Looking for some collective wisdom from the group. I'm a believer in redundant batt/switch/rx setups for the safety factor since these are among the top point of failures (not counting dumb thumbs !). I'm wondering about JR's implementation (1222x) where there are dual power inputs and up to 4 remote receivers. Does this qualify as a redundant receiver system ? Or since the remote receivers, power inputs and servos all connect to the same box, is this really a single receiver with remote antennas and dual power supplies ? It's tempting to go with a single unit for simplicity but I don't want to lose the benefits of redundant receivers. Any thoughts ?

TIA

Steve

Hi Steve.... The JR receivers all work independently of each other. If one goes kaput, the others will work individually. I had this conversation with Eric Meyers (Horizon Hobby Product Development) regarding redundancy and he assured me that most owners do not realize this fact.

Even if the MAIN receiver goes down, the satellites will still work independently....

What I am NOT sure about, is the distribution of power from the two batteries if the main receiver was to die. There are too many variables inside the main receiver that I could not give you a definitive answer on that.

Best regards,
Wayne

I had the set up you are describing in a Carden a couple of years ago. I lost the plane due to radio failure. Due to the extent of the damage to the electronics, I could not determine the cause of the failure. All I can say is since then I use nothing but two totally redundant, independent systems(2 - batteries, regulators, switches and receivers). If I could figure out how to have redundant transmitters, I would do that also.

Bobby

I go the same path as Bobby. I built my last plane with totally redundant everything. When you are investing thousands in a plane I never understood folks who won't spend a few bucks more for redundancy and the added protection.

I'm a newbie and understand everything you guys are talking about. I only have two second hand 33% planes that I want to protect by taken all the percaustions.

One question on redundancy is what are you guys doing for the ignition or am i just missing the point? I have the smart fly systems with two Rx batteries but only one on the ignition. I'm using the JR921X with a smart fly with two satelites on one system and a JR922X with 4 satelites on the other.

Gary, great question on the ignition. I had plenty of people tell me, "Don't worry, ignition batteries never go - without warning..." I had just this occurence though. I was flying down at the Joe Nall, my Edge 540 (50cc) and all of a sudden deadstick! Lucky it was at the 'Nall as I had plenty of runway...So I landed it safely.

After going over the whole plane I checked the ignition battery through the switch, zero voltage! I thought OK, typical - I had a switch failure...So I take the battery loose and check it sans switch. Zero! The cells must have cut loose or perhaps a connection, but I had absolutely no voltage and no warning prior to, other than a longer charge cycle then normal. I had actually been flying for about 6 mintues before it went out (4.8 v NiMh battery).

So I have a NiMH on all my planes but I buy the Sanyo Enloops (sp?) whereas before I used a cheaper brand. I don't know anyone that runs a redundant ignition battery, but it would be easy to run a parallel battery, if you adjust for the nose weight. I don't, but a failure can happen...I should have noticed the longer charge cycle as that was the tip off....It would have been a stupid loss at $25 for a new battery...

You just mentioned parallel which just made the little light in my head turn on.. It is usually off. LOL

I use A123 6.6V 2300mah on my Smart Fly system so I guess I could use a 4600mah - 4 cell A123 Hi-Current - 6.6v - 2s2p- Redundant on the ignition. Although a little heavier and twice the mah I have in it now it would give me the peace of mind that it is redundant as well.

I'm not a 3D flyer so I'm not really worried about the weight as long as the CG is still good.

Gary, I guess you could, but I think it's overkill. If you were to parallel two 4.8v batteries, with the same mAh rating(which you should always do when running parallel batteries), say two 1,000 mAh packs that would give you 2,000 mAh at 4.8v which is all you need for your ignition system. Likely this will let you have a day of flying. Even if your ran two 4.8v, 2,000 mAh packs that would be 4,000 mills which will run your ignition all day no matter what you are running under the hood. This is a far cheaper alternative (I'm thinking Nickel Metals -NiMH) and it would be far less than the A123s and likely the same weight or lighter. Most ignitions take 4.8 to 6.0 volts just fine....

Just be smart and if you notice your batteries doing something different in your charge routine check them out and when in doubt replace them.

I'm new too, so maybe some of the more experienced folks will chime in. I'm a little over two years new to the hobby in general..

The good thing is that I already have the A123 4600. I have a A123 2300 mah (correction not regulated) on the DA 85 right now. Basically the way I bought it from an IMAC flyer that went to F3A pattern.

I use A123 with no regulator, I called DA first and was told that unregulated A123 on their ignition was OK.

Absolutely correct. Brain Fart. I have no regulator on it.

Gary, if you are into redundancy, take a look at the RRS system. I used it in my EF Yak 54. I listed the details of it in an web article on the build on our club's website at www.toponewjersey.org, its under Builds, Reviews...Yak 54 w/DA-120...I'm LenD on the site..

It switches between receivers in case of a failure, in milliseconds, a total switch-over instead of having half the plane on one receiver or another. You have redundant batteries, but if the main receiver goes where you servos are plugged in it appear you are down, regardless of the satellite receivers. In other words, if you smoke the main bus, who cares if the sattelites are still getting signal. I used two completely independent receivers each with its own power path that then feeds the RRS system. So if the RRS goes and/or one of the receivers I am still OK. It's hard to explain, but the pictures on the site show the system and details...

I guess you could have the RRS main bus go that feeds the receivers, but its supposed to be just a passthrough to the servos from the receiver...so not likely to have a failure.