2.4GHz: is it all it’s cracked up to be? Join the discussion

Model Airplane News - RC Airplane News | 2.4GHz: is it all it’s cracked up to be? Join the discussion

We recently received this intruiging article from Dave Horvath and invite you to read it and then join in the discussion.  

A substantial number of unexplained crashes of radio control model airplanes on 2.4GHz frequency prompted me to write this article on the so-called “interference free” radio control systems on the 2.4GHz band.            
The electromagnetic wave spectrum is subject to the immutable laws of physics.
The propagation characteristics of the 2.4GHz wavelength and the environmental effects of this frequency are more complex than on the 72MHz band. To better understand this, we have to look at the electromagnetic wave spectrum where 72MHz band is in the broadcasting region and the 2.4GHz band is in the microwave region. It is easier to see the huge difference between 72MHz and 2.4GHz frequencies when we convert 2.4 gigahertz to megahertz. Now it is 2400MHz versus 72MHz. When frequency increases, wavelength decreases. Therefore, the 2.4GHz wavelength is shorter and closer to visible light on the electromagnetic wave spectrum. Since visible light is also an electromagnetic wave, 2.4GHz wavelength behaves more like visible light and travels in straight lines until it is reflected, deflected, diffracted or absorbed. Reflection and diffraction will create interference. When parallel rays of light are reflected by a concave mirror, it greatly increases the intensity of light at the focal point. A parabolic dish antenna works the same way for a 2.4GHz electromagnetic wave. Since we cannot focus a high gain directional parabolic dish antenna between our constantly moving model airplane and our transmitter, we have to use an omnidirectional vertical antenna system which has much lower signal intensity.  

The FHSS (frequency-hopping-spread-spectrum) and the DSSS (direct-sequence-spread-spectrum) techniques can share the same band. However, they interfere with each other causing a degradation of performance. Range decreases as the number of clear channels decreases. Bandwidth drops each time FHSS encounters a blocked frequency on a crowded spectrum.          
The crowded spectrum on the 2.4GHz band reduces the bandwidth, increases the ever present background noise, increases the adjacent channel leakage ratio, reduces the range, and causes overlapping. Overlapping is a direct interference.            
Unlike the 72MHz wavelength which penetrates most objects, the 2.4GHz wavelength behaves more like visible light. Signal absorption from objects on a model airplane like the engines, electric motors, batteries, servos, pushrods, landing gears, switches, wires, etc., may cause path interference.            
Signal reflection from objects in the terrain, like fences, walls, buildings, trees, hills, power lines cause line of sight interference. High speed data transfer reduces the receiver’s sensitivity on 2.4GHz band. There is a trade-off between speed versus range.            
The signal strength decreases quadratically as distance increases at constant radiation levels. This is called path loss. When frequency increases, path loss also increases. This is one of the reasons why 72MHz radios have a better range than the 2.4GHz radios. We can see this clearly when we look at the Wireless Range Calculator:
Frequency                  Distance                      Loss
100MHz                     0.2 mile                      62 decibel  
2400MHz                   0.2 mile                      90 decibel  
These calculations are under non-existing ideal conditions, less Fresnel (pronounced Frehnel) effect. When we fly our model airplane on 2.4GHz, the area around us is known as the Fresnel zone. Since we have to use an omnidirectional antenna system, the electromagnetic waves will scatter and diffract from objects and from the terrain around us. When the diffracted wave reaches the receiver antenna, it is slightly lags behind the signal which traveled to the receiver antenna in a straight line that creates interference due to the phase canceling effect.            
The Fresnel effect also deals with the behavior of electromagnetic waves over a water surface. As mentioned before, the 2.4GHz radiation behaves more like visible light, so we have to think of reflections and shadows. Flying a 2.4GHz radio control model over a reflective surface like water, snow, ice or wet terrain negatively affects the radio link. Occasionally a 3D aerobatic model plunges into water while hovering. When the rudder is near the water surface, the prop wash creates a chaotic wave pattern which generates a myriad of false-signals.            
The Fresnel effect and the described interference on the 2.4GHz band work pretty well. We successfully tested this at different locations. Unfortunately, the “unbreakable Tx-Rx link” broke when our model was over 0.2 miles away at 45 degree angle. Despite the fact that a 90 decibel signal loss over a thousand feet (0.2 miles) is rather significant, we should have had control at this distance. There are too many factors that can determine the overall range on 2.4GHz. 2.4GHz receivers are not immune to ignition and electrical noise as advertised. Occasional arc from high tension insulators could break the bind.  

