[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba and pattern

[Del K. Rykert]

They would rather lose customers.. lol 
 
    Del
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Van Putte 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 7:52 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba and pattern


  I'm probably going to step on some toes, but it could be that Futaba is reluctant to admit when problems occur, because it would cause them to "lose face".  I don't understand all the reasons regarding why Futaba might act this way.  Maybe someone who is more knowledgeable on my stereotyping of "orientals" can straighten me out.


  Ron Van Putte


  On Dec 20, 2007, at 6:12 PM, AtwoodDon at aol.com wrote:


    I would add the following to the list and expand on Jim's thoughts below......
    Let us run 2 or 3 lipos as the airborne battery and let us pick the voltage we want to go into Battery Failsafe.  I would like a servo like the 9650 but with a tighter gear train.  Also, get rid of the feedback pots like Jim mentions below.  Either go to a stepper motor approach or go to an optical feedback instead of the mechanical wipers that wear out over time and centering goes away.  I know that would impact the repair/replacement revenue but give us something we can run until some unfortunate collision with the ground.

    My last wish if for Futaba to be more straight forward in their communications with customers as to what is actually going on.  The delays in the 2.4G systems and modules is frustrating even tho I am willing to wait for the 'right' system.  Also, if there are issues with a system, TELL US!!!  We pay a lot of money for these radio systems and pattern planes and if those systems have a problem (like the long antennas on the 5014), tell us the truth so we can choose what to do instead of basically denying anything is wrong.  The lack of accurate and timely information irritated me much more than the fact there were some issues. 

    Don

      In a message dated 12/20/2007 12:24:07 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, joddino at socal.rr.com writes:
      My first thought won't make everyone happy because it will make a lot  
      of stuff obsolete but I think it is time to get rid of the analog  
      pulse width interface between the receiver and servos.  It is time for  
      a high speed computer bus so more information could be transferred at  
      a higher rate.  The servo should use a brushless motor and if possible  
      a stepper motor that would eliminate the need for a feedback pot.  In  
      other words a true digital servo.  It should run with a range of  
      voltages (7.2 to 9.0 volts) with no change in performance so no  
      voltage regulators would be required.  It should keep working, at a  
      noticeably slower rate,  from 7.2 down to 3.6 volts.  It should be  
      programmable so servos could be matched exactly at all positions.

      Jim O







----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    See AOL's top rated recipes and easy ways to stay in shape for winter.
    _______________________________________________
    NSRCA-discussion mailing list
    NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
    http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  NSRCA-discussion mailing list
  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071221/7934f630/attachment.html