Large Model Association Forum

What is the official word on the suitability (or otherwise) of the Powerbox 'Royal' Spectrum 2.4 system in over 20kg models?

http://www.powerbox-systems.com/e/powerbox_systeme/powerbox_royal_spektrum/start.php

Phil

Phil

The Powerbox "Royale" works in a similar way to the Weatronics system and thereby complies with the "redundancy" requirements.
It has 2 Rx's (which can be augmented by satellite aerials) and also has 2 independant battery supplies to the unit. The system has been successfully installed in UAV's and has been given CAA "aerial work" Exemptions. The Weatronics system on 35Mhz has proved to be a very successful installation in quite a number of Over 20kg models and they have now brought out a 2.4 Ghz system based on the same specification.
In the absense of the failure of either a battery supply or Rx inoperation all the flight controls are still available.

Thanks Tony.....I thought that was the case, just wanted to double check before going ahead........

Cheers

Phil

Tony,

If I have read the data sheet correctly, this unit doesn't have 2 independant Rx's in it.. Just one
If it did ,it would have the ability to plug in 8 satellite aerials.

I know it has 2 independant power supplies, but a failure in the decoder section of the Rx would lead to a total failure of the receiving system, so it doesn't meet the CAA spec or have I miss interpreted the data ?

The Powerbox RRS system allows 2 x rx's to be connected together ,( but has no power management for lipo's etc) not the system discussed above which includes a 12 channel Rx

Rgds,

Shaun

I was thinking of using one of these in a project I have in mind .
Not over for 20Kg but I was going to use 2 Receivers so the outcome of this will be of interest to me.
At the moment I am using the Powerbox RRS unite which allows the use of twin RXs but it is not two totally separate systems.



Regards Simon

Shaun

There seems to be some confusion .
The Powerbox Royale RSS (Reduntant Rx System) has a redundant receiver system as well as 2 independant battery supplies
regards

Tony

tony hooper wrote:Shaun

There seems to be some confusion .
The Powerbox Royale RSS (Reduntant Rx System) has a redundant receiver system as well as 2 independant battery supplies
regards

Tony

Have you a link to this unite, as I can't find it on the Powerbox site. The Unite on there has no built in Spektrum RXs from what I could see.

many thanks Simon

tony hooper wrote:Shaun

There seems to be some confusion .
The Powerbox Royale RSS (Reduntant Rx System) has a redundant receiver system as well as 2 independant battery supplies
regards

Tony

Hi Tony,,

Like Simon, I can't find any reference to a powerbox with 2 built spectrum Rx's...
There is the RRS which allows 2 x rx's ( 35mhz or 2.4) to provide redundancy, ( but has no traditional powerbox functionality) or the powerbox royal spectrum which has one 12 channel Rx but no capability for rx redundancy.

Could you please point me in the direction of the unit you are referring , as, if this is available ,it will influence my forthcoming purchase of my " large model solution".... i.e the unit you were refering to in reply to Phils original post about a spektrum specific unit.

What is the official word on the suitability (or otherwise) of the Powerbox 'Royal' Spectrum 2.4 system in over 20kg models?

Cheers,

Shaun

Shaun Quote - "powerbox royal spectrum which has one 12 channel Rx but no capability for rx redundancy".

Shaun, the Powerbox Royal Spektrum has 4 receivers - all external. So if one fails, there are still three Rx's left - each can maintain full control of the model. How is that "no capability for Rx redundency"?

I believe the configuration of the Powerbox Spektrum is the same as the Powersafe Spektrum AR12100 - both have 4 external receivers and dual battery capability. Both should meet the over 20 Kg requirements for receiver redundency?

"The Spektrum Powersafe - Aimed at larger giant scale and jet models that utilise high power high torque power hungry servos the Spektrum Powersafe combines the roles of both receiver and power control centre. The unit itself isn't actually a receiver, rather it's a robust power bus designed specifically to handle high current loads. From a safety standpoint power input can come from two batteries via twin 16 AWG input leads and EC3 connectors making a truly redundant dual battery system".

Both Spektrum systems, I would suggest are far better than the recommended “two batteries, each feeding an independent receiver and splitting up the flight controls”. If one battery fails or a receiver fails then many large models will end up going down. I don’t see any redundancy in this system – even a controlled crash should not be acceptable.

I would like to purchase a new 12 Ch transmitter (I prefer JR) for an over 20Kg model that I'm building and need to know what Spektrum receiver system is acceptable (or not) for the Over 20 Kg model, before I fork out £2k for this equipment. I need a system that will keep ALL flight controls active even if one receiver/ battery fails.

TC

Shaun, the Powerbox Royal Spektrum has 4 receivers - all external. So if one fails, there are still three Rx's left - each can maintain full control of the model. How is that "no capability for Rx redundency"

Hi Tim

this is where confusion abounds ..... The 12 channel spektrum Rx( AR12100 ) has 4 antenna that are capable of receiving a signal but they all feed into one decoder module,( the same features as the AR9100's that I currently use) but ...and this is a very big but, if there is an electronic failure in this part of the spektrum Rx system ( the decoder), all control to the model would be lost.

My understanding of the CAA requirement for over 20Kg models is the need for 2 independant rx's.... The Powerbox Spektrum Royal does not fufill this requirement as it only has one RX system...i.e receiving modules and decoder module.

This is not like the Weatronic system that has 2 independant receiving systems , and 2 independant decoder sections, in the box.

The unit itself isn't actually a receiver, rather it's a robust power bus designed specifically to handle high current loads.