Latency is the time between stimulation and the beginning of response caused by propagation delays. There is a huge time difference in latency claims by different radio manufacturers. Some latency claims are in milliseconds, others are in microseconds! This is confusing since one millisecond is one thousandth of a second and one microsecond is one millionth of a second.            

Velocity of electromagnetic waves is 186,283 miles per second. The velocity of the electric signal through conductors is nearly at the speed of light. With an adequate power output, our radio signal will travel one microsecond which is one millionth of a second to reach our model airplane one thousand feet away. This applies to all brands of radios on 72MHz or on 2.4GHz. As we know, nothing travels faster than the electromagnetic waves. Therefore, I don’t see how latency could be improved “50 %” over the leading competitors regardless of different processing.

 A seven millisecond latency or a fourteen millisecond latency claim is irrelevant since the human being, the RC pilot, has a painfully slow 200 millisecond latency and can not differentiate between seven or fourteen milliseconds.  

At huge events, like Nationals, the 2.4GHz pin-free radio system makes life easier for competitors and organizers. However, there is a huge difference between flying on 2.4GHz band in the beautiful country side near Muncie where chances are good that there won’t be any noticeable interference and flying on 2.4GHz band in the middle of one of the largest concentration of population and industries in Los Angeles or other urban areas.            
2.4GHz radios under harsh conditions work most of the time, however most of the time is unacceptable. Illegal signal boosting, ham radio, and rolling hills further aggravate the situation. 2.4GHz wavelength has higher incurred losses than 72MHz wavelength. In any case, we should hold on to our assigned frequencies on 27MHz, 50MHz, and 72MHz bands.            
Despite glowing reviews, the so-called “bulletproof 2.4GHz technology” has had range and reliability problems since day one. A bench test inside a building in a controlled environment where the receiver is a few inches away from the transmitter is meaningless.            

 2.4GHz wavelength is not the best choice to control model airplanes. Furthermore, we have ended up with complex radio systems on an overcrowded band on the electromagnetic wave spectrum.            

The bottom line is that glitch-free software, error-free computers, and an interference-free radio link is only an illusion.


www.google.com electromagnetic spectrum Images for electromagnetic spectrum Videos for electromagnetic spectrum  

www.google.com Frequency-hopping spread spectrum DSSS and FHSS-Spread Spectrum tutorials   www.google.com 2.4 GHz interference Interference in the 2.4GHz ISM Band: Challenges and Solutions by N Golmie 20 Myths of Wi-Fi Interference (RF Solutions)  

www.google.com path loss in the 2.4GHz Speed vs. Distance ISA 900 MHz versus 2.4GHz – Learning Center  

www.google.com fresnel zone Images for fresnel zone ZyTrax-Fresnel Zones and their Effect   www.google.com diffraction Images for diffraction Diffraction-Wikipedia    

www.google.com polarization of light Images for polarization of light Videos for polarization of light MIT Physics Demo-Microwave Polarization  

www.google.com 2.4GHz spread spectrum problems 2.4GHz Spread Spectrum problems   www.radiolabs.com Wireless Range Calculator Free Space Loss

Updated: July 16, 2015 — 4:46 PM


  1. This is very interesting and explains some of the issues that I’ve read about on the forums. I haven’t encountered any of these problems personally.

    Even if it isn’t perfect (what really is?), isn’t 2.4ghz significantly better than 72mhz?

  2. OF COURSE 2.4GHZ isn’t totally glitch-free. And as long as R/C flyers are HUMANS, we’ll continue to have dumb-thumbs CRASHES that are blamed on radio interference, bad servos, badly built ARFs … you name it!

