[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble

Fri Jan 11 05:41:10 AKST 2008

QQ lost his Python because of battery issues.

On Jan 11, 2008 8:58 AM, Archie Stafford <rcpattern at swtexas.net> wrote:

>  Wayne,
>
>
>
> Not one radio has come out that has not had some problems.  This time last
> year, Spektrums were having problems..QQ lost his new Python at SEFF because
> of it.  There were other losses as well.  I remember when the first ones
> came out…they had problems with ANYTHING that got in front of the radio…Yes,
> it was geared towards park flyers, but they still had problems.  They
> learned of the voltage drop problem from QQ, but it cost others planes as
> well, just didn't get acknowledged until QQ had a problem. I have yet to
> hear of any incidents with a module based Futaba radio.   I don't know if
> this incident on RCU actually happened or not…I'm curious as to why they
> went ahead and flew knowing they had an issue on the ground..and also
> curious as to the guys setup with a 40% airplane with a 6EX radio..lots of
> Y's or matchboxes there.  The Futaba setup does have advantages..it is true
> Spread Spectrum where the JR/Spektrum is not.  It never frequency hops.  I'm
> sure there will be growing pains, just like with the JR/Spektrum.  I know
> Airtronics is also working on a 2.4 system.
>
>
>
> Arch
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Wayne
> *Sent:* Friday, January 11, 2008 1:24 AM
> *To:* NSRCA Mailing List
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble
>
>
>
> dedicated circuitry....hmmmm That sounds like it was done right!
>
>
>
>
>
> I'll stick with the Spektrum product at least people are using it. I'm
> sure there will be problems with any system. Its the growing pains of the
> situation. However to be running ads that are pretty much bashing the other
> guys saying Futaba did it right. Egg on the face it seems.
>
>
>
> Besides JR and Spektrum have the market well in hand. You need a RX for a
> indoor or park flyer, they got it. Need a 9 channel system for you jet or
> Pattern plane they got it and people have been flying it for months. Need
> something just for a 7channel sport plane, got it. Oh and by the way all the
> stuff from the very first RX on DSM as well as all the RX's on DSM2, they
> all work on the same TX and any of the newer TX's. Its really nice to have
> reverse compatibility. I guess we know who did Spread Spektrum Right?
>
>
>
> I was looking toward the 14MZ but a local IMAC guy planted 3  40% models
> on the "new" G3 RX before they told him to cut the antenna off. That's a lot
> of bones to plant. Each time the RX's went back to Hobbico for a checkup,
> nothing wrong with them. Its your setup, its this, its that. He now flies
> the 10X with Spektrum Module.
>
>
>
> By the way I love the X9303. Switched over from the Futaba 9Cap and
> haven't looked back. The 9303 blows the doors off the 9C and its got a 2.4system that works. I think when the 12X hits the shelves I might drop my
> dime on it. I just can't believe I flew Futaba all these years and was
> missing the forest for all the trees. I have 3 different books how to
> program the 9C and have yet to crack the plastic wrap on the 9303 CD manual.
> Its awesome.
>
>
>
> All I can say it was a sad day when Futaba closed its doors in Irvine, CA
> and sent the ball into Hobbico hands. Back then they had people that knew
> what was up, knew what was needed in a system and drove the market. Today
> they are along for the ride. I wish Steve Helms and crew were still running
> the show. Giving us Hysteresis adjustment OMG, making it a music player
> another OMG,  just make the darn thing work man! I can listen to music on an
> 8 track player. I wanna fly my toy airplane.
>
>
>
> Derek the question came as to what people want from Futaba. Well here is
> your answer. Futaba Corp of America not Hobbico.
>
>
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Stuart Chale <schale at optonline.net>
>
> *To:* 'NSRCA Mailing List' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2008 7:21 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble
>
>
>
> I guess I should have said radio not modules (thanks RVP.  6 ch and 7 ch.
> Here is the RCU thread.
>
> http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6857282/tm.htm
>
>
>
> Stuart
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Stuart Chale
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2008 6:37 PM
> *To:* 'NSRCA Mailing List'
> *Subject:* [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble
>
>
>
> I am sure a bunch of you are watching the various threads on this, but if
> not and you have one of the Futaba 2.4 systems, be careful.  Apparently on
> a couple of occasions one radio has shot down another.  So far it has only
> been reported a couple of times with the 6 and 7 channel modules only.  The
> word on the forums and I am not sure how accurate this is, is that some
> transmitters have been shipped without programming a unique identifier into
> them.  They have the basic 0000… code.  The receiver is bound to the
> transmitter's supposedly unique code.  So if two transmitters have not been
> programmed with a unique ID then any receiver bound to one of them will
> respond or be shot down by the other, because they essentially have the same
> ID code.  Again I am not sure that this is suspicion or fact but be careful
> if you are flying one until more is known.
>
>
>
> Stuart C.
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080111/b3065ba5/attachment.html 