Who STILL flys 72 mhz?

[Turbojoe]

Sure you can do some things mechanically but it can create failure points I am of the KISS type and 72 cannot creat flight modes, servo mapping, speedup or slow down servos, create mixes to anything the heart or plane desires, elevons to flaps. flaps to elevator, full length split ailerons for crow, inside ailerons for flaps, or outside if you wish, use only outboard ailerons only, inboard if you choose. When a plane needs coupling for certain maneuvers none of this can be done on the old 72 radios. There is so much more the new radios can do it is amazing.

Sorry but your wrong. My 72 mhz 9CAP can do just about everything that you listed and then some. Virtually any of the computerized 72 mhz transmitters can. I can also use the Spektrum 2.4 ghz module in my 9 CAP and my Hitec 7 channel Eclipse.

Joe

 

[mdcerdan]

Sure you can do some things mechanically but it can create failure points I am of the KISS type and 72 cannot creat flight modes, servo mapping, speedup or slow down servos, create mixes to anything the heart or plane desires, elevons to flaps. flaps to elevator, full length split ailerons for crow, inside ailerons for flaps, or outside if you wish, use only outboard ailerons only, inboard if you choose. When a plane needs coupling for certain maneuvers none of this can be done on the old 72 radios. There is so much more the new radios can do it is amazing.

I am in the 99.9% of people that don't need most of the features you are talking about. The most simple a plane is the more I enjoy flying. I guess I am getting old and lowering my expectations.

But you are right, those new radios are awesome. Wish I had one of those when as a kid I flew with my old man with a Kraft 4 channel AM and a Proline 2 channel radios.

 

[Bricks]

My first radio had one button and you had to wined up the rubber band for the actuator for the rudder, it was more a free flight with some control. I thought I had gone to heaven when I got my first 2 channel and could control the elevator.

 

[bracesport]

I have a working JR-X378 but am contemplating adding a FRsky 2.4Ghz module to run my D16 Rx's

 

[L Edge]

One area that is causes problems is 60 size heli's. Tap a screwdriver on the frame and 72 mhz servoes jumped. Changed freq (had 4 different) and never resolved issue. Bought 2.4 and never had an issue.
The only thing I use freq 72 for is when I drop a shuttle from a transport so the pilot's freq is different.

 

[JennyC6]

Sure you can do some things mechanically but it can create failure points I am of the KISS type and 72 cannot creat flight modes, servo mapping, speedup or slow down servos, create mixes to anything the heart or plane desires, elevons to flaps. flaps to elevator, full length split ailerons for crow, inside ailerons for flaps, or outside if you wish, use only outboard ailerons only, inboard if you choose. When a plane needs coupling for certain maneuvers none of this can be done on the old 72 radios. There is so much more the new radios can do it is amazing.

Yeeeeep. I use my Futaba 10J on my cars and my planes, which you can't really do on an analog set. They don't have the flexibility to run a 1/7 2WD nitro buggy and a 72" Piper Cherokee off the same radio.

 

[Turbojoe]

One area that is causes problems is 60 size heli's. Tap a screwdriver on the frame and 72 mhz servoes jumped. Changed freq (had 4 different) and never resolved issue. Bought 2.4 and never had an issue.
The only thing I use freq 72 for is when I drop a shuttle from a transport so the pilot's freq is different.

On the subject of heli's I had issues with static buildup from the tail belt on Beam 450's and Align 450's causing even 2.4ghz to freak out. A wire running from the tail box to the mainshaft bearing mount took care of the problem. Shooting the belt with food grade silicone spray makes a big difference as well to help keep down static build up. It also helps everything run much more freely.

I wish there hadn't been so many surgeries on my left elbow/wrist/thumb that keep me from doing much more than hovering or I'd have no qualms about using 72 in an ELECTRIC heli. In the mid 80's a buddy had a GMP heli with NO GYRO and he flew that thing on 72mhz! He crashed the hell out of it but it wasn't due to 72 mhz issues.


Joe

 

[Turbojoe]

Yeeeeep. I use my Futaba 10J on my cars and my planes, which you can't really do on an analog set. They don't have the flexibility to run a 1/7 2WD nitro buggy and a 72" Piper Cherokee off the same radio.