    Use commonsense, check your aircraft before each flight and fly in a safe, responsible manner. I love my programmable 2.4 radio!! If there’s something better out there, we may have to wait ten years to get it.

  3. Bill – I agree. I think 2.4Ghz is a natural progression beyond the 72Mhz realm. One thing he forgets to mention is that multiple users on 2.4Ghz are able to fly at the same time. Only one flier can be on the 72Mhz band width. Everyone has their own opinion, but I believe Mr Horvath should do more research on his own. The 27Mhz is mostly for surface vehicles, 50Mhz is hardly used anymore. Not perfect, nothing is!!

  4. Nice article, and interesting reading. I would offer some barnyard logic to go along with the technical stuff.

    I’ve never had radio interference on 72 or 2.4 as far as I am aware. This is year #39 in the hobby for me. I fly several times a week, 12 months, helicopters and airplanes mostly. I fly conservatively, I build/assemble carefully, and most of my models are 6-7 servos or less. I still use NiMH batteries and never had one quit in the air. I fly nitro and electrics, no gas. That sound you hear is me knocking on wood. I’ve seen a number of crashes blamed on radio interference.

    The “I ain’t got it” statement invariably is followed — after the crash — by… “the radio works now”. Hmm.

    On a really busy day, there are 20-30 guys at the field. Most are now on 2.4. Most of them never crash except when they make a pilot error. I’ve definitely done some of those.

    Like fishing, where 10% of the fishermen catch 90% of the fish, I’d say that’s about the right percentage of the crashes I’ve seen. 10% of R/Cers have 90% of the crashes.

    Not counting 700 fliers at Joe Nall, or 1,000 fliers at IRCHA. No wonder there are issues there. Our radios are masterpieces of engineering in my opinion, and if you have any idea of what they used to be like, you certainly agree with me.

  5. Very Informative! Thank you Dave Horvath.

  6. You know it is interesting… I was sent here to read the commentary being misled that this was written by the magazine. It wasn’t, The arguments used were used for those who are trying to get the 900mhz radios going. I even agree somewhat. But to insert comparisons with 72 (and I had to laugh when he also mentioned the a.m. and 50 mhz that was never for flying in the first place. Is 2.4 perfect? of course not. Is 900 the way to go? Not necessarily. Are both 900 AND 2.4 far better than 72??? ABSOLUTELY. Try and distance your 72 to 3-5 miles like my Airtronics SD10-G or my 8 channel Spectrum. LOL In theory things are much different than in the real world.
    Imagine… If it is wonderful (2.40 in crowded areas where 72 would die a sudden and painful death) then how much nicer it is outside Muncie…. Free of any issues you will face in the real world… (unless you can fly your plane miles away and do a Jedi trick of keeping it flying out of site).. Perhaps there is a reason so many of us old timers as well as newcomers love the 2.4 but hated their old 72’S?

  7. Well, I have been saying for YEARS we should go back to HAM Radio….which requires a license (Which could generate some revenue for someone) and is not an open “Wild West” free for all like the 2.4 band is.

    As long as guys like JR, Futaba, and Hi-tec made Tx units I would switch to HAM band in a second. I would buy ALL NEW Rx units, even though it would cost me well over a thousand bucks, just because 2.4 is the most polluted cess-pool in the band and I can’t believe I am stuck there.

    That being said, I have had 100% flawless results with my 2.4 and many using the same gear have not. Can’t explain that other than to say there is alot to having a good setup and testing. I have been flying 2.4 weekly for about 6 years with perfect result…..I will keep knocing on wood and praying for the return of the HAM band 🙂

  8. Good article. The transmitter manufacturers are working on signal hopping to minimize the signal loss issues by changing bands every 20 milliseconds or less. You can lose one or two and not see the loss of signal affect airplane. Things are better as technology is improved and applied.
    I do have an issue with :Therefore, I don’t see how latency could be improved “50 %” over the leading competitors regardless of different processing.” The issue of latency is not with signal speed, but signal processing speed of transmitter and receiver pair. These are measured in the tens of milliseconds where 50% can be realized. Think about this, in 1983 computers ran 6 Mhz, today they run 2Ghz +. Significant, noticeable, difference in processing speed. Fly a responsive airplane with a JR then the same plane with Airtronics and see if you can feel the difference in speed of signal from your hand to servo. It may surprise you.