This isn't the full picture, as the decoder to provide the control signals to the servos are also included in this section of the unit.... As I previously mentioned ...4 aerial systems with one decoder doesn't equal 4 Rx's .. It is one Rx with 4 times the resiliance of the receiving section of the system. The main reason for multiple aerials on 2.4g systems is because simply as frequencies get higher the system ( tx & rx) becomes more directional in its operational capability and the need for multiple aerials is to provide signal diversity, to ensure a reliable data link in all orientations.

As far as I see it from the available data , the only true CAA approved solution for spektrum would be the Powerbox RRS ( redundant Rx System) fed by 2 AR9100 or AR12100. This would give true redundancy ( even the ability to have 2 power systems per Rx and provides a high current bus capability at the Rx for digital or large servos....

I believe it is vitally important that this is clarified by Spektrum before we find out too late it doesn't comply with the CAA regs, because, although I'm currently only building a 15Kg model, I want my large model solution to comply, when I do eventually build a big un !!

Somebody must be able to confirm this....

Shaun

Thanks Shaun, Now I understand where you are coming from.

I'll keep my wallet firmly in my pocket until it is fully clarified - we are given clear guidance on what 2.4g receiver units would meet the CAA over 20Kgs compliance.

I already have a Spektrum AR9100 in another model (16 kgs model) and found it to be 100% reliable so was keen to use the AR12100 receiver unit in my new model which is expected to be around 25 Kgs dry.

The problem I have is I need a system that will maintain full control over the model (if a receiver fails) so I cannot split the flight controls between two receivers - The model has tailerons.

TC

Hi Tim,

your solution would seem logically to be the following:-

Powerbox RRS with your existing AR9100, plus an additional AR9100 or AR12100 with both Rx's bound to the same Tx.

Although the unit only has 7 outputs, which I would use for the primary flying controls, ( you could use a matchbox to extend this capability, if thats not enough), you could still use additional secondary functions i.e. retracts, doors, lights etc direct from either rx's unused channels.

The only thing I can't establish is what the current rating of the power bus, of the unit is with regards to servo sizing

Here is the link for the RRS http://www.powerbox-systems.com/e/power ... /start.php

This unit is about £140.00. As it uses a common group of outputs, there would be no problem with the tailerons as either Rx can operate the appropriate servo.....

Still the old problem of when do you need to stop been resiliant.... If the powerbox RRS fails your still screwed

It still needs Tony to confirm this is acceptable though as a CAA acceptable solution.

I would chat to Powerbox to get a definative answer / solution.

Rgds,

Shaun

Shaun Garrity wrote:Hi Tim,

your solution would seem logically to be the following:-

Powerbox RRS with your existing AR9100, plus an additional AR9100 or AR12100 with both Rx's bound to the same Tx.

Although the unit only has 7 outputs, which I would use for the primary flying controls, ( you could use a matchbox to extend this capability, if thats not enough), you could still use additional secondary functions i.e. retracts, doors, lights etc direct from either rx's unused channels.

The only thing I can't establish is what the current rating of the power bus, of the unit is with regards to servo sizing

Here is the link for the RRS http://www.powerbox-systems.com/e/power ... /start.php

This unit is about £140.00. As it uses a common group of outputs, there would be no problem with the tailerons as either Rx can operate the appropriate servo.....

Still the old problem of when do you need to stop been resiliant.... If the powerbox RRS fails your still screwed

It still needs Tony to confirm this is acceptable though as a CAA acceptable solution.

I would chat to Powerbox to get a definative answer / solution.

Rgds,

Shaun

That is the set up in the picture above . One of the problems with this is you need to decouple the battery inputs if you are using two packs as the supply is common throughout the unite.
I have been trying this out in my Jungmiester and it all appears to work very well , but I don't think it would be legal for 20KG + models .
It dose what I wanted perfectly which was to give dual receiver redundancy with full control of the model. I also used twin battery packs with Diodes fitted along with there own switches.

Simon

Hi Simon,

I believe you are using AR7000 Rx's which as you have done do need the batteries de-coupling, to isolate them....The Dual power AR12100 and AR9100 powersafe Rx's, ( which also offer the additional safety feature of soft power switches .. i.e. if they fail, they fail on) have this facility built into the them I believe, so, as I understand it, ( I may be wrong though...a call to spektrum to confirm this would be prudent,) no decoupling of the batteries is necessary when using these Rx's.

Cheers,

Shaun

Shaun Garrity wrote:Hi Simon,

I believe you are using AR7000 Rx's which as you have done do need the batteries de-coupling, to isolate them....The Dual power AR12100 and AR9100 powersafe Rx's, ( which also offer the additional safety feature of soft power switches .. i.e. if they fail, they fail on) have this facility built into the them I believe, so, as I understand it, ( I may be wrong though...a call to spektrum to confirm this would be prudent,) no decoupling of the batteries is necessary when using these Rx's.

Cheers,

Shaun

I like the sound of the AR9100 RXs . I will look further into it. That could be a better receiver for my single receiver based models.

Regards Simon

Has anyone found a link to the Powerbox with twin Spektrum RXs in yet.

Hi Simon,
as far as I can see , the product doesn't exist..
Cheers,

Shaun

Hi Shaun,i hope you had a nice Christmas and that you are looking forward to 2010.You are correct about the Powerbox twin Spectrum it dose not exist.Best wishes for the New Year.Brian..

Shaun Garrity wrote:Hi Simon,
as far as I can see , the product doesn't exist..
Cheers,

Shaun

That was the conclusion that I came to , but Tony must have researched this to give the answer he did so he must be looking at something different , or it was an error in which case that solves it as well.

Regards Simon

PLEASE can we have some official confirmation on this issue? I am in the final stages of completing another over 20kg model for a customer, and the original intention was to fit a PowerBox Royal Spectrum 2.4..................the customer has already purchased the unit and is going to be mightily annoyed if we are now told we are unable to use the unit in this project.

Phil