If you use a stick TX rather than wheel TX for ground why couldn't you use an "analog" system? As long as it's on 75 MHz ground frequency of course. There are tons of really cool (and expensive) 75 MHz wheel TX's out there.

I'm a bit bewildered by a lot of the posts here. I'm assuming a lot of guys when disparaging the 72 MHz TX's are talking about the OLD "one TX for one plane" pre-computer TX's? My 72 MHz computer TX's can do just about everything my Spektrum G2 DX6 can EXCEPT have the sexy British female voice tell me which switch I just flipped. (British guys voices me puke but British female voices are sexy and get me all worked up. LOL. )

The old "one TX for one plane" TX's really are dead in my opinion but the later computerized 72 MHz versions are still quite serviceable and even more so now that all of the SHEEPLE have gone to 2.4ghz systems just because it was new at the time. Just because something new came out doesn't mean the "old" system stopped working! Please keep ignoring what worked so well for SO many years and still works great to this day. That just drives prices down and we can keep buying 72 MHz RX's for pennies on the dollar! Us old timers are just lapping up the good deals. Just think when TX's change to 5GHz or more! That means even better deals for those of us that know the "old" system still works great and we can buy the parts for peanuts yet again. I refuse to become a SHEEPLE.......

Joe

 

[JennyC6]

If you use a stick TX rather than wheel TX for ground why couldn't you use an "analog" system?

Because none of them have the adjustments and mixing I need on my cars. I only have two or three that run the basic 2ch setup and even they have custom EPAs set that are beyond what an analog set can do. If I wanted an analog set with those same computer functions I'd have to be a naughty boy and use a 72mhz set for my cars.

Also, I like having one TX for everything, and I prefer sticks anyway. It just works out to have all of my RCs on the same Futaba 10J.

As long as it's on 75 MHz ground frequency of course.

Nobody's ever gonna give me any schtick about 72mhz in a car.

There are tons of really cool (and expensive) 75 MHz wheel TX's out there.

Yeah, but I prefer sticks on the ground anyway. I ran stick radios back in the days when 2.4g wasn't even a thing. I still remember buying a Futaba 2DR on 75mhz to replace the pistol grip 27mhz set that came with my first ever hobby grade.

I'm a bit bewildered by a lot of the posts here. I'm assuming a lot of guys when disparaging the 72 MHz TX's are talking about the OLD "one TX for one plane" pre-computer TX's? My 72 MHz computer TX's can do just about everything my Spektrum G2 DX6 can EXCEPT have the sexy British female voice tell me which switch I just flipped. (British guys voices me puke but British female voices are sexy and get me all worked up. LOL. )

The old "one TX for one plane" TX's really are dead in my opinion but the later computerized 72 MHz versions are still quite serviceable and even more so now that all of the SHEEPLE have gone to 2.4ghz systems just because it was new at the time. Just because something new came out doesn't mean the "old" system stopped working! Please keep ignoring what worked so well for SO many years and still works great to this day. That just drives prices down and we can keep buying 72 MHz RX's for pennies on the dollar! Us old timers are just lapping up the good deals. Just think when TX's change to 5GHz or more! That means even better deals for those of us that know the "old" system still works great and we can buy the parts for peanuts yet again. I refuse to become a SHEEPLE.......

Joe

Let me show you precisely why I refuse to use a 72/75/27mhz set to control an RC model.

I'm not a gambling man. Watching my servos twitch when I connect my glow driver is enough to shake my faith in the security of the control link, and that's something which only happens when I'm on an analog set. I will admit FM is more resilient than AM, but modern digital sets are orders of magnitude more resilient than FM could ever hope to be because they're discarding whatever RF garbage they pick up if it doesn't have the specific digital header created during binding that tells them a control packet from the transmitter is arriving. If you want to gamble that the airwaves are fine for your analog sets, then feel free to fly them. Me, personally? I don't even trust it to a car which will in all likelihood survive a crash, much less a plane that won't survive a crash. 'Bout the only exemption in my book is submarines, and that's by necessity; water blocks high wavelength signals but low wavelength signals penetrate handily. I'd still look for a digital set on these lower frequencies, though.