  9. Great Article ! The unexplained crashes we have seen on 2.4 systems at our “rural” field have all been on DSM-2 and each time we see it, it is the same scenario. We have not seen crashes with the Futaba or the Airtronics 2.4 systems. I know they operate differently and I suspect they are more robust in their ability then the DSM-2 design. I switched reluctantly to 2.4 a few years ago because of pin policing issues at some of the larger events. I dont trust the honor system when the impound shuts down at 5 pm………lol

  10. i AM A Extra Class Ham and I find your article very accurate. I have used my spektrum analyzer at the field and you can see the block or group of channels that are active ( Hitec example 20 channels in the sweep ) .. As more radios are active I see the noise floor rise.. I also noticed that if you rebind the radio when several are active it will select the clearest group of channels at the time. ( hitec ) It never changes until re-bound.. Also Spektrum / JR have improved some of the problems with DSM by going to DSMX.. I believe that dual antennas at 45 degrees from each other will help with path/phasing loss.. Nothing is perfect and watch out for the over powered (illegal ) wireless modems . As the noise floor rises watch the degredation of range.. Great article – I enjoyed it Thank you

  11. Very interesting piece. What is forgotten by many flyers is the fact that the pulse from the 2.4 receivers to the servos is only about 3.2 volts and not 4.8 volts or 6 volts as is the battery. This can sometimes cause poor and erratic servo operation if the servos are older types. Correction, use a signal booster if you have this problem. Hobby King has these boosters.
    Also, high servo peak currents can cause the so called “brown out”. High current peak requirements from the servos can case the battery voltage to dip below about 3.5 volts and below where the microprocessor in the receiver will operate. This may cause the receiver to stop operating for a moment and the microprocessor may not reset in time to save a crash. Place a large filter capacitor on the battery lead. five thousand micro Farads or so. They are sold at many places and some sites advertise them in MAN.
    Some receiver come with filters. I use them all the time. You can also operate your receiver on 6 Volts to help with this problem but make sure your servos can handle 5 cells fully charged. This may be over 7 volts. Many small servos will not handle this high voltage.
    You can test the voltage dip problem by operating all your servos at once, just move the transmitter sticks in a circle. I have done this with my Hytec, and sometimes I can get a low voltage beep from the transmitter cause by a low voltage dip in the receiver battery.
    If you take precautions you will not have any trouble but nothing can fix dumb mistakes like I have had..

  12. My first flight on 2.4 ended in a catastrophic crash due to radio failure. (Spektrum 6).
    I have since gone back to 50 Mhz where I never had a problem and am not leaving.

  13. Nobody seems to be addressing the fact that strong WiFi links and everything under the sun is using 2.4GHz. I think in the U.S. the max power for 72MHz is 1 watt and for 2.4GHz it is .1 watt. Also, microwave ovens use 2.4GHz because it is efficient (resonant) at heating water. Why is that important? Your eyes (being mostly water and sensitive to radiant energy) can be slowly permanently damaged without you feeling it by this frequency. It is a matter of range vs power. The more power, the farther away you need to be to not damage your eyes. Hotels, restaurants, etc have large hidden antennas, some 5 feet tall, to make people happy with WiFi coverage. If you are looking in the direction of that wall or ceiling, your eyes are being damaged without you knowing it. Nobody cares because, hey, I have a signal! With enough power it will cook you like a microwave oven…before then you will be blind. The 72MHz tends to pass through your body. What does that do? The ONLY reason for the switch is because companies have a plan to acquire as much bandwidth as possible for smart phones, etc. They plan to take all of the TV frequencies as well. They are nearly maxed out now. There will always be a physical natural limit to bandwidth. 72MHz gobbles much more (50 channels available) than 2.4GHz (80 channels available). In the end, it is always about the money!

