Smallest size heli for a satellite installation

[oldcelt]

What is the smallest heli in which one would normally use a satellite rx?

[cjcj1949]

Probably a 450. It depends how much conductive stuff is in the construction as this will shield or boost the reception. Anything with carbon fibre needs more than one aerial. Many rxs have more than one aerial.

[oldcelt]

Probably a 450. It depends how much conductive stuff is in the construction as this will shield or boost the reception. Anything with carbon fibre needs more than one aerial. Many rxs have more than one aerial.

So, as virtually all modern fbl electric kits use a carbon fibre frame, all of them should use a satellite rx system?

[djm]

Personally I dont bother with my 450 it doesn't get to far away because I can't see it and never had a problem,but any thing above that has a sat....

[Sharpedge]

I have a new 250DFC with 2 x stats on it, one on the landing skid strut and another on the opposite side frame. Brain installed under the main frames between the skids.

[LaurenceGough]

I have always said 500 size and above. My 450's have all been fine with one receiver. Although there is no harm in adding an extra one... It is just not really required for below a 500 size (425mm main blades).

[BenScoobert]

Agree with lawrence, 500 and above.
My 450 never had issues and it's carbon.

[oldcelt]

Personally I dont bother with my 450 it doesn't get to far away because I can't see it and never had a problem,but any thing about that has a sat....

The reason I'm asking is because I'm planning on building a 450 kit so I'd like to know as much as possible in advance.
Cheers, Ken

[Mark_T]

With Spektrum technology you need to understand exactly what you are getting with each receiver or satellite.

The individual satellites may have two pieces of wire on them but they form a single antenna, same goes for the AR7000, this is why you need to keep the wires on these devices in a straight line for optimal performance but with the satellite mounted at 90 degrees to the base unit.

The AR7200BX by contrast needs the wires mounted at 90 degrees to each other as each one is a separate antenna.

[Sao]

And on those satellites one of those is active and one a ground. I have posted this a few times before but it is really god reading, skip the technical jargon is you want but look at the important pictures which show you the correct way to mount Spektrum antennas 2.4GHz Rx Installation Primer

BAck on topic I use a Vbar so no seperate RX on my helis. I use 2 satellites on anything 500 sized and over but if I happen to have a spare one kicking around I Will put 2 on a 450 and below even though it is not really needed.

[oldcelt]

And on those satellites one of those is active and one a ground. I have posted this a few times before but it is really god reading, skip the technical jargon is you want but look at the important pictures which show you the correct way to mount Spektrum antennas 2.4GHz Rx Installation Primer

BAck on topic I use a Vbar so no seperate RX on my helis. I use 2 satellites on anything 500 sized and over but if I happen to have a spare one kicking around I Will put 2 on a 450 and below even though it is not really needed.

Trying to learn... Why does the Vbar not require separate rx?

[Sharpedge]

Because the vbar becomes an rx when you plug the sats into it. Same with the Brain and the 3GX and a few others.

[oldcelt]

Because the vbar becomes an rx when you plug the sats into it. Same with the Brain and the 3GX and a few others.

OK, now I'm totally lost - none of that means a thing to me.
You have a rx - ok? Because you may get blind spots at distance and differing orientations, you have a satellite rx mounted at a different orientation to the primary rx, integrating with the primary so as to eliminate the blind spots - yes? What exactly is Vbar (and, apparently Brain and 3GX) which is different from that concept?

[cjcj1949]

The VBar, Brain and 3GX are flybarless controllers. They can be used with just satellites to make a rx as the controllers have electronics inside them that would be in a rx on a flybarred system. Whether or not you can get away with using one rx on a 450 is not really the point. 2.4GHz is very sensitive to aerial placement. You may well be able to fly without problems most of the time with one sat/aerial but you will have a weak signal some of the time. If interference is present this will cause loss of control which could have been avoided. If you have an aerial that can be placed away from the fuselage you will have less potential problems than if you mount the rx on the carbon fibre frame. If you have telemetry you can check your link quality for a given setup making sure you check all orientations.

[MartinW]

I've got two sats even on my 250DFC. Just for the simple reason that I don't fancy having no redundancy. However, that completely flys in the face of my 450 sport which only has a single park flyer (6110E) - or is it microlite?, anyway, whatever, it only has one RX and no satellite. In my defence, I've not managed to get even a decent hover on it yet in 12 months due to tail wag! When I do, I may well stick a different RX into it. The 6110E is just what I had to hand at the time and I'm 99% sure doesn't even accept a sat?