Spektrum DSS or Tracker III - What will be your choice?

Pls note I'm only interested in electric planes and may be hand
launched electric gliders for the next 3-4 years.
If Spektrum DSS or Tracker III are the only two options, what will you
choose? Or why you will not choose either?
Hope I have not started a fire....
Reply to
jayanthigk2004
Loading thread data ...
May I ask, where you;re going to fly, are there many others? Do you need to have the spread spectrum? mk
Reply to
MK
There are few people who fly near my home, may be 10 people max.
I'm not sure if I need to have spread spectrum. Honestly, I don't know.
MK wrote:
Reply to
Geekay
I don't have any receiver currently. I would appreciate couple of important reasons why you would go with JR and not Specktrum or Tracker III?
Solcat wrote:
Reply to
Geekay
Though not admitted and frequently denied, the Spektrum certainly appears to be JR. The flow of program setup for mixing and the other bells and whistles that go with a digital radio are virtually identical to the 6 ch JR radios, and so is the box the transmitter is housed in. When recently faced with the same decision you are contemplating, I went for the Spektrum 6, and have no regrets. Beside the freedom from concerns about interfering with others or being interfered with, the supplied airborne package is well suited to the small electric 3D type models that have captured my fancy. Recently replaced the GWS Rx in a foamy that was experiencing sporadic motor (ESC) shutdowns, apparently due to electrical noise. With the Spektrum Rx - no more unexpected shutdowns. A little more costly than parts to fix the noise problem at the source (probably commutator arcing in the ferrite can motor) but a darned sight easier and less time-consuming, and more certain.
Abel
Reply to
Abel Pranger
The Spektrum is from JR. It works only with the Spektrum receivers. So if you had been flying for a while and had a bunch of receivers, they all would be incompatible with the Spektrum. But being that you apparently are new to the hobby, you will be having to buy new recievers anyhow. So go for the Spektrum, it's a big advantage to not have to even ask what channels are occupied, just fly. You will not be shot down.
Reply to
Solcat
Hmmm,
Every model needs a receiver unless you're into swapping receivers around. With the Tracker III you can use any receiver you want, in any price range and/or application.
CR
Solcat wrote:
Reply to
Charle & Peggy Robinson
With the Tracker III you can use any receiver you want, in any
That was true until the Spektrum became available, you can not mix Tracker and Spektrum.
Ed
Reply to
Ed Smega
Ted shuffled out of his cave and grunted these great (and sometimes not so great) words of knowledge:
The Tracker III is most likely going to be your best bet. The Tracker has a SUBSTANTIALLY longer range than the Spectrum. You will need the range for the gliders.
Reply to
Ted Campanelli
| Ed Smega wrote:
| > With the Tracker III you can use any receiver you want, in any | > price range and/or application. | > | > That was true until the Spektrum became available, you can not mix Tracker | > and Spektrum. | | True but what a nit-picker. ;^)
Some nits are best picked. Let me pick that nit a bit more ...
The Tracker III also isn't likely to control AM receivers at all, and probably can't do anybody's PCM (unless there is a Polk brand PCM RX, which seems unlikely.)
And then of course, if your Polk TX is 72 MHz, it can't do 27, 50, 53, or 75 MHz, or any of the R/C bands in other countries.
But yes, the original idea is still true ... if you already have a bunch of existing RXs, the Tracker will probably work with them, and the Spektrum will not, which gives the Tracker a big advantage. If you're starting from scratch, this is not an issue.
The Tracker will also give you better range than the Spektrum stuff ... 1.5 miles vs. 2000-3000 feet. For small electrics you may not care, but for gliders you might. (I've had my gliders up over 2500 feet before, for example.)
And the computer functions of the Spektrum DX6 are rather limited ... no expo on the rudder, for example. I don't know about the Tracker, but I'm guessing it's not so limited.
Personally, I'd suggest the Spektrum, based on what we've been told about what is needed.
Reply to
Doug McLaren
| Personally, I'd suggest the Spektrum, based on what we've been told | about what is needed.
Of course, you also said electric gliders, which puts it into more doubt.