  14. My gliders are on 72mHz ands while I hate the darn long antenna that’s easy to break the extended range is worth the trade off and don’t need all the bells and whistles of my DX9. However just saw a toy quad get to 2000 ft on 2400mHz using an antenna reflector so maybe that’s a simple solution for 24mHz that’s needs to researched more. As well as to remind people of the 400ft rule to protect full scale planes and the hobby. I think 24mHz has some resent advances applied towards it that 72mHz doesn’t but the laws of physics still remain and 24mHz is what it is and will never carry a signal like 72mHz. Hay Dave you may find this equation interesting: e{a}/t=hv. The fine structure constant is caused by the asymmetry of the weak force to maintain E=T. E=hv so just focus on the left side of the equation and you will see a lever made of time. Not much more difficult than Ohm’s law to comprehend.

    1. Whoops meant to say 24GHz… no 24mHz.

  15. We blamed our crashes on the varmint repeller in one hanger . I crashed three times because I forgot to pull out my antenna ; haven’t done that since I switched to 2.4 . We finally quit blaming our crashes on anything but us..

  16. A very good article, however the latency statement is possibly in error as I would believe that the system latency would be additive to the “painfully slow” human latency so would become 207 vs 214 milliseconds, although the 200 milliseconds is our human brain processing time so we are not even aware that it has elapsed so maybe the 14 milliseconds is to us half as responsive as 7 milliseconds.

  17. Sick of hearing the same old mantra that most crashes are due to pilot error.This is not the case. I fly in a group of VERY experienced pilots in a rural location and there have been some interference issues and recently an inexplicable crash of a very expensive model. The pilot in question completely lost signal. It has happened to me too. Been flying RC for 40 years and I KNOW when I get interference – the last two times on 2.4 Ghz. I re gained control after 2 or 3 secs by holding the trannie above my head! Have now returned to my antique Multiplex 35 Mhz PCM system which has worked flawlessly for 30 plus years and has better range. I am not convinced that 2.4 Ghz is safer and now that everyone has switched over, 35 Mhz is freed up and entirely fit for purpose.

  18. Due to signal problems with 2.4ghz – I too have switched back to my old 35mhz futaba radios. Not a single problem with them in the past 20 years.

  19. I have been flying RC planes for many years. My first 2.4GHz radio was a Spektrum DX7 using DSM2 technology.
    I experienced signal loss a few times at our club and nobody believed me. I lost my Showtime 90 in a crash and was accused of “Pilot Error”. My Piper Cub flying straight towards me also once lost signal. It headed for the ground and I regained control a few meters above the ground. I repositioned the satellite received by moving it higher up into the roof of the cub. I never had a glitch again and I am still flying the today since 2008 using the same transmitter. I bought a FUTABA 10CAG FASST radio in 2010 and use it for all my later aircraft with absolutely no issues. I will never the DX7 Spektrum radio again in any other plane. It works in the Cub and I leave it there.
    JR later introduced 3 satellite receivers on their radios so I believe there were path diversity issues. All my planes now use Futaba FASST. It is very solid.

    1. I guess I am replying to,all the posts, very good info, I had my 72 Kraft updated to 2.4. I can change it back to 72 by removing the 2.4 modular. I live on an airfield with many metal buildings. Did a range check in 2.4 all worked fine for a few seconds, then the plane went crazy, servo chatter and non responsive. To all controls. I thought the radio was at fault? Did not fly that day. Sent the radio in to South west RC, and nothing was wrong. Had them replace the battery. I felt the environment of the metal buildings was causing the trouble. I only fly 72 now with no issues.

  20. A 5G antenna was recently built near my local aero model club and we have had a lot of problems since then.

    We have identified at least 3 areas were any 2.4ghz radio fails no matter which brand, so far we have tried Spektrum dsmx, Frsky D16 and Flysky afhds2. 900mhz seems to be interference free for now.

    We even got a glider to scan the area for more “Blind Spots”.

    I have been in this hobby for 17 years and we never had these issues on 72Mhz, we had a good channel control and we even had events with several planes flying at the same time on 72 Mhz, now I can count at least 3 crashes caused by interference confirmed by the radio.

Comments are closed.

Air Age Media ©
WordPress Lightbox