failed e-flite SAFE receiver

[ericrw]

My Apprentice SAFE receiver, after two years use will not re-bind. As any one had the same experience? An e.mail to Horizon Hobby, was not of any forthcoming help; other than buy a new one !!

[Chris Walby]

Just checking you are using the same TX as before?

Are you sure you are not too close...gap between TX and RX when binding?

...did it lose its bind or where you rebinding it for some reason?

I did have a RX lose its bind after a year or so, bought a new one and carried on....back in the workshop it rebound and has worked with small Depron models for the last couple of years (I won't trust it with anything else).

[Tim Flyer]

I bought an Apprentice a couple of years back for my son . We had constant problems with the “safe” receiver. It kept going out of range and forced the model to land in “ safe mode” . We ditched the receiver and swapped it with a full range standard receiver and have never looked back😊. I’m afraid I’m not a big fan of those “safe mode” receivers after that! Our “safe” receiver seemed to just have “park flyer range”. Anybody who has taught beginners knows they often end up flying too far out! It’s totally stupid in my opinion to have shorter range receivers on trainers. 

Edited By Tim Flyer on 02/05/2019 18:14:32

[Glyn44]

Tim is spot on. I had two flyaways using said receiver. Both landed safely. Retrieving was difficult as both occurred well into fields of fully grown crops, one wheat, the other rape. Never used the Rx since.

[ericrw]

Chris, Same TX. The rx would nor respond on the field,at the start of flying. I tried to re-bind at home but to no avail ! Interested to know as to why yours responded, in the workshop . eric.

[Chris Walby]

Same as you with the loss of bind at the field and it would not rebind. Still don't know why it lost its bind or why it rebound later hence only trust it for bench work/very small Depron models.

Other issues I have had with different RX's is being too close to the RX with the TX, easy fix (do as the instructions say!) and move a couple of metres back.

[Kim Taylor]

Posted by Tim Flyer on 02/05/2019 18:11:03:

I bought an Apprentice a couple of years back for my son . We had constant problems with the “safe” receiver. It kept going out of range and forced the model to land in “ safe mode” . We ditched the receiver and swapped it with a full range standard receiver and have never looked back😊. I’m afraid I’m not a big fan of those “safe mode” receivers after that! Our “safe” receiver seemed to just have “park flyer range”. Anybody who has taught beginners knows they often end up flying too far out! It’s totally stupid in my opinion to have shorter range receivers on trainers.

Edited By Tim Flyer on 02/05/2019 18:14:32

I'm not doubting that you had a problem with your receiver, although I don't understand why it would 'force' you to land in safe mode.

I must, however, pick up on your assertion that the Apprentice receiver is a reduced range park flyer type. It simply isn't. The trouble with the internet is that if inaccurate statements aren't challenged they become fact.

Again, not doubting you had a problem, but it wasn't due to the range of the receiver. I've used couple of these receivers both in the Apprentice and once that plane was retired, transplanted into a Max Thrust Riot and then a Sig 4 Star 20 which I built using all of the gubbins from the Apprentice. All flown out to (my) limit of vision - certainly 400 - 500 metres at a guess with no problems.

Kim

[Tim Flyer]

Kim the problem on my e-flight receiver WAS Reduced Range .

FACT...we range tested it and range was very poor we had a number of “fly aways” just as the other user above.

Another user at my club also had the same experience.

When I say landed in “safe mode” the plane when out of transmitter range cut throttle and flat landed ...so fail safe.

Do not accuse me of making inaccurate statements on the internet.

I am advising others based upon this . If you for some reason are a keen admirer of this make of receiver, you are free to tell others of your admiration for it

I am speaking from actual experience. I know a number of others have also had this .

in my view this is a bad receiver .

Happy to meet you personally to discuss

[Kim Taylor]

Tim,

Not trying to have an argument, and I stated twice that I didn't doubt that you had experienced a problem.

You stated that this receiver is a park flyer reduced range receiver, which it is not.....FACT.

You have obviously got a bad one, which had a reduced range. It is not designed as a reduced range receiver, which is what you inferred in your original post.

I was just trying to point out that your experience of this receiver isn't necessarily typical.

As I said, not looking for an argument so I'll leave it there.

Kim