[NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble

Fri Jan 11 07:58:50 AKST 2008

Good e-mail Mark. 

One more thing would be that all these systems use an encryption key so the receiver only listens to it's own transmitter, ergo the binging of the RX to the TX. This is the big difference between any SS technology and analog like what we used on 72 meg. This in and of itself is what really sets this technology apart. Unless the band is swamped or the front end of the receiver has been overloaded by another signal it should be able to differentiate between data packets. 

A prime example of DSSS is the wireless LAN router that so many of use in our homes. Not many people change the setup out of the box but they work in densely populated areas due to the UID assigned to the box. Range of course decreases as the noise floor on channel increases but the systems still weed out their intended data. 

With this technology you certainly have to let go of some of the things you know and learn it's idiosyncrasies.

Pete

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Atwood, Mark 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:31 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Futaba FAAST trouble

  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 

    To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 

    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

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

  _______________________________________________
  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/20080111/5bf85ad8/attachment-0001.html 