Also, that's why we call 2.4ghz sets 'digital' and 27/72/75mhz 'analog'. The older analog sets do not care what source is broadcasting, they listen and obey to anything that matches the crystal they're equipped with. It has nothing to do with what sort of programming options the transmitter does or does not have, but rather with how the data you input at the sticks is transmitted to the model in question.

I've got digital sets with such rudimentary trims they wouldn't be out of place on an old Kraft radio from the 1970s. Literally just ratcheting potentiometers for trims, SPDT switches for channel reverse, and nothing else. They're still digital sets even if they lack any sort of computer function. And I've seen computers with all the bells and whistles on analog sets!


If you want to take a gamble on your control link being lost because of a control rod rubbing up against the side of the engine when you move the throttle, then be my guest. Me, I'll stick with a more robust and resistant control link that discards such erroneous signals. I do agree that not every 'new' thing is better, but in this particular case the 'new' thing is better.

Oh, and a side perk? With cars I can dispense with the huge antenna poked out the roof that invariably gets -beep-ed up whenever the thing rolls over. 2.4ghz receivers have such short antennae that I seldom even have to run one out of the receiver box, and even if I do, it's short enough that it's lower than the bodyshell is. IE: I haven't had to replace an antenna wire in over 15 years. Also applies to the Tx; I can't count how many old fishin' rod antennae I had to replace but I've never had to replace a 2.4g Tx antenna!

 

[Turbojoe]

Nobody's ever gonna give me any schtick about 72mhz in a car.

Unless you run a ground vehicle on an aircraft only (72MHz) frequency in an area where aircraft are flying and you shoot one down. That could get your butt kicked AND your car AND TX destroyed in a hurry!

Hey. it's all about what works for whomever. Both 72 MHz and 2.4 GHz work just fine for me. I just happen to have a boat load of 72mhz TX and RX's and crystals and I'm going on 50 years now that I have never lost an aircraft to a frequency related failure. Metal on metal vibrations will definitely cause issues but using due diligence you should sort them on the ground and NOT after the crash! If you don't then you have nobody else to blame but yourself!

In the beginning 2.4 GHz had a history of "brown outs" and many more aircraft losses than I had ever heard of with 72 MHz! That's why I stayed away from 2.4 for so long. I now fly both. I don't prefer one over the other as I don't have any issues with either. I know NOT to have any metal on metal contact anywhere in the system while using 72 MHz. Also I have to look out for static build up on helicopters with 72 MHz AND 2.4 GHz.

Fly what works for you. If one is best for you then stick to it. For me both work equally well. I just happen to have a bunch of the "old" technology that still works just as good as the day it was released!

Joe

 

[JennyC6]

Unless you run a ground vehicle on an aircraft only (72MHz) frequency in an area where aircraft are flying and you shoot one down.

I live rural enough that I can flash up a Super Tiger G60-16 at 3 in the morning on a Monday without pissing anyone off. That's just not gonna happen out here.

That could get your butt kicked AND your car AND TX destroyed in a hurry!

I dare them to try. I'm normally a pretty passive person and I'm not one to resort to such childish tactics to settle a dispute, but I'm not a pacifist and I will not stand idly by while another vandalizes my property or attempts to be violent to me. All I'm gonna say on that one.

Happily there's no 12 year olds at my local field.

Hey. it's all about what works for whomever. Both 72 MHz and 2.4 GHz work just fine for me. I just happen to have a boat load of 72mhz TX and RX's and crystals and I'm going on 50 years now that I have never lost an aircraft to a frequency related failure.

Yaeh I've never had an analog set cause a runaway or cost me a model either, but that doesn't mean I'm going to take the risk if I can avoid it. You wouldn't fly an airplane if the elevator servo wire was spliced together with a twist and a bit of electrical tape, so why would you fly one on a control link no more secure?

Metal on metal vibrations will definitely cause issues but using due diligence you should sort them on the ground and NOT after the crash! If you don't then you have nobody else to blame but yourself!

