Any benefit in 35MHz

[mark398]

I've got some very old 35MHz futaba kit hiding up in the attic somewhere. Is there any benefit of this compared to modern 2.4GHz gear? The 35MHz kit has been stored for quite a few years so I'm assuming that batteries would be dead and even some components would need to be checked, but is there any point?

[bignose13]

Put a 4 meter extension on the antenna and your getting 4k easily
Far more than the 2.4 radio gear and you can use 2.4 video gear, better for planes in my opinion
Also when you come to the end of the signal, you'll get glitches warning you, not stop all together, so gives you a good chance of recovery, just lift your radio tx as high as you can and you'll get signal back

[electrotor]

Also when you come to the end of the signal, you'll get glitches warning you, not stop all together, so gives you a good chance of recovery, just lift your radio tx as high as you can and you'll get signal back

Not necessarily. It depends on whether the gear has failsafe or not.

[BigT]

Which it must have by regs. Also remember why most of us stopped using it in the first place. But if you want some I have about 20 rx going cheap😄 inc some PCM and dual conversion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[electrotor]

Which it must have by regs.

Which regulation is this?

[BigT]

CAP 658, chapter 5

"Whilst the recommendations in CAP 658 are not
regarded as legal requirements, one of the reasons
why it is issued by the CAA is to provide a guide to
what would be considered 'reasonable practice' in
the event of a model flye
r being prosecuted by them
under the Air Navigation Order."

[electrotor]

CAP 658 has no such wording. Where did you get this from?

Chapter 5 certainly mentions failsafes but only if the receiver is capable of it. Here it is in total :

Chapter 5 Safety Considerations
1 Any Model Aircraft Flying
First
Choose an unobstructed site and at all times keep a safe distance from:
• PERSONS
• VESSELS
• VEHICLES
• STRUCTURES
Only Fly
• In suitable weather.
• With regard for any other conditions such as local bye-laws.
• With due consideration for other people and property.
• With the model in direct unaided visual line of sight at all times.
• If reasonably satisfied that the flight can be made safely.
Failsafes
Any powered model aircraft fitted with a receiver capable of operating in failsafe mode should have the failsafe set, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle on loss or corruption of signal.
2 Additional Requirements – Models Having a Mass from 7 kg to 20 kg
Should only be flown
• Clear of controlled airspace unless with Air Traffic Control (ATC) permission.
• Clear of any Aerodrome Traffic Zone (ATZ) unless with ATC permission.
• At less than 400 ft above the point of launch except with permission as above.
• Well clear of any congested area of a city, town or settlement.
• At least 50 m clear of persons, vessels, vehicles or structures. This can be reduced to 30 m for take-off or landing. Other model operators and any assistants or officials may be within this distance; as may vessels, vehicles or structures under
their control.
and
• A serviceable 'fail-safe' mechanism should be incorporated to operate on loss of signal or detection of an interfering signal. For example on an internal combustion power driven model this should operate, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle.
• Ensure that any load carried on the model is secure.

[RaySky]

CAP 658 has no such wording. Where did you get this from?

Chapter 5 certainly mentions failsafes but only if the receiver is capable of it. Here it is in total :

Chapter 5 Safety Considerations
1 Any Model Aircraft Flying
First
Choose an unobstructed site and at all times keep a safe distance from:
• PERSONS
• VESSELS
• VEHICLES
• STRUCTURES
Only Fly
• In suitable weather.
• With regard for any other conditions such as local bye-laws.
• With due consideration for other people and property.
• With the model in direct unaided visual line of sight at all times.
• If reasonably satisfied that the flight can be made safely.
Failsafes
Any powered model aircraft fitted with a receiver capable of operating in failsafe mode should have the failsafe set, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle on loss or corruption of signal.
2 Additional Requirements – Models Having a Mass from 7 kg to 20 kg
Should only be flown
• Clear of controlled airspace unless with Air Traffic Control (ATC) permission.
• Clear of any Aerodrome Traffic Zone (ATZ) unless with ATC permission.
• At less than 400 ft above the point of launch except with permission as above.
• Well clear of any congested area of a city, town or settlement.
• At least 50 m clear of persons, vessels, vehicles or structures. This can be reduced to 30 m for take-off or landing. Other model operators and any assistants or officials may be within this distance; as may vessels, vehicles or structures under
their control.
and
• A serviceable 'fail-safe' mechanism should be incorporated to operate on loss of signal or detection of an interfering signal. For example on an internal combustion power driven model this should operate, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle.
• Ensure that any load carried on the model is secure.

I have a question if I may ask it... Nothing to do with 35mhz as I have given up on that due to frequency crystals and possibly being shot down!
Anyway... Q is the above states a failsafe should reduce the motor/engine to minimum; I am soon to purchase an Auto pilot and failsafe receiver and set it up with the deliberate intention of enough throttle to keep the craft airborne above stall speed on a RTH setting when the signal is lost or if I get into trouble,
Can anyone advise if this is acceptable?

[electrotor]

CAP 658 has no such wording. Where did you get this from?

Chapter 5 certainly mentions failsafes but only if the receiver is capable of it. Here it is in total :

Failsafes
Any powered model aircraft fitted with a receiver capable of operating in failsafe mode should have the failsafe set, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle on loss or corruption of signal.

