[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble

Fri Jan 11 06:42:55 AKST 2008

I think this highlights that it's less about a "problem" with the
system, than it is a "Difference" in the system.   Just as we learned
with Glo vs Electric, there are different issues to worry about.  We
were comfortable with the hazards of glo...  Having a large lipo is no
more dangerous (potential energy) than the 5 gallon plastic jug of
gasoline you keep in the garage for your lawn mower...but everyone is
comfortable with the gasoline, because they have learned how to handle
it, they know and understand what the risks are and how to avoid them.
Lipo's are new...when and how they fail, and when and how they fail
catastrophically was an unknown...the more we learn, the more
comfortable we become.

2.4 vs 72 has some of the same TYPE issues.  It's an unknown.  We know
how 72 reacts to many scenario's and we're just starting to learn about
2.4.  It's not a direct replacement for 72.  There IS a saturation point
for all the brands, and in fact, the more brands involved (types of
systems), the lower the saturation point.  We don't even range check the
same way we used to.  

All I'm saying is we have to be a tad tolerant while we all go through
the learning curve.  I'm not saying the manufacturers don't have an
obligation to test... they do.  But we're likely to have some problems
even with perfectly functioning equipment because we're trying to use it
in the exact same fashion as we successfully use to use 72Mhz equipment,
and that's not going to always work.  

-Mark

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Van
Putte
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:05 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble

I don't have an axe to grind here, but Quique's problem was with a
voltage regulator with insufficient capacity, not with the Spektrum
radio.

Ron Van Putte

On Jan 11, 2008, at 7:58 AM, Archie Stafford 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
2.4 system 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 <mailto:schale at optonline.net>  

	To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
<mailto: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/ebce197c/attachment-0001.html 