Unless it's not your model that's got metal-metal contact. Or you're running a spark ignition engine. Or someone else is flying one. Or you've got a brushed electric motor. Or there's a power surge on nearby power lines. Or someone plugs in a 6s5000 lipo in the pits to test an EDF foamy in preperation for flying it once you land. Or someone else powers up another analog set on your channel. Or an FPV system drowns you out. Or the local FM radio station swamps you....Oh hey, look, these are all things you don't have to worry about on digital sets but can be a problem on analog sets. No, they're not guaranteed crashes, but they're risk factors that can easily be mitigated.

It's why most of us have gone to 2.4ghz. It isn't because 2.4ghz was 'newer', it's because it's far more robust.

Also, the only 2.4ghz issues I've ever heard of that couldn't be attributed to a cause other than the link is DSM2 Spektrum stuff. Yanno, the silver Spektrum transmitters like the DX-6i I have kicking around for simming purposes. Never heard of any issues out of any other protocol that weren't attributable to, say, over-discharged receiver batteries, or trying to use 30+ year old 600mAh 4s NiCD packs to fly a modern 6ch aircraft, stuff like that.

I did, however, have issues with that DX-6i when I used it for actually controlling a model. Only ever used it on cars, so it wasn't like the issues cost me a model, but I swear to god if I had a dollar for every bind plug I had to make because the system forgot its bind I'd be able to buy a 20 channel set. This is also why I switched to Futaba; I was tired of having to rebind my all the time and I didn't trust it with an airplane. If it loses bind while the model's parked what's stopping it from losing bind in flight?

Fly what works for you. If one is best for you then stick to it. For me both work equally well. I just happen to have a bunch of the "old" technology that still works just as good as the day it was released!

Joe

What works for me is minimizing the chance that outside influences beyond my control can cost me a model I could barely afford to build in the first place. If I have to spend a month and a half squirreling away pocket change to pay for a model aircraft responsibly you can be damned sure I'm not going to fly it on an analog control link that can be drowned out by someone else's spark ignition engine.

Now can we stop calling people 'sheeple' because they're not willing to take risks with analog sets? We're not 'sheeple' because we don't use such systems anymore. Not every new thing is good, but this was an example of a new thing that is good. And clearly deep down you do agree to some extent because you admit to flying with it anyway, something you just simply would not do if you didn't acknowledge there was some true merit to running these systems.

 

[Turbojoe]

Now can we stop calling people 'sheeple' because they're not willing to take risks with analog sets? We're not 'sheeple' because we don't use such systems anymore. Not every new thing is good, but this was an example of a new thing that is good. And clearly deep down you do agree to some extent because you admit to flying with it anyway, something you just simply would not do if you didn't acknowledge there was some true merit to running these systems.

Not gonna argue what points work for you other than this one. Many (10+) years ago in an effort to establish an AMA flying club back in the 2.4 ghz infancy days the city (Mesa) only gave us an area in close proximity to an R/C heli club that flew exclusively on 72 MHz. Because the heli club was long established and the president was a total dick they were complete jerks and left us very few frequencies to fly on. We were basically forced to convert to 2.4 GHz. It cost me a ton of money in the 2.4 GHz conversion. I only flew in that "legal" area a very few times and finally said screw 'em and the club. Haven't flown there since.

In the next few weeks I'll be moving south from the Phoenix metro area so I can fly just about anything on any R/C protocol. My Daughter lives in Florence Arizona and I've taken my frequency scanner with me on several visits. NEVER in any of the local areas have I gotten even a blip of interference on any 72 MHz channel. While I'll still use some of my 2.4 GHz equipment I expect if I find a house to buy in that area that all of my old 72 MHz equipment will become "new" again as I have tons of it. Especially if I find deserving kids to give airplane/radio combo's to give to to get them started in the hobby.

Yet again, Fly whatever works for you. Both 2.4 GHz and 72 MHz work for me. All I'm saying is that 72 MHz didn't cease to work on the day that 2.4 GHz was released. It worked just fine for decades before 2.4 GHz and continues to work just fine to this day.