You might want more than 2000 feet range for an electric glider (but on the other hand, 2000 feet is way out there, so maybe not.) And you might have a full house electric glider which will require seven channels to properly control everything and give you full span ailerons. You can do it with six channels as well (by putting the flaps on a Y connector) but then you can't do full span ailerons.
(The Spektrum DX6 is 6 channel. The Tracker III is 8, though the RX that comes with it only does six channels. But of course you can buy other receivers.)
But not having to worry about interference is a very nice thing.
Also, there's the matter of price. The DX6 is $200, and comes with TX, RX and four micro servos. The Tracker III is $180, comes with TX and RX, and one standard servo. (One servo? Why bother?)
Reply to
Doug McLaren
For Electric Gliders (and any plane) I won't fly it if I can't visually appreciate its beauty in the air.
So 2000 feet is some thing I would probably never do because the glider will be nothing more than a dot (Well, may be bigger than a dot).
I beleive Tx range of 2000-3000 feet should be more than enough for any non-pro flyer....
Doug McLaren wrote:
Reply to
Geekay
Ted,
I was just replying to Doug.....
For Electric Gliders (and any plane) I won't fly it if I can't visually
appreciate its beauty in the air.
So 2000 feet is some thing I would probably never do because the glider
will be nothing more than a dot (Well, may be bigger than a dot).
I beleive Tx range of 2000-3000 feet should be more than enough for any
non-pro flyer....
Ted Campanelli wrote:
Reply to
Geekay
| For Electric Gliders (and any plane) I won't fly it if I can't visually | appreciate its beauty in the air.
When you're flying a glider (especially a non-powered one), few things are more beautiful than getting it so high up that you can barely see it -- it means that you found some damned good lift!
... of course, to complement that, there's the sense of terror where you realize that the spot you were flying is actually a bird, or is a spot on your glasses, or you just don't know where your plane is anymore.
| So 2000 feet is some thing I would probably never do because the glider | will be nothing more than a dot (Well, may be bigger than a dot).
I've flown a 2 meter glider at up to 2600 feet. (I know it was that high because I had a recording altimeter in it.) It was an irregularly shaped speck -- I could sort of tell which direction is was pointed in, but not much more than that. I also lost track of it once or twice, and that's when I decided that it was time to come down again.)
| I beleive Tx range of 2000-3000 feet should be more than enough for any | non-pro flyer....
Actually, I doubt the `pros' speck out their gliders as much as us amateurs do. They may be able to speck them out much better than we can, but they don't need to as badly as we do.
When finding thermals is hard (because conditions are bad, or you're unskilled) once you've found one, you don't want to give it up. And 2000 feet of altitude means that you've got 2000 feet of altitude to use up to find your next thermal -- but 2100 feet would be even better. But when finding thermals is easy (either because you're skilled, or conditions are good) you're more likely to go look for another thermal at only 1000 feet. (And really, even 1000 feet is pretty high up there.)
Also, it's not all about altitude. When flying a glider, you tend to look for lift in a large area, with the size of the area increasing as 1) your altitude increases (you always want to be able to bring the plane back if you can't find lift) and 2) your skill increases (as better pilots can spot lift from further away, and are more likely to find lift in any given situation, so they'll push their luck more.)
Once you get away from gliders, I suspect that 99+% of all powered R/C plane flying is done at less than 700 feet of altitude or so. Sure, you can go higher, but why? And they don't usually go too far away horizontally, because there's little benefit to that either.
I'm guessing you made the right decision.
Reply to
Doug McLaren
Thanks Doug,
I'm glad some of my thoughts as a newbie to rc are in sync with an experienced rc flyer like you.
I'm placing an order for spektrum shortly.
Thanks for all folks who gave their thoughts. I knew choosing between a tarcker III and specktrum is not easy for a newbie. Not any more :)
Doug McLaren wrote:
Reply to
Geekay
I was in a hobby shop in Waco today as a fellow was sold a Spektrum. It looked really nice. mk
Reply to
MK
They seem like a great deal - though no expo on the rudder is a bit annoying - some people have been popping the RF board from the Spektrum into the JR6102
formatting link

Reply to
Poxy

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.