 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / June 2006Scanner
Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html If it is to check your frequency before you fly and it can only detect a TX up to 1000 feet away, does it really help? > Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner > http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html > > If it is to check your frequency before you fly and it can only detect a TX > up to 1000 feet away, does it really help? I use an old SM services scanner but it sounds like it has a similar spec, what it will do is tell you if someone else at the field has turned on with your channel before you turn on due to poor use of the peg board, or if someone's TX is out of tune and interfering with adjacent channels as the SM one has a deviation meter. Greg ??>> Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner ??>> http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html ??>> ??>> If it is to check your frequency before you fly and it can only detect ??>> a TX up to 1000 feet away, does it really help? G> I use an old SM services scanner but it sounds like it has a similar G> spec, what it will do is tell you if someone else at the field has G> turned on with your channel before you turn on due to poor use of the G> peg board, or if someone's TX is out of tune and interfering with G> adjacent channels as the SM one has a deviation meter. A problem we may have is that we are in close proximity to another flying field. We have not had any major problems, and the odd blip could of course be anything. The neighbouring field is 1.5 miles away as the Fokker flies, and so the question is are we likely to experience interference from that far away or are we relatively safe, which is generally our experience so far. The question has arisen as we had a visit from our neighbours after they had suffered 3 write offs, one being a very expensive heli, all in 1 afternoon that they could not explain. I did experience a couple of flicks on a small fast plane (a Mustard) but that could have been anything, and the channel I was on was not one being used at the other field. A scanner was though of as a bit of a solution, but the one mentioned if its range is only a 1000 feet would not pick the other field up. I have tried to find the SM Services one but have only managed to find a picture of it on a club website. Do you know if there is a website for SM services LTD? snip > A scanner was though of as a bit of a solution, but the one mentioned if > its range is only a 1000 feet would not pick the other field up. I have > tried to find the SM Services one but have only managed to find a picture > of it on a club website. Do you know if there is a website for SM services > LTD? http://website.lineone.net/~smservices/ Trefor > ??>> Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner > ??>> http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > question is are we likely to experience interference from that far away or > are we relatively safe, which is generally our experience so far. I think 1.5 miles may be too close (Futaba says 2 mile range), suggest you agree channels with the other club.  SignatureRick -- BMFA recommends frequency sharing agreement with clubs within 2miles. I am very jaundiced about scanners and believe we place too much faith in them at the expense of good discipline with a pegboard. This subject has been aired extensively on the BMFA website and came to no real conclusion. Regards Peter >> ??>> Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner >> ??>> http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I think 1.5 miles may be too close (Futaba says 2 mile range), suggest you > agree channels with the other club. One of our club fields is just over 2 miles from another club. We fly on even channels, they fly on odd. We've never had any problems. Due to the size of the field and flying restrictions (we have to stay within the boundaries) the models are probably no further than 150m away at any time, so interference from another club 2 miles away is unlikley to happen. Our method of frequency control is a peg-board, (the type were you remove the freq peg and replace it with a name tag when flying - that way you know who is hogging the peg!). We also have an S.M. scanner that is set up next to the peg-board, so you "should" know if someone has switched on without taking the peg, in which case they get a warning from the safety officer - usually very loudly in order to embarass them. The scanner is only used as a back-up to the peg-board. >BMFA recommends frequency sharing agreement with clubs within 2miles. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Regards Peter > The neighbouring field is 1.5 miles away as the Fokker flies In that case I would strongly suggest an agreement with them to avoid using the same channels. The trouble is that a model at a good altitude and over in their direction could get a signal from them that's not so much weaker than the one from you, and so have problems discriminating. > A scanner was though of as a bit of a solution, but the one mentioned if its > range is only a 1000 feet would not pick the other field up. I have tried to > find the SM Services one but have only managed to find a picture of it on a > club website. Do you know if there is a website for SM services LTD? Here it is, at £165 I have to say it's a lot more expensive than the crop of hand held units now appearing, and I haven't any experience of them, I bought my SM scanner when it was the only one on the market. http://smservicesuk.co.uk/acatalog/Test_Units.html I very much doubt it will help with your situation though as even if it could reliably detect the channels being used by the other club you would both have to have them and use them rigorously as a sort of long range peg board in order to avoid clashes. Much easier to just come to some agreement. My view on the scanner is that it helps reduce the consequences of mistakes in peg board usage, after all everyone is human, and then there are the club members who think they own a channel... Greg >Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner >http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html > >If it is to check your frequency before you fly and it can only detect a TX >up to 1000 feet away, does it really help? I have one, and it depends what you want to do. It detects is something is on a frequency, so I turn mine on when I get to the field and glance at it before I turn my tranny on. It won't detect someone turning on after you on, and it can't help tell you if you get nterference, but then again I don't think anything can. Being perfectly honest it's belt and braces, I have the peg but I check the scanner. Saves me shooting someone else down.. > Has anybody got any views on the IDP scanner > http://www.alshobbiesstore.com/acatalog/info_1864.html > > If it is to check your frequency before you fly and it can only detect a TX > up to 1000 feet away, does it really help? Being significantly less sensitive than an R/C receiver, such a device is utterly useless. One would be better off switching on the Rx in the model and checking for suspicious servo movement, although such a test cannot be certain to detect interference that may be present at altitude. No matter how sensitive the monitoring equipment used, it can do no more than assure the absence of interference prior to a local Tx being operated on that channel. Thereafter, a scanner at the same location cannot detect any remote source of damaging interference that may appear subsequently. > Being significantly less sensitive than an R/C receiver, such a device > is utterly useless. My experience differs, my SM services scanner is also less sensitive than an RX but is very useful in spotting sloppy peg board procedures and out of tune transmitters. >One would be better off switching on the Rx in the > model and checking for suspicious servo movement And the first thing we're all taught is ... don't turn on the RX without the TX being on!. It can cause servos to move iratically with the possibility of damaging something, and in the case of electric can cause the motor to start unexpectedly with obvious dangers. > No matter how sensitive the monitoring equipment used, it can do no > more than assure the absence of interference prior to a local Tx being > operated on that channel. Thereafter, a scanner at the same location > cannot detect any remote source of damaging interference that may > appear subsequently. That's perfectly true, they aren't a cure all but are never the less quite useful. Greg I agree with Greg, My SM Scanner has been of most use on busy days at the field when channel hogging is a real crime and some pillock has actually left his Tx turned on whilst munching on a grungeburger. Incidentaly you can use the SM scanner to 'seek' out frquencys in use for up to 2 miles set to 'Step' and connected to a pukker aireal and the suplied speaker. The Rx checker has been most usefull in detecting 'off ' frequency Crystals and Rx's too. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.