Joe

 

[Turbojoe]

I dare them to try. I'm normally a pretty passive person and I'm not one to resort to such childish tactics to settle a dispute, but I'm not a pacifist and I will not stand idly by while another vandalizes my property or attempts to be violent to me. All I'm gonna say on that one.

On a few occasions back in the day I've seen "Big John" pummel guys that showed up and turned on their TX's without calling out their 72 MHz channel first and shooting down his $300.00 Carbon Fiber Hotliner reducing it to expensive rubble when they were driving a car or truck on a ground prohibited aircraft frequency. I'm not much smaller than John and have have had altercations with ground based IDIOTS using 72 MHz aircraft frequencies for cars/trucks as well. You shoot me down because you're STUPID enough to use 72 MHz when you are required to use 75 MHz for ground then you're gonna pay one way or another be it with money or blood..... You've got it. I'm not opposed to violence in these situations when someone's stupidity has cost ME money and so many hours of work. I learned to fight and WIN in the military. I fear nobody but I much prefer the least violent option.

Using 72 MHz for ground based vehicles is not only illegal per FCC rules but is just plain stupid and asking for trouble in any area that 72 MHz aircraft are flown.

Joe

 

[Turbojoe]

How about this? You can use 72 MHz or 2.4 GHz for aircraft as spelled out in AMA/FAA docs. Just don't use 72 MHz aircraft frequencies for ground vehicles anywhere near airborne vehicles. If you use GROUND VEHICLES then ONLY use 75 MHz frequencies. No problems and no bloodshed. Hows that!?

Joe

 

[L Edge]

On the subject of heli's I had issues with static buildup from the tail belt on Beam 450's and Align 450's causing even 2.4ghz to freak out. A wire running from the tail box to the mainshaft bearing mount took care of the problem. Shooting the belt with food grade silicone spray makes a big difference as well to help keep down static build up. It also helps everything run much more freely.

I wish there hadn't been so many surgeries on my left elbow/wrist/thumb that keep me from doing much more than hovering or I'd have no qualms about using 72 in an ELECTRIC heli. In the mid 80's a buddy had a GMP heli with NO GYRO and he flew that thing on 72mhz! He crashed the hell out of it but it wasn't due to 72 mhz issues.


Joe

Both my son and I learned how to fly using the Cricket. I shaped the tail boom down so the wire from the motor to the tail was straight and reduced the friction(no gyro is right) so it was easier to prevent yawing and had a little more power. Learn to barrel roll it and loop it (the big E) without gyro. Using 72, at competitions, had to change frequency at some locations due to possible interference. Glad 2.4 came along.

 

[Turbojoe]

I need to apologize for getting so belligerent in my posts last night. In the midst of packing, moving and trying to buy a house I've really been on edge and for whatever reason vented here where I shouldn't have. There's really no excuse for it but it's the only one I have.

What works for one person doesn't always work for another and there's no point in trying to force your opinion on them like I did and I'll let the 72 MHz issue go. Let's all just enjoy whatever makes US happy!

Joe

 

[mdcerdan]

Why dont we just show our old stuff? Everyone has its own opinion on 72 vs 2.4 and no one is right or wrong.

 

[Turbojoe]

Why dont we just show our old stuff? Everyone has its own opinion on 72 vs 2.4 and no one is right or wrong.

I'd love to but all of mine is packed up and sitting in a storage locker waiting for a new house to buy.

Joe

 

[mdcerdan]

I already shown my Futabas, here are a couple Art-Tech TX. One is 4ch and the other is 6ch.

 

[speedbirdted]

Here's a picture from a while ago of what I have, plus a few others. The left one was used with a Kaos 60 which I've since destroyed (was 100% pilot error... pulled the old figure 9) so now it's orphaned. Other one is currently used with a Great Planes PT-40 which I fly maybe once a year. Honestly I find it too boring to waste money burning fuel with it more than that.

I've also got an older FP-T8SGA-P from the mid-80s. Thing still works perfectly, range tested and all, even pulled it apart to check for solder joints that might've taken a dump in the past 30+ years, but the PCB looks like it was manufactured yesterday (aside from being old) A fun fact is it's the exact same model of radio that Doc Brown used in Back to the Future