I have a question if I may ask it... Nothing to do with 35mhz as I have given up on that due to frequency crystals and possibly being shot down!
Anyway... Q is the above states a failsafe should reduce the motor/engine to minimum; I am soon to purchase an Auto pilot and failsafe receiver and set it up with the deliberate intention of enough throttle to keep the craft airborne above stall speed on a RTH setting when the signal is lost or if I get into trouble,
Can anyone advise if this is acceptable?

Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread if there is going to be enough responses to the above failsafe question. It has been covered before though and I doubt if anything new would emerge.

The regulation only states "should" not "must".
For what it is worth, aircraft do not fail safe. In practice the best you can call it is fail preset and certainly one size does not fit all. I understand that this has been raised in discussion with the CAA in relation to multicopters and RTH. Surely better to stay flying and RTH than plummet to the ground above a road or building, over which you may have been flying at a legal separation distance.

BTW frequency synthesised 35MHz receivers are common and inexpensive so no need to worry about crystals. Also I have never experienced a shootdown in 35 or so years of flying 35MHz. In fact 35MHz non failsafe usually gives you a warning of control issues so you can act accordingly. For my latest model (Multiplex Solius) I have chosen JR 35MHz synthesised single conversion PPM gear.

[BigT]

CAP 658 has no such wording. Where did you get this from?

Chapter 5 certainly mentions failsafes but only if the receiver is capable of it. Here it is in total :

Chapter 5 Safety Considerations
1 Any Model Aircraft Flying
First
Choose an unobstructed site and at all times keep a safe distance from:
• PERSONS
• VESSELS
• VEHICLES
• STRUCTURES
Only Fly
• In suitable weather.
• With regard for any other conditions such as local bye-laws.
• With due consideration for other people and property.
• With the model in direct unaided visual line of sight at all times.
• If reasonably satisfied that the flight can be made safely.
Failsafes
Any powered model aircraft fitted with a receiver capable of operating in failsafe mode should have the failsafe set, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle on loss or corruption of signal.
2 Additional Requirements – Models Having a Mass from 7 kg to 20 kg
Should only be flown
• Clear of controlled airspace unless with Air Traffic Control (ATC) permission.
• Clear of any Aerodrome Traffic Zone (ATZ) unless with ATC permission.
• At less than 400 ft above the point of launch except with permission as above.
• Well clear of any congested area of a city, town or settlement.
• At least 50 m clear of persons, vessels, vehicles or structures. This can be reduced to 30 m for take-off or landing. Other model operators and any assistants or officials may be within this distance; as may vessels, vehicles or structures under
their control.
and
• A serviceable 'fail-safe' mechanism should be incorporated to operate on loss of signal or detection of an interfering signal. For example on an internal combustion power driven model this should operate, as a minimum, to reduce the engine(s) speed to idle.
• Ensure that any load carried on the model is secure.

Its from the CAA web site  http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP658%204%20Edition%20Amend%201%20June%202013.pdf 

[electrotor]

Its from the CAA web site  http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP658%204%20Edition%20Amend%201%20June%202013.pdf

'Fraid not. The wording you quoted

"Whilst the recommendations in CAP 658 are not regarded as legal requirements, one of the reasons why it is issued by the CAA is to provide a guide to what would be considered 'reasonable practice' inthe event of a model flyer being prosecuted by them under the Air Navigation Order."does not appear in CAP 658."

does not appear in CAP 658.

You are quoting from the BMFA Members Handbook (p17) which is not a regulatory document.

[Coyote]

I've got some very old 35MHz futaba kit hiding up in the attic somewhere. Is there any benefit of this compared to modern 2.4GHz gear? The 35MHz kit has been stored for quite a few years so I'm assuming that batteries would be dead and even some components would need to be checked, but is there any point?

Sorry your thread has turned into yet another regulations thread even though it had absolutely nothing to do with opening topic.

Yes you can use the 35 meg gear, if its been stored for while just give it a run for a few hours, everything powered up, just a soak test. Then do a range check to make sure everything is in order and your good to go.

You will get further than stock 2.4ghz gear but you leave yourself to the possibility of being shot down by another 35mhz user but this should be very rare as nearly all fly 2.4ghz anyway now. 

[electrotor]

Point taken Coyote but I thought it important to correct the misinformation. I also suggested starting a new thread if anyone wished to debate (again)fail safes.

Expanding on the original question, one of the problems with "very old kit ... hiding up in the attic" is that corrosion and component ageing may have taken it's toll. A thorough visual inspection and, as you suggest, a soak test/range check could identify any issues. I believe that Ripmax are Futaba agents and may be able to inspect the kit, but obviously at a cost, which the original questioner may not consider worth it.

[bignose13]

Yep there's a section in the bmfa handbook saying about black corrosion and should be taken with caution, I'd get my handbook out and quote it
Can't be arsed

[BigT]

Its from the CAA web site  http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP658%204%20Edition%20Amend%201%20June%202013.pdf

'Fraid not. The wording you quoted

"Whilst the recommendations in CAP 658 are not regarded as legal requirements, one of the reasons why it is issued by the CAA is to provide a guide to what would be considered 'reasonable practice' inthe event of a model flyer being prosecuted by them under the Air Navigation Order."does not appear in CAP 658."

does not appear in CAP 658.

You are quoting from the BMFA Members Handbook (p17) which is not a regulatory document.

My Last word to you. Try chapter 5 para 2 of the article : FAILSAFES. CAA CAP 658. Yes it is paraphrased in the handbook but read the original.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk