected Litium Ion batteries as it seems they can be safely charged using my balanced LiPo charger.
mpthompson
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 6:33 am

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby RCModelReviews » Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:35 pm

thos wrote: If one of the downfalls of the Turnigy V2 radio is no failsafe then I would have thought that an upgarde of software be able fix this ?

The failsafe capabilities are a component of the receiver's software, not the transmitter. So far, nobody's bothered to try and rewrite the receiver software and I don't think they'll bother. These $9 receivers are what they are -- very cheap and without failsafe (although in an electric model, the motor will stop if you turn off the transmitter).

I was also wondering if the circuit board is much different to the V1 as I would like to do the battery conversion when I recieve my radio? I was also wondering when doing the conversion, why you didnt use the the hole in the circuit board to the right of the resistor to terminate the resistor,giving the connection a lot more strength to the joint. I guess it isn't connected to resistor? Its hard to see connection points. :D

I haven't looked closely at the new PCB but it seems identical in almost every way (except for a couple of pads that are related to in-circuit programming of the processor). It was some time ago that I worked out the 2S lithium mod and I think that if the hole was usable I would have used it -- I'll recheck though.
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
RCModelReviews
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby mpthompson » Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:23 pm

Sorry, this is a noobie question. For RC aircraft of what use is failsafe other than to remove power from the engine -- something my cheap HK-TR6A receivers do anyway. I'm thinking that if the receiver loses contact with the transmitter it's going down anyway with or without failsafe. Unless you have a very self-stabilizing platform centering all controls isn't going to do much good. With this in mind, is a beginner or intermediate RC flier loosing much by choosing the 9X Tx/Rx which doesn't offer failsafe.

For RC helicopters I can see the advantage to perhaps move motor controls and such to minimize the danger of a 2lb buzzsaw falling from the sky. Of course, perhaps there are other reasons to have failsafe in an RC helicopter that I can't think of.
mpthompson
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 6:33 am

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby redline » Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:25 pm

RCModelReviews wrote:
thos wrote: If one of the downfalls of the Turnigy V2 radio is no failsafe then I would have thought that an upgarde of software be able fix this ?

The failsafe capabilities are a component of the receiver's software, not the transmitter. So far, nobody's bothered to try and rewrite the receiver software and I don't think they'll bother. These $9 receivers are what they are -- very cheap and without failsafe (although in an electric model, the motor will stop if you turn off the transmitter).
.

Ahh i was going to ask about that. I wasnt sure how failsafes worked. But as long as my electric motor turns off if it loses contact it sounds good for me.
Module based sytem doesnt worry me as im a newbie so wont need to remove the module. :)
I suppose it would be nice if they used a decent connector in the module for the antenna. My existing cheap 4 channel 2.4 uses one like laptop computer wifi so it cant be that expensive to make :)
Heres a pic of what i did to mine when I dropped the radio and ripped the antenna off. Cable off ebay is designed for putting 'normal' computer wifi antennas on your laptop wifi card. I use a 5dbi antenna on it which is probly massive overkill
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a293/redliner31/RC/IMG_3720r.jpg
User avatar
redline
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:13 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby RCModelReviews » Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:39 pm

Failsafe is useful for several reasons.

If you're not flying electric then failsafe is the only way to ensure that the motor stops (or at least cuts back to idle) if the radio link is lost. Many glow and gas motors have a lot of power and can cause very nasty injuries if a model runs amok. I've seen situations where someone is taxiing their model out to the runway when another person turned on their RC system on the same frequency. The model took off at full throttle, narrowly missing pilots on the flight-line -- before smacking into a fence. Failsafe (so long as it was properly set up) would fix that.

Another thing failsafe can do is reduce the distance a model travels if control is lost. On some of my faster models, I configure the failsafe to put the model into a snap roll -- which then (once the airspeed is washed off) would become a spin. This ensures that even if the RC link did fail while the model was being flown very fast, by the time it hit the ground (and possible someone on it), the amount of energy involved would be significantly reduced.

The other advantage of having something like full-up elevator on failsafe is that you will soon notice when there's any potentially dangerous interference around. Even momentary activations of the failsafe (caused by loss of link for more than half a second or so) will cause the model to pitch up quite noticeably. This becomes a warning signal that something is wrong and it's time to land.

I even use failsafe on my DLG (to put it into a spin) so that if I ever get hit by interference, it's not going to fly away and be lost.

We flew models for decades without failsafe -- but now that it's available I think it's a *very* important safety feature that everyone should use to protect their model and the people who are around when you fly it.
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
RCModelReviews
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby johnkim100530 » Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:32 am

mpthompson wrote:if the receiver loses contact with the transmitter it's going down anyway with or without failsafe.


Very true. Fail Safe cannot save the plane. When all controls stay at preset position, the plane falls in graceful arc instead of squirming when the signal is lost intermittently when no fail safe is employed.
When they introduced what they called PCM, we mocked it "Perfect Crash Mode."

I never bothered to use PCM. Why buy more expensive PCM receivers? I think PCM fail safe was invented by an engineer who never flew model airplanes. Theoretically it sounds nice but practically it is useless gimmick.
Last edited by johnkim100530 on Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
johnkim100530
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 8:23 pm
Location: Panorama City, California

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby RCModelReviews » Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:04 am

johnkim100530 wrote:Very true. Fail Safe cannot save the plane. When all controls stay at preset position, the plane falls in graceful arc instead of squirming when the signal is lost intermittently when no fail safe is employed.
When they introduced what they called PCM, we mocked it "Perfect Crash Mode."

Failsafe is more about protecting people than saving the plane.

It's true that no failsafe can guarantee a model won't be destroyed in the event of signal loss -- but it can prevent fly-away (in the case of a glow/gas/glider) and it can mean that, if you're flying in a safe area, away from spectators, the model is far less likely to travel far enough to endanger human life or other property. Those are indeed very important considerations, especially when you look at how many more large/fast models there are around these days.
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
RCModelReviews
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby mpthompson » Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:53 pm

RCModelReviews wrote:We flew models for decades without failsafe -- but now that it's available I think it's a *very* important safety feature that everyone should use to protect their model and the people who are around when you fly it.

Thanks for the very detailed explanation of failsafe. I can understand how it's not about really saving the plane, but rather taking out as much energy out of an impact as possible. The difference between something coming out of the sky at 15 mph and 75 mph can be quite dramatic.
mpthompson
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 6:33 am

Re: Review: Turnigy 9X version 2 (FHSS).

Postby rotorcrafts » Sat Jun 26, 2010 6:48 pm

Hello guys,

Sorry for deviating from the current topic, i wanted to share some info with you people. I am a small hobby shop owner in Pakistan, I ordered some radios direct from FlySky. the one 9x that i received is quite different from this $60 version. following are some pictures. Sorry for the poor picture quality :?

Image

Image

Image

Please note the following picture. the receiver still has the connector for the remote receiver but it wasent supplied with one. when i asked FlySky people they said that this is V2 so its not needed any more.

Image

the instruction manual was supplied with the radio, As you all must have noticed that the 2.4ghz module is separate from the radio and is not connected by a wire. I opened up the 2.4 module and yes the antenna wire was soldered to the PCB. Regarding the price.... I paid more than $60 :roll: but that was just one piece bought direct from the factory. also i bought the following radios aswell.

Image

Image

Image

At first when i bought these radios i was a bit confused that whether these radios are good enough to be sold or not. now after the reveiw by Rc Model Reveiws i am pretty confident that my customers will be happy.
User avatar
rotorcrafts
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 5:38 pm

PreviousNext

Return to 2.4GHz radios/modules/